Rayshard Brooks: A justified use of deadly force, explained

[TemplarKormac]

Right the cops should not be judge jury and executioner.

They have a right to self-defense. Quit advocating for anarchy, crime and lawlessness. Point a weapon at me and I'll cap your ass just as fast.

Cops do not have the permission to shoot a person that is not a direct threat to them or to another person in the immediate area.

Already pointed out Brooks WAS A direct threat. End of story. Cop will beat the charges. Throw a shovel of dirt on Brooks and be done with it. Scum got what he deserved.

And when Brooks was shot he was not a threat to either cop.

So the self defense claim will not stand.

The video shows otherwise. Quit talking out your ass. Point a cellphone at a cop and if he mistakes it for a weapon, thinks you are threatening him, he has a right to shoot you in self-defense.

If you weren't just another stupid ass, you'd realize that police cannot operate any other way. You've got a desperate man fighting with you trying to get away pointing a weapon and you've got a split second to assess the threat.

BANG. You're dead.

But the cop knew it was a Taser.

The cop saw the Taser be fired

The cop saw that Taser shot miss him by a mile.

There was no reason for the cop to fear for his life from what he knew was a TAser

Tasers have a 2 round clip.

That means the taser still had one cartridge left. It was still a weapon.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Right the cops should not be judge jury and executioner.

They have a right to self-defense. Quit advocating for anarchy, crime and lawlessness. Point a weapon at me and I'll cap your ass just as fast.

Cops do not have the permission to shoot a person that is not a direct threat to them or to another person in the immediate area.

Already pointed out Brooks WAS A direct threat. End of story. Cop will beat the charges. Throw a shovel of dirt on Brooks and be done with it. Scum got what he deserved.

And when Brooks was shot he was not a threat to either cop.

So the self defense claim will not stand.

False!

See post 34.

True.

After he fired that Taser it was useless as a weapon because it could not be fired again therefore he was no longer a threat to either cop

Apparently, he was a threat to his own children. In fact he did time for it.

Dead thugs are good things.

Irrelevant to this instance

Actually it is. It's called a pattern of violence.

 

[CowboyTed]

You are mandating that a Tazer is a Firearm and thus Rolfe could shoot him in the back running away

Because the law backs my assertions.


GA CODE § 17-4-20 (b)

Second conclusion: Rolfe was permitted to use deadly force to apprehend the felon or misdemeanant:

(b) Sheriffs and peace officers who are appointed or employed in conformity with Chapter 8 of Title 35 may use deadly force to apprehend a suspected felon only when the officer reasonably believes that the suspect possesses a deadly weapon or any object, device, or instrument which, when used offensively against a person, is likely to or actually does result in serious bodily injury; when the officer reasonably believes that the suspect poses an immediate threat of physical violence to the officer or others; or when there is probable cause to believe that the suspect has committed a crime involving the infliction or threatened infliction of serious physical harm. Nothing in this Code section shall be construed so as to restrict such sheriffs or peace officers from the use of such reasonable nondeadly force as may be necessary to apprehend and arrest a suspected felon or misdemeanant.

Begone with you.

He was running away with a spent tazer gun... The tazer gun is effectively a piece of plastic, the officer was trained to know this as he was trained in how to use it...

Are Georgia Police saying that a tazer can cause serious bodily injury?

 

[TemplarKormac]

You are mandating that a Tazer is a Firearm and thus Rolfe could shoot him in the back running away

Because the law backs my assertions.


GA CODE § 17-4-20 (b)

Second conclusion: Rolfe was permitted to use deadly force to apprehend the felon or misdemeanant:

(b) Sheriffs and peace officers who are appointed or employed in conformity with Chapter 8 of Title 35 may use deadly force to apprehend a suspected felon only when the officer reasonably believes that the suspect possesses a deadly weapon or any object, device, or instrument which, when used offensively against a person, is likely to or actually does result in serious bodily injury; when the officer reasonably believes that the suspect poses an immediate threat of physical violence to the officer or others; or when there is probable cause to believe that the suspect has committed a crime involving the infliction or threatened infliction of serious physical harm. Nothing in this Code section shall be construed so as to restrict such sheriffs or peace officers from the use of such reasonable nondeadly force as may be necessary to apprehend and arrest a suspected felon or misdemeanant.

Begone with you.

He was running away with a spent tazer gun... The tazer gun is effectively a piece of plastic, the officer was trained to know this as he was trained in how to use it...

