EDITED'Less than 24 hours after a white police officer shot and killed an African-American

[elleng]

man outside a fast-food restaurant, Mayor Keisha Lance Bottoms of Atlanta announced on Saturday that the city’s police chief had resigned, and called for the “immediate termination” of the officer who shot the man.

The authorities said the man, Rayshard Brooks, 27, had run from the police on Friday night after failing a sobriety test and grabbing a Taser from an officer during a struggle with him. Ms. Bottoms said that security footage appeared to show that Mr. Brooks had fired the Taser toward the officer, who was chasing him before he was killed, but that she did not consider that a justification for the shooting.

“While there may be debate as to whether this was an appropriate use of deadly force, I firmly believe that there is a clear distinction between what you can do and what you should do,” Ms. Bottoms said. “I do not believe that this was a justified use of deadly force.”

Ms. Bottoms’s rapid response to the fatal shooting signaled the heightened scrutiny facing law enforcement as a wave of protest against police violence continues in many cities around the country — a movement that has already prompted a number of changes to local police policies, as well as a broader conversation about the ongoing racism that people of color experience in the justice system and nearly every other facet of American life. . .

EDIT:The encounter at the Wendy’s began around 10:30 p.m. on Friday when police officers were called to the restaurant because Mr. Brooks had fallen asleep in his vehicle, which was parked in the drive-through, causing other customers to drive around him, the Georgia Bureau of Investigation said in a statement.

Mr. Brooks failed a sobriety test, the authorities said, and then struggled with officers as he was being arrested. A video posted on social media showed him grappling with the two officers who were trying to arrest him. One officer appeared to try to stun him with a Taser after Mr. Brooks threw a punch at him.

As Mr. Brooks ran away, appearing to hold the Taser, one officer chased after him, holding another stun gun. Then, in one video, several gunshots were heard.'>>>

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/13/us/atlanta-police-shooting-rayshard-brooks.html

Watching Mayor Keisha Lance Bottoms, and wishing her and Atlanta well.

[Renew Deal]

1. I just watched the video. Brooks stole the taser from the officer and then pointed it at him.

So why is there an issue with police conduct in this case?

[CurtEastPoint]

2. That means he deserved to be shot in the back six times?

[Renew Deal]

4. How many times is appropriate?

1, 3?

My point is that there are cases that are much more clear cut than this one like the Walter Scott case.

[CurtEastPoint]

6. Maybe I'm tired but I have no idea what point you are trying to make. Nitey nite

[Renew Deal]

11. My point is that they are shooting to kill as soon as they use a gun.

[StarfishSaver]

19. Why did they need to shoot him at all?

He had committed no crime and posed no serious threat to them. A taser is not a deadly weapon.

[Renew Deal]

20. Did you watch the video?

I don't know how he ended up in a fist fight with the cops, but I'm pretty sure that's a crime.

[StarfishSaver]

24. Why do you assume the fist fight was his fault?

And even if you decide it was s "crime," fist fight with a police officer is not a capital offense deserving of summary execution on the spot.

People who insist on bending over backwards to make excuses for the inexcusable when cops shoot black men in the back are one of the reasons we are marching in the streets to tell the world that black lives matters.

[Renew Deal]

25. Do you think that punching a cop is a crime?

Because I think it's possible to say that both things are wrong (fighting the cops and shooting someone running away).

[StarfishSaver]

26. Are you really making a "both sides" argument

equating punching a police officer while being manhandled with a police officer shooting an unarmed man who pose no threat of immediate deadly harm?

Yes, you are.

[Renew Deal]

34. No, I'm making the your first argument was intellectually dishonest argument.

"He had committed no crime"

That's not true when shooting happened.

[Dream Girl]

48. They don't get so summarily execute someone for "committing a crime"

That would make them judge and executionerwith no due process.That’s not how it’s supposed to work.

[Doodley]

28. A man who turns and points a taser gun at the police -

are the police supposed to just hope that is a taser and not a lethal weapon? He didn't deserve to die, but if a white man behaved like him, he could expect to be shot too.

[jayfish]

32. I'm Going To Have To Give You Props On That Observation Doodley.

My only counter is that they had just been wrestling with the guy and may have even patted him down beforehand. It the heat of the moment though? It's a tough one.

