What are the police supposed to do if you resist arrest and try to use a police TASER on the cops?

[A Hit With The Ladies]

Quote

Video shot by a bystander captures Brooks struggling with two officers on the ground outside the Wendy’s before breaking free and running across the parking lot with what appears to be a police TASER in his hand.

A second videotape from the restaurant’s cameras shows Brooks turning as he runs and possibly aiming the TASER at the pursuing officers before one of them fires his gun and Brooks falls to the ground.

Brooks ran the length of about six cars when he turned back toward an officer and pointed what he had in his hand at the policeman, said Vic Reynolds, director of the GBI at a separate press conference.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-minneapolis-police-atlanta/protesters-burn-down-wendys-in-atlanta-where-black-man-was-slain-by-police-idUSKBN23K0RI

So is the cop supposed to sit around and get tazed? I thought it was common sense that if you're resisting arrest and trying to taze a cop, the cop is going to neutralize the threat and bring you down. I think using deadly force here was completely justified.

[A Hit With The Ladies, BSN, RN]

The taser absolutely can be a lethal weapon! If you point one at a cop expect there to be dire repercussions!

[Joe V]

18 hours ago, A Hit With The Ladies said:

The taser absolutely can be a lethal weapon! If you point one at a cop expect there to be dire repercussions!

Sooo ... when police use it on civilians it's NOT lethal??

The risk was equal. But, only 1 person ended up dead.

[herring_RN, ASN, BSN]

Rayshard Brooks Killing by Police Officer: Press Conference Transcript

... District Attorney Paul Howard: When someone makes an immediate statement and because it is made without the ability to consult with counsel or to think about it, under the law, an excited utterance is considered as highly reliable. And at the time that the shot was fired, the utterance made by Officer Rolfe was, ” I got him.” That was the statement that was made at that time. We also noted that Officer Rolfe was firing a taser at Mr. Brooks. The City of Atlanta SOPs, in fact, prohibit officers from firing tasers at someone who is running away. So the City of Atlanta says you cannot even fire a taser at someone who’s running away. So you certainly can’t fire a hand gun at someone who is running away...

District Attorney Paul Howard: ... We have also concluded that Rolfe was aware that the taser in Brooks’s possession, that it was fired twice. And once it’s fired twice, it presented no danger to him or to any other persons...

... This is a count charging him for the shooting of Mr. Brooks... ... The third aggravated assault account is for the shooting towards or in the direction of Mr. Melvin Evans. Mr. Evans was the person who was seated in the car. Do we have a picture of it? And if you would point out this automobile is the place that Mr. Evans and his two companions were driving. And the shot was fired, and I believe we’ve also got a photo of the shot that ended up in the vehicle. Think you got it. Stand it up. And so with counts against officer Rolfe, it charges him with aggravated assault for firing the weapon in or in the direction of Danielle Killians, who was in the passenger side of the front seat of the car. Next slide. Count five is an aggravated assault charge. And this was a charge for shooting towards or in the direction of Michael Perkins. Mr. Perkins was seated in the rear of this same vehicle at that time. There’s a charge for criminal damage for shooting into that vehicle. Also, Officer Rolfe is charged with seven violations of office. Each one of those carries a one to five sentence. These are violations of his oath of office for the City of Atlanta...

... Thirdly, excessive force when shooting a firearm at Mr. Brooks. And number four is the failure to render timely medical aid. Those are the four violations of oath. The eighth is for kicking Mr. Brooks...

https://www.rev.com/blog/transcript-category/press-conference-transcripts

https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/da-announces-charges-in-atlanta-rayshard-brooks-killing-press-conference-transcript

PS: I posted two links to the transcript because one has so many pop up ads. It is probably best to watch the presentation if you are interested so you can see the photos and videos.

The actual press conference begins about 35 minutes from the start of the video.

[A Hit With The Ladies, BSN, RN]

8 hours ago, Joe V said:

Sooo ... when police use it on civilians it's NOT lethal??

The risk was equal. But, only 1 person ended up dead.

It could have been the cop that was the one person who was dead. Luckily, Brooks missed when firing the taser at the cop. Glad the cop was unhurt. Brooks was the bad guy, as is anyone else who would fire a weapon at a cop to resist arrest. Blue lives matter, too.