Are Georgia Police saying that a tazer can cause serious bodily injury?

Uh yeah? What do you think happens to the human body when you apply a sufficient electrical charge to it?

One way or the other, Brooks established himself as a violent threat the moment he was willing to use violence against the police. Spent or not, he could not be permitted to assimilate back into the community at large. He was a threat. Hands down. Period. Full stop.

 

[CowboyTed]

Right the cops should not be judge jury and executioner.

They have a right to self-defense. Quit advocating for anarchy, crime and lawlessness. Point a weapon at me and I'll cap your ass just as fast.

Cops do not have the permission to shoot a person that is not a direct threat to them or to another person in the immediate area.

Already pointed out Brooks WAS A direct threat. End of story. Cop will beat the charges. Throw a shovel of dirt on Brooks and be done with it. Scum got what he deserved.

And when Brooks was shot he was not a threat to either cop.

So the self defense claim will not stand.

The video shows otherwise. Quit talking out your ass. Point a cellphone at a cop and if he mistakes it for a weapon, thinks you are threatening him, he has a right to shoot you in self-defense.

If you weren't just another stupid ass, you'd realize that police cannot operate any other way. You've got a desperate man fighting with you trying to get away pointing a weapon and you've got a split second to assess the threat.

BANG. You're dead.

But the cop knew it was a Taser.

The cop saw the Taser be fired

The cop saw that Taser shot miss him by a mile.

There was no reason for the cop to fear for his life from what he knew was a TAser

Tasers have a 2 round clip.

That means the taser still had one cartridge left. It was still a weapon.

They are new on the market relatively and they are black I believe... The cops had yellow ones which I think are one shot...

It looked like the one here

Police use of Tasers: Why and when do police use the shocking devices?

While Tasers are designed to be non-lethal, they can kill. Rules for police use vary across the country, as does training. But there are some national guidelines and cautions that officers are encouraged to heed.

eu.usatoday.com

Thats a Tazer X26... That is single shot...
If it is Tazer X26P it has extra cartridge in handle which needs to manually swapped... Brooks would have needed to stop figure it out... I say 30 sec to a min to swap...

 

[TemplarKormac]

Thats a Tazer X26... That is single shot...

Sorry, wrong again!

https://buy.axon.com/ccrz__ProductDetails?sku=22003

 

[CowboyTed]

You are mandating that a Tazer is a Firearm and thus Rolfe could shoot him in the back running away

Because the law backs my assertions.


GA CODE § 17-4-20 (b)

Second conclusion: Rolfe was permitted to use deadly force to apprehend the felon or misdemeanant:

(b) Sheriffs and peace officers who are appointed or employed in conformity with Chapter 8 of Title 35 may use deadly force to apprehend a suspected felon only when the officer reasonably believes that the suspect possesses a deadly weapon or any object, device, or instrument which, when used offensively against a person, is likely to or actually does result in serious bodily injury; when the officer reasonably believes that the suspect poses an immediate threat of physical violence to the officer or others; or when there is probable cause to believe that the suspect has committed a crime involving the infliction or threatened infliction of serious physical harm. Nothing in this Code section shall be construed so as to restrict such sheriffs or peace officers from the use of such reasonable nondeadly force as may be necessary to apprehend and arrest a suspected felon or misdemeanant.

Begone with you.

He was running away with a spent tazer gun... The tazer gun is effectively a piece of plastic, the officer was trained to know this as he was trained in how to use it...

Are Georgia Police saying that a tazer can cause serious bodily injury?

Uh yeah? What do you think happens to the human body when you apply a sufficient electrical charge to it?

One way or the other, Brooks established himself as a violent threat the moment he was willing to use violence against the police. Spent or not, he could not be permitted to assimilate back into the community at large. He was a threat. Hands down. Period. Full stop.

Well now you have just created a huge amount of criminal and civil cases against Police Force...

Remember this...


Unarmed, confirmed by his partner as unarmed and the cop attempted to tazer him...

Or this

US police dept faces backlash online after officer uses taser on 87-year-old grandmother

An officer used the taser on the woman when she didn't obey an order commands to drop the knife in her hand. However, the woman's relatives said said she doesn't speak English and was merely cutting dandelions with a kitchen knife near her home.

indianexpress.com

And this is the same Police Dept.... These are now all subject to attempted murder... Careful where you go here...