[Doodley]

40. These police officers have a horrible job. Every time

they deal with an incident, it may be the last time their family sees them. This isn't clear cut like the killing of Mr. Floyd. That was cold-blooded murder.

How did the officer know this wasn't going to have a different outcome? An officer dead or a bystander? Imagine the officer was your spouse. Would you say if you feel your life is in imminent danger shoot, or wait and see if you have a bullet in your head first?

[mvd]

43. The thing that really bothers me is..

they went through the whole struggle, and when he was running away, they decided to shoot him. Where was the threat at that point? And wasn’t it their taser gun? It seems like a completely inappropriate use of deadly force. Maybe it isn’t clear cut murder like Floyd. But charges should absolutely be considered pending investigation.

I agree that it is a hard job, and people really have to be up to doing it properly. Training seems to be lacking, too.

[Doodley]

52. I agree. There should be charges and there should be an investigation. Was it

really necessary to kill this man?

[maxrandb]

64. JFC-Every time I leave the house it may be the last time my family sees me

Last edited Sun Jun 14, 2020, 02:09 PM - Edit history (1)

Police Officer isn't even in the top 10 most dangerous jobs.

Every time I drive my car it may be the last time my family sees me. That doesn't give me the right to plow over pedestrians to get home.

This fucking "last time their families" shit is why the fucking highest priority for police is NOT the safety and well-being of the people they serve... it's their own safety.

We wouldn't accept that from firefighters.

We wouldn't accept that from the military.

We wouldn't accept that from emergency room doctors.

There's no reason they had to shoot this man.

There's no reason they even had to harrass him.

He was drunk and sleeping in his car. He was calm up until they started to cuff him.

There were a hundred different ways that they could have handled it.

Hell, if you want to use the "last time my family sees me" argument, that's how African American men feel when they are stopped for jaywalking.

We want to ensure the safety of our police, but their safety should NEVER be the highest priority.

The highest priority ought to be..."ensuring the safety and well-being of the community they serve ,"while" conducting their work safely.

If we treated firefighters the way we treat police, firefighters would show up at a house fire with three young children trapped inside and collapse the house on top of the children to ensure no firefighter was hurt.

The lives of police matter, but so do the lives of the people they serve. We've elevated one life above the other.

There is no modern Democracy in the world where police kill the citizens even 1/1000th of the time it happens here.

[Doodley]

65. I come from a country where the cops don't even carry guns. America is

armed to the hilt. 30,000 die a year from firearms. It is a violent place and some neighborhoods are much worse. I am constantly shocked at how racist America is. It breaks my heart. I will never be content with how divided America is and how much racism I hear from so many white folk that I encounter. I will never be content with the disparity in the number of blacks who are in jail, the financial disparities and the number that are killed by cops. I will never be content with a racist pig for president. I will never forget laying in the middle of the road at 3 o'clock in the morning and seeing my world collapsing around me on the night it became clear Trump had "won" the election.

However, this guy was out of control. No, he didn't deserve to die. The police presumably weren't restraining him or using force. He was able to take the taser and run away. I don't know if there is reason to say the cops mishandled it up to that point. The question is when he turned and appeared to shoot. In that second of time, the cop may have been uncertain if that was a real gun. Was he right to shoot? That is the question. I am not going to decide this cop was racist and deliberately killed an innocent man, based on this information.

[Alex4Martinez]

67. Powerful, moving. Please consider making this reply and OP, and original post on DU.

I'm tired as hell of how people rationalize how dangerous certain jobs are while dismissing how dangerous skin color is.

Thanks in advance.

[Bettie]

68. +1 Thank you

this said all the things I was thinking!

[uponit7771]

59. Of course it is but dying from it?!?!

[lostnfound]

63. Try waking up out of sound sleep and getting jumped by cops

These cops deprived three girls of their father

[Dream Girl]

46. I don't care if he grabbed the taser or not. A taser is not deadly force. The standard is the office

Is justified only in meeting the same level of force. If some swings a punch shooting them is not justified. The taser is the same. It is not,considered deadly so should not be met with deadly force. I doubt that it would have happened the the assailant been white. Police offericers have a much easier time shoot black people.