[toomuchbaloney]

After nearly 40 minutes of on the street interview by police the officer determines that the best course of action for someone is to arrest the guy who could just walk to his sister's nearby home. And in order to convince the drunk man that he should simply comply with this action, the officer unholsters his taser. Then when the feaeful drunk guy gets the weapon away from the police, the police's fear of the weapon justifies shooting the drunk guy in the back...as he's fleeing for his life.

Only the police are allowed to be afraid and act out their fear in those situations.

[jobellestarr]

On 6/15/2020 at 3:13 PM, A Hit With The Ladies said:

The officer shot him AFTER he fired the Taser at the officer. Merely pointing it at the officer would have been grounds to neutralize the suspect.

Well, why were they trying to arrest him in the first place? I think that is the issue besides that they shot him in the back. Any common sense person with an ounce of compassion would have had the car towed and either he could have walked to his sister’s house, which is what he said he wanted to do since it was right there or they could have given him a ride. Good grief.

[A Hit With The Ladies, BSN, RN]

1 minute ago, jobellestarr said:

Well, why were they trying to arrest him in the first place?

He was driving a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol, which is an offense that is a cause for arrest in every state and territory nationwide.

Quote

I think that is the issue besides that they shot him in the back.

Let's not conveniently omit the fact that resisting arrest, attempting to flee arrest, stealing a police officer's weapon, and trying to shoot at a police officer with that weapon are all crimes worthy of prosecution.

Quote

Any common sense person with an ounce of compassion would have had the car towed and either he could have walked to his sister’s house, which is what he said he wanted to do since it was right there or they could have given him a ride.

Driving under the influence of alcohol does not get you a ride to your sister's house. It gets you a ride in the back of the cop car to jail.

[Trampledunderfoot, LPN]

On 6/14/2020 at 10:29 AM, A Hit With The Ladies said:

I did see the video. And then Brooks was aiming the taser at the cop! What was the cop supposed to do? Just get tased?

Even if you point a toy gun at a cop, they can use lethal force to neutralize what they perceive to be a threat. When seconds count they have to do what's necessary to defend their lives as well as that of innocent bystanders.

It seems like the world is turning into a scary place for the police. I hear that they are trying to "defund" them, and also making it harder for them to win lawsuits against them. It seems like they are setting things up so that no one will want to be a policeman. It seems like it would have been a scary enough job before all of this happening. Makes you wonder what the world will look like 30 years from now at this rate.

[toomuchbaloney]

Yes. Having standards for conduct and accountability for behavior and attitudes certainly sounds like a real deterrent for professional policing.

(Was the sarcasm evident?)

[toomuchbaloney]

1 hour ago, A Hit With The Ladies said:

He was driving a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol, which is an offense that is a cause for arrest in every state and territory nationwide.

Let's not conveniently omit the fact that resisting arrest, attempting to flee arrest, stealing a police officer's weapon, and trying to shoot at a police officer with that weapon are all crimes worthy of prosecution.

Driving under the influence of alcohol does not get you a ride to your sister's house. It gets you a ride in the back of the cop car to jail.

When the police encountered him he was not driving, he was sleeping. The police interacted with him for 40 minutes before casualty threatening him with a taser. There was no protect and serve in this police interaction...

[unplgt16, BSN]

1 hour ago, A Hit With The Ladies said:

He was driving a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol, which is an offense that is a cause for arrest in every state and territory nationwide.

Wrong. He fell asleep in the Wendy’s drive thru and was asked by the cops to move his car to a parking spot. If he was “sooo drunk”, why would the cop knowingly have a drunk man move his car. Sounds like some good ol victim blaming to me.

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/supersurvivors/201803/why-do-people-blame-the-victim

[NurseBlaq]

13 minutes ago, toomuchbaloney said:

When the police encountered him he was not driving, he was sleeping. The police interacted with him for 40 minutes before casualty threatening him with a taser. There was no protect and serve in this police interaction...

Also, they had already deployed the taser the maximum amount of times and were aware he could no longer use it to harm them when he was murdered. Therefore, the taser in his hand was irrelevant because it was useless and they knew it, plus he was shot in the back. How was he a threat to them with a useless taser and his back towards them? The whataboutism around here has run amok!