There is more

11-year-old girl shocked with police Taser will not face charges

The 11-year-girl who was struck by a Taser deployed by a Cincinnati police officer at a Kroger on Monday will not face charges.

eu.cincinnati.com

You are now upgrading all of these charges...

 

[TemplarKormac]

Well now you have just created a huge amount of criminal and civil cases against Police Force...

By doing or asserting what, precisely?

 

[TemplarKormac]

You are mandating that a Tazer is a Firearm and thus Rolfe could shoot him in the back running away

Because the law backs my assertions.


GA CODE § 17-4-20 (b)

Second conclusion: Rolfe was permitted to use deadly force to apprehend the felon or misdemeanant:

(b) Sheriffs and peace officers who are appointed or employed in conformity with Chapter 8 of Title 35 may use deadly force to apprehend a suspected felon only when the officer reasonably believes that the suspect possesses a deadly weapon or any object, device, or instrument which, when used offensively against a person, is likely to or actually does result in serious bodily injury; when the officer reasonably believes that the suspect poses an immediate threat of physical violence to the officer or others; or when there is probable cause to believe that the suspect has committed a crime involving the infliction or threatened infliction of serious physical harm. Nothing in this Code section shall be construed so as to restrict such sheriffs or peace officers from the use of such reasonable nondeadly force as may be necessary to apprehend and arrest a suspected felon or misdemeanant.

Begone with you.

He was running away with a spent tazer gun... The tazer gun is effectively a piece of plastic, the officer was trained to know this as he was trained in how to use it...

Are Georgia Police saying that a tazer can cause serious bodily injury?

Uh yeah? What do you think happens to the human body when you apply a sufficient electrical charge to it?

One way or the other, Brooks established himself as a violent threat the moment he was willing to use violence against the police. Spent or not, he could not be permitted to assimilate back into the community at large. He was a threat. Hands down. Period. Full stop.

Well now you have just created a huge amount of criminal and civil cases against Police Force...

Remember this...


Unarmed, confirmed by his partner as unarmed and the cop attempted to tazer him...

Or this

US police dept faces backlash online after officer uses taser on 87-year-old grandmother

An officer used the taser on the woman when she didn't obey an order commands to drop the knife in her hand. However, the woman's relatives said said she doesn't speak English and was merely cutting dandelions with a kitchen knife near her home.

indianexpress.com

And this is the same Police Dept.... These are now all subject to attempted murder... Careful where you go here...


There is more

11-year-old girl shocked with police Taser will not face charges

The 11-year-girl who was struck by a Taser deployed by a Cincinnati police officer at a Kroger on Monday will not face charges.

eu.cincinnati.com

You are now upgrading all of these charges...

This is Georgia law NOT OHIO, you blithering shill. Pay attention.

 

[TemplarKormac]

And this is the same Police Dept.... These are now all subject to attempted murder... Careful where you go here...

Furthermore, the taser appears to have been fired once, not twice, meaning he was an ACTIVE threat.

I love how you just tried to spin the argument around on me. Are you that desperate?

 

[gipper]

I won't dive into the federal offenses he committed before he died. I am making the case that the police followed Georgia law to the letter. A grand jury will likely not convict Rolfe and Bronson based on these facts.

I challenge you, the reader, to prove me otherwise.

Twinkie, the cop shot this guy in the back.

I repeat. He shot the guy in the back. Twice. Over a parking violation.

I agree with Joe. That doesn’t happen often. The cop committed murder. He deserves a long prison sentence.

I really don’t understand these Americans who think cop killing and brutality is justified. Apparently they WANT to live in a police state.

 

[Dragonlady]

Rayshard Brooks: A justified use of deadly force, explained

What Brooks did by punching an officer in the face was an aggravated misdemeanor, punishable by a $5,000 fine and up to 1 year in jail (see Ga. Code Ann. § 17-10-4.).

GA CODE § 16-5-23 (e)

(e) Any person who commits the offense of simple battery against a police officer, correction officer, or detention officer engaged in carrying out official duties shall, upon conviction thereof, be punished for a misdemeanor of a high and aggravated nature.

Brooks, by resisting arrest, punching the officer in the face and later firing a taser at the police officer was guilty of a felony under Georgia Law, punishable by a maximum of five years in jail:

GA CODE § 16-10-24 (b)

Whoever knowingly and willfully resists, obstructs, or opposes any law enforcement officer, prison guard, correctional officer, probation supervisor, parole supervisor, or conservation ranger in the lawful discharge of his official duties by offering or doing violence to the person of such officer or legally authorized person is guilty of a felony and shall, upon conviction thereof, be punished by imprisonment for not less than one nor more than five years.