[John Fante]

3. Brooks was no longer armed when police shot him.

[Renew Deal]

5. It looked like he pointed the taser at the officer

Is that not the case?

[John Fante]

7. He shot the taser at the officer, missed, dropped the taser, then

was shot in the back.

[Renew Deal]

9. Thanks

[jrthin]

8. A taser, by law, is not a deadly weapon. Police have argued

in court that tasers are not a deadly weapon. Also, the distance from where the taser MAY have been fired was too far to effect the police officer.

[soothsayer]

13. Taser might not have even had any charge left

But it’s not deadly (under most circumstances). Ridiculous escalation especially with all that’s going on.

Senseless.

[jrthin]

18. +100 nt

[onecaliberal]

10. They knew who he was, let him run. How about DONT shoot at all.

Arrest him later.

[JI7]

16. Exactly, nobody is saying nothing should be done in these cases

but if we had people who werent total idiots and there were some standards in place they would be able to figure out that they can catch him later and add on additional charges for running away.

[jrthin]

12. They could have boxed him in with backup. They could have

let him go, his car was sitting in the parking lot so they had all the info they needed to find him. The police officer did not need to shoot him in the back.

[StarfishSaver]

17. He did not pose a deadly threat to the officers

Moreover, how did they allow a simple situation of an intoxicated man sleeping in a car in a fast food parking lot escalate into a deadly police shooting?

At best, they suck as police officers and need to find other jobs.

[pnwmom]

53. Because he was running away, with his BACK to the officers, when he was killed. n/t

[delisen]

15. Why did the Wendy's call police? Cars were able to drive around.

Police Chief Erika Shields is still going to be working for the city in another capacity.

[elleng]

21. 'Nuisance.'

Patrons may have become restless>>>

[Doodley]

22. Police get the "red mist" of rage and don't exercise the self-control to deescalate the situation.

[mvd]

29. Yes. There are those who just should not be police officers

Perhaps they need frequent evaluations. And the training needs to be better.

This was excessive force for sure. The threat was not there when they shot him. If the police get that afraid and trigger happy, they should not have been officers.

They should be fired with possible charges.

[demigoddess]

55. the police officers not only need more training but probably should be

rotated to different duties so they have down time so they are not always revved up to kill. Let them walk around a neighborhood and learn about the people. Also, why did they have to arrest the guy? is sleeping in your car in the wrong place a crime? They should have just told him to walk home and sleep it off.

[Karadeniz]

23. My view is police seem to never think "just let him go." Seems like they get too caught up

With "respect." However, black citizens have no reason to trust or cooperate and police get too upset about it, escalating a situation instead of defusing. What really needed to be done? Get the car out of the lane. Knock on the window, waking him up, and tell him he's blocking the lane. Situation handled...ask him for the name of someone to pick him up if they think he'd be unsafe driving.

[Sneederbunk]

27. Not much discussion these past weeks about the advisability of resisting arrest.

[mike_c]

30. I still don't understand why they tried to arrest him in the first place

What do you charge someone with when they've fallen asleep in their parked car? Why not simply tap on his window and wake him up, then ask him to move his car out of the way? Why did they need to arrest him at all? That's what caused the situation to escalate.

[exboyfil]

33. Because he failed a field sobriety test

I guess they could have let him drive off on his own. What would we be saying if he later runs over somebody?

[mike_c]

37. But he was not driving.

I still don't get it. It's not illegal to get drunk-- if it were, there wouldn't be any bars or liquor stores. Most bar patrons would probably fail a field sobriety test. That's why people call a cab or nap in their car for a while. If he was being a loud, obnoxious drunk causing clear danger to anyone, that might be different, but only to the point of letting him go when he ran away, or maybe chasing him if there was really any evidence that he posed a danger to others. They had his car and ID. And I know some people will respond that he resisted arrest and struggled with the cops, but that happened AFTER they tried to arrest him. What crime did he commit before they tried to arrest him?

