Man dies after being shot by Atlanta police at Wendy’s drive-thru

He couldn't hit a lumbering human, try it on the Fur Missile. If he actually hit him it would be the luckiest shot in the world.

 

Regardless of other issues, I'd like to point out that state law is being considered as part of the PROBLEM. It's part of what is being analyzed to see if it is acceptable, what it causes, whether it is constitutional, etc.

Within Georgia law, lots of things may be legal. Maybe Georgia law says this officer can murder a black guy in these circumstances. But, that isn't the larger question the is what BLM and other civil rights movements are about.

During slavery, slavery was completely legal in Georgia.

Anyone killing their slave could say that within state law they were carrying out a totally legal action.

But, we KNOW that such state law is grossly unacceptable - civil war level unacceptable.

 

The biggest problem is these folks who cannot think beyond their emotions. They are falling for the faux outrage and sympathy generated by liberals. Hey folks, let's try thinking instead of feeling.

Cops are given the power to do whatever it takes to keep the public safe. Shooting a fleeing felon is part of that power. We must look at the whole picture here. Lefties tend to keep a very narrow focus by design. Wake up folks!

 

Yeah, only Robocop hits every time, even Chris Kyle and Carlos Hathcock missed. People are expecting the impossible.

 

The law of the united states does not work that way. The individual in question had a blood alcohol level more than twenty times over the legal limit, and his actions met the legal definition of operating a motor vehicle in an intoxicated state. It makes no legal difference whether the motor vehicle was in motion or not at the time.

 

So let's look ahead to the trial;

DA; "Officer why did you shoot this man?"

Officer; "He pulled a gun and tried to kill me"

DA; "But it wasn't a gun, it was a taser he'd stolen off you?"

Officer; "I didn't know that in the dark and fast moving events. I though he'd either snatched my oppo's pistol or had pulled a concealed gun"

DA; "But you'd already searched him?"

Officer; "True but he could still have had a small pistol stuffed into his crotch or down the back of his trousers where we couldn't have searched"

DA; "Huh?"

Officer; "Besides a taser could be a lethal weapon. If he incapacitated me he could have taken my pistol off me and killed both of us or run over by a car when I collapsed in the road"

DA; "Yeahhhh..... But you shot him in the back!"

Officer; "As he twisted around to fire at us. Try it, if you're running away you can still turn around and hit someone behind you"

DA; "Hmmmm... But you kicked him on the ground and restrained him with foot?"

Officer; "Yes to make he wasn't playing possum, wasn't going to come up with a gun and kill us. We then started to give CPR and tried to save his life"

DA; "Ah but you hesitated before you did that!"

Officer; "Because we were in shock, what had been an ordinary DUI arrest turned into a struggle for our lives and gunfight"

DA; "Yeah but one of your bullets nearly struck a bystander!"

Officer; "So what? I'm not The Terminator, I don't hit with every round?"

DA; "Hmmm...?"

 

It is not a law, but a standard by which law enforcement officers are trained. It is why suspects are physically restrained, rather than being left free to walk around of their own volition.

If one assaults a law enforcement officer, they have a statistically greater chance of being killed in response, than they would if no offensive action was taken in the first place.

Anyone who would have been encountered in the course of his operating a motor vehicle on a public right of way. One does not get a blood alcohol level over twenty times the legal limit in a short amount of time, meaning he was operating a motor vehicle in an intoxicated state long before he ever passed out. He posed the same threat to the public as a mass shooter in the time leading up to his arrest.

 

And yet a private individual is allowed to use deadly force if they have reason to believe their life or well being is threatened by a violent assailant, even though no jury has been involved in determining if a crime is being committed at the time.

 

So if he runs away shooting him in the back is the answer.

 

So post the standard that states that is what to do in that situation. Who said anything about being left free, I said ARREST him that is what LE officers do everyday.

NS, how long did it take you to realize that.

He didn't pose a threat at the time the police showed up, in this country you are not arrested for what might have happened.

 

He was being calmly arrested and booked until he freaked out. Same story. You are always arrested for drinking and driving. Doesn’t matter if the car is moving or not. He would have slept it off in jail and paid a fine, but since he was on probation, probably sent back to prison, which is why he fought and resisted in the first place.

And being shot in the back is inconsequential when you are shooting at the cops over your shoulder. It’s was split seconds.

 

So you are now denying it didn't happen? Amazing.

It's not a quota. He was clearly over the limit why do you think we should no longer enforce DUI laws against blacks along with resisting arrest?

OH you now agree he SHOULD have been stopped with the necessary force as they used at NOT allowed to escape. Change of mind?

 

You're simply making things up.

 

Ahhhh true we have had the lowest black unemployment since we began recording this is not about jobs. Stop making excuses.

We had a surplus of 7,000,000 jobs.

How many unarmed black men were killed last year unjustly? Justice is not if the criminal can use lethal force against a police officer to escape they get to do so.



No. Stop repeating your nonsense, parrot-like, ....and study MMT.

Hint: classical economics - from which neoliberalism is derived - was developed at a time when food production employed about 20% or more of the workforce.

Now that number is down to about 2%. See the implications for "wealth creation"?[/QUOTE]

 

It is split second, but when you know he has no other weapons and he fired the last shot in the taser he is pretty much done. I don't think the officer will be convicted because it is all split second decisions, I just don't think he had to shoot him in the back that is just my opinion.

 

What is amazing is 2 trained police officers can't handle one man.

[qute]It's not a quota. He was clearly over the limit why do you think we should no longer enforce DUI laws against blacks along with resisting arrest?[/quote]

I believe I said they should have ARRESTED him how many freakin times.

I believe they should have used the necessary force to ARREST him, not shoot him in the back. That is just my opinion doesn't make it wrong or right.

 

[/QUOTE]

How many black men were beaten or harassed last year unjustly.

 

NS, did you just realize that.

the officer should have shot him before the criminal thug pointed a weapon at him, in the olden days resisting with a weapon was enough for lethal force.

 

The attempt was being made to do just that. He chose to resist and commit assault instead of simply complying. He chose to escalate the situation to an unreasonable, unnecessary degree for no reason.

And yet so many refuse to understand such.

He was being arrested on the basis of his operating a motor vehicle while in an intoxicated state. Until he chose to resist and use physical force in an unjustified manner.

 

Show us where the actions that were taken are the standard. That was more of your opinion than a standard.

Do they or is that just more of your BS.

NS, he WASN'T being arrested for an accident or accidents he may have caused as you claimed earlier.

 

It's about lack of jobs in a system that REQUIRES a level of unemployment. see NAIRU, which the fools at the reserve bank heed as gospel, and for which you have fallen, hook like an sinker. Burn baby burn.

[QUOTE}We had a surplus of 7,000,000 jobs.[/QUOTE]

Yes...and your education/training system is so inadequate you had 10,000.000 full-time job equivalent unemployed at the same time (U6+ those given up looking)

Dunno, but millions of black men were un/underemployed.

as someone said last week, there's no way I would be a policeman in the US these days...it's kill or be killed.

Dunno.

But another non sequitur...

 

In the -40- minutes they were talking to him, did they call dispatch and run his ID?
I bet they did.
This would have been his 2nd DUI, and absent anything else, he would have likely gone to jail -- given this, there's no way a responsible police officer lets anyone go.

 

Only if he's black.
Its perfectly OK to shoot white people.

 

More than the number of people murdered with firearms.

 

Let's look ahead at the actual answer:
"He resisted arrest, repeatedly assaulted my partner and I, took one of our tasers, tried to tase my partner and I, and commenced to flee on foot with one of our tasers. I shot him because, being intoxicated, armed, and having just committed several violent felonies, I deemed him an immediate danger to the people in the vicinity."