[grantcart]

41. "Operate or have actual physical control"

You clearly don't understand the law. If you are drunk and pull over and go asleep with the engine off but are behind the wheel you are guilty of DUI/APC, and for good reason. Do you actually expect the police to wait around until he starts the car?

If somebody thinks they are too drunk to drive and pull over they should lock and leave the car, although if they moved to the backseat they would not be prosecuted. Falling asleep at the drive thru because you are drunk is a clear and justifiable chargeable offense.

[SunSeeker]

45. You must be driving or in actual physical control of a moving vehicle in order to be charged.

That is apparently the law in Georgia: https://www.blacklawoffices.com/what-is-dui-in-georgia

He was asleep. He wasn't controlling anything.

[NickB79]

47. You didn't read far enough

From your link:

Being behind the wheel with the keys in the ignition and the radio or heater on may be enough to qualify as "actual physical control."

[SunSeeker]

50. In CA, sleeping in you car does not amount to "control" for DUI purposes.

Not sure about GA.

[grantcart]

57. absolutely, unqualified not true. In fact CA tightened the law to make it more difficult to defend.

https://www.expertlawfirm.com/can-get-dui-sleeping-car/

If you know you’ve had too much to drink, sleeping in your car until you’re sober again is the right thing to do, right? Believe it or not, you can get a DUI for sleeping “it off” in the car, and you could get a DUI in that situation – if the police find indications that you may have been driving drunk.

According to California law, a driver can be arrested for a DUI if they are found sleeping inside their vehicle while intoxicated. In fact, the legislature in California created a separate law that allows for an arrest for sleeping in a car (even if not running) to be authorized by law.

The reasons for this law are obvious with reasons.

Police have witnessed a drunk driver but lost eye contact because they had to change directions or streets and when they finally relocated the driver the suspect has turned off his car and is feigning sleep.

A driver has become so intoxicated that he pulls over and falls asleep. Are the police expected to wait until he wakes up and re enters the street to take a potential vehicular manslaughter killer off the street.

I am surprised that people can be so misinformed on something that is widely taught and tested for driver's licenses. Simply being behind the steering wheel and being the intended driver is an offense. If they see someone exit a bar they don't have to wait for the driver to engage the ignition and drive to arrest them they can do it as soon as he/she sits behind the wheel and pulls out their keys. Which enables an arrest before a chase and endangering the public.

There are defenses for people that are sleeping behind the wheel (if they had texted someone that they were going to stay in the car until morning or were waiting for a cab, etc) but it is absolutely a chargeable offense and that is why the legislatures, especially in CA, have written the legislation that way.

[SunSeeker]

61. That's one lawyer's opinion. He cites VC 40300.5, which does not even mention sleeping in your car.

ARTICLE 1. Arrests [40300 - 40313]  ( Article 1 enacted by Stats. 1959, Ch. 3. )

40300.5.  

In addition to the authority to make an arrest without a warrant pursuant to paragraph (1) of subdivision (a) of Section 836 of the Penal Code, a peace officer may, without a warrant, arrest a person when the officer has reasonable cause to believe that the person had been driving while under the influence of an alcoholic beverage or any drug, or under the combined influence of an alcoholic beverage and any drug when any of the following exists:

(a) The person is involved in a traffic accident.

(b) The person is observed in or about a vehicle that is obstructing a roadway.

(c) The person will not be apprehended unless immediately arrested.

(d) The person may cause injury to himself or herself or damage property unless immediately arrested.

(e) The person may destroy or conceal evidence of the crime unless immediately arrested.

http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=VEH&sectionNum=40300.5.

You're citing one law firm's website.

Other law firms offer different opinions. If you Google "Can you get a DUI if sleeping in your car in CA?" this is the first thing that pops up:

In California, merely sleeping in a vehicle while under the influence is not a DUI offense as long as there is not evidence of driving or volitional movement. It is important to remember that even if sleeping in a vehicle may not be DUI, a driver could potentially be charged with drunk in public in violation of California Penal Code Section 647(f) PC.

https://www.losangelescriminallawyer.pro/dui-and-sleeping-in-a-vehicle.html

It's also important to note Brooks was not on a public street, but on private property (a Wendy's parking lot).

However, it looks like you can get a DUI for sleeping in your car in Georgia, particularly if you're black.

[grantcart]

58. You have no clue what the legal meaning of APC is, so here is the universal definition

https://definitions.uslegal.com/p/physical-control-traffic-law/

Physical control refers to the means of a person driving vehicle to initiate any movement of, and in close proximity to the operating controls of the vehicle. It is meant to cover situations where an intoxicated person is found in a parked vehicle which could become a source of danger to the operator, to others, or to property

Actual physical control of a vehicle means the defendant must be physically in or on the vehicle and have the capability to operate the vehicle, regardless of whether s/he is actually operating the vehicle at the time.

You do not have to be driving or operating or have the radio on to meet the legal definition of APC, you simply have to be in the car with the keys and able to turn it on. If you are in the car and behind the wheel with the keys your in actual control of the car. It doesn't mean that you are driving or operating the car but if you are intoxicated you cannot, in almost every state of the union, even sit behind the wheel, awake or asleep with the ignition key, and for obvious and good reasons.

[SunSeeker]

62. Each state's DUI laws are different, and interpret things differently, such as APC.

Chill, counselor.

[exboyfil]

66. He did drive

He pulled his car into the parking space after the cop told him to get out of the fast food line (after waking him). He had to drive to get to that point as well.

[grantcart]

38. Are you serious? He drove to the drive in drunk and fell asleep

Drunk drivers kill thousands including several friends of mine.

It is a serious crime and without any excuse in the age of Uber. He risked innocent lives for a Wendy's hamburger.

Should have been detained and faced charges.

[SunSeeker]

49. I'm not taking Uber until Covid-19 is no longer a threat.

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2020/03/an-uber-driver-has-reportedly-died-from-the-coronavirus/


But I don't drink and drive, so not an issue for me.

[LenaBaby61]

31. Dylann Roof ....

An avowed white Supremacist who loved Confederate rags walked into a church where people were bible-studying and violently murdered 9 black parishioners because he wanted to start a race war. After the police 'nicely' arrested him they bought him a hot, juicy hamburger because he was hungry.



Meanwhile ......

George Floyd ended up here 👇🏻 inside of a coffin,


because a racist police officer and his racist buddies decided that him trying to spend an alleged counterfit non-violent $20.00 bill was worth murdering him over.

WONDER why Roof got a hot, juicy burger and George Floyd got murdered 🤔

[Renew Deal]

36. One of the protesters was just talking about this.

Not sure if she is a DUer or if it's a coincidence.

[pnwmom]

54. He was running away with his back to the officers when he was shot. That looks pretty clearcut. n/t

[uponit7771]

60. Ah, so that's why the cops kill us 21 times greater that white people cause we resist arrest 🙄🙄🙄

WTF ?!!

This statement comes off at the least tone deaf

[sop]

42. No matter what happened just prior to the shooting, the victim was unarmed, running away from

the two officers, he was not a threat to the officers or other bystanders as he was running away, and was about 20 to 25 feet from the nearest officer when shot multiple times. According to Atlanta Police Department policy, this was not a justified shooting.

An attorney for the victim's family noted that the two cops were seen searching for and picking up their spent casings from the pavement right after the shooting. They probably did that so investigators could not accurately determine how far away the cops were from the victim when they discharged their weapons.

If true, that's a police cover up, and it demonstrates the cops knew they violated department policy by shooting a fleeing suspect at that distance, and under those circumstances. By covering up the actual shooting distance, and possibly making it appear closer, the police could later claim they felt "threatened" by the suspect when they shot him.

The family's attorney also pointed out the cops took several minutes to check the victim's pulse as he lay dying. No first aid was administered, and the EMTs didn't arrive for some time. They did kick the victim while he lay dying, and tried to roll him over. Not receiving prompt medical attention may have contributed to the man's death.

[mvd]

44. I heard they picked up their shell casings before checking the victim

Did seem like covering up and disregard for life.

[NoMoreRepugs]

51. Shooting a man in the back. How can you possibly feel

threatened by someone running AWAY from you?

[CountMyVote4Reality]

56. "It's like a really bad Groundhogs Day, but for many of us we don't wake up." CNN commentator

Segun Oduolowu, Host “The List”