GA CODE § 16-11-123

As soon as Brooks gained possession of the taser, he was facing five years in jail for illegally possessing a firearm. As the law states:

"A person commits the offense of unlawful possession of firearms or weapons when he or she knowingly has in his or her possession any sawed-off shotgun, sawed-off rifle, machine gun, dangerous weapon, or silencer, and, upon conviction thereof, he or she shall be punished by imprisonment for a period of five years."

GA CODE § 16-11-106 (a)

Tasers are considered firearms under Georgia Law:

(a) For the purposes of this Code section, the term "firearm" shall include stun guns and tasers. A stun gun or taser is any device that is powered by electrical charging units such as batteries and emits an electrical charge in excess of 20,000 volts or is otherwise capable of incapacitating a person by an electrical charge.

GA CODE § 16-5-21 (c)(1)(A)

What Brooks did with the taser he stole would have warranted 10 to 20 years in jail under Georgia law had he survived the encounter. As stated above (in § 16-11-106), tasers are classified as firearms:

(c)

(1) A person who knowingly commits the offense of aggravated assault upon a public safety officer while he or she is engaged in, or on account of the performance of, his or her official duties shall, upon conviction thereof, be punished as follows:

(A) When such assault occurs by the discharge of a firearm by a person who is at least 17 years of age, such person shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than ten nor more than 20 years.

GA CODE § 16-3-21 (a)

First conclusion: Officer Rolfe was justified in using deadly force to prevent the commission of a "forcible felony" (as defined in GA CODE § 16-11-131), given that the one or more of the above offenses committed by Brooks would have resulted in imprisonment of more than one year in jail:

(a) A person is justified in threatening or using force against another when and to the extent that he or she reasonably believes that such threat or force is necessary to defend himself or herself or a third person against such other's imminent use of unlawful force; however, except as provided in Code Section 16-3-23-, a person is justified in using force which is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm only if he or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent death or great bodily injury to himself or herself or a third person or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.

GA CODE § 17-4-20 (b)

Second conclusion: Rolfe was permitted to use deadly force to apprehend the felon or misdemeanant:

(b) Sheriffs and peace officers who are appointed or employed in conformity with Chapter 8 of Title 35 may use deadly force to apprehend a suspected felon only when the officer reasonably believes that the suspect possesses a deadly weapon or any object, device, or instrument which, when used offensively against a person, is likely to or actually does result in serious bodily injury; when the officer reasonably believes that the suspect poses an immediate threat of physical violence to the officer or others; or when there is probable cause to believe that the suspect has committed a crime involving the infliction or threatened infliction of serious physical harm. Nothing in this Code section shall be construed so as to restrict such sheriffs or peace officers from the use of such reasonable nondeadly force as may be necessary to apprehend and arrest a suspected felon or misdemeanant.


I won't dive into the federal offenses he committed before he died. I am making the case that the police followed Georgia law to the letter. A grand jury will likely not convict Rolfe and Bronson based on these facts.

I challenge you, the reader, to prove me otherwise.

Facts aren't feelings....the leftists will not understand anything in your post.

His reading of the facts ignored standard police practices, which is not to shoot into a crowd of bystanders, and not to shoot suspects in the back, unless the suspect poses an imminent threat. Rayshard Brooks was not a threat. A taser is NOT a deadly weapon under Georgia law, and after he fired the taser in the direction of the officer, it was out of charge, and not a threat to anyone.

Police aren't supposed to be shooting and killing suspects. Templar's OP is looking for JUSTIFICATIONS for the use of deadly force, all of which totally ignores all issues of best policing practices and public safety, all in the desperate mission of excusing a murder.

The goal of policing isn't to kill offenders, it's to "serve and protect". Nothing that was done by the police officers in that parking lot, did either. Serving and protecting would be to ensure that Brooks, who was polite, cooperative, and reasonable when first encountered by the police, got home safely. Brooks offered to give police his car keys so they knew he wasn't driving. He pointed to his sister's house, so they could see where he lived. They had his driver's license to confirm that information. "Serving and protecting" would have seen Mr. Brooks safely home, no risk to the community, problem solved.

Instead, Mr. Brooks is dead, his children will grow up without their father, and a police officer is going to jail, the community is inflamed, and the Wendy's lies in ashes. No one was "served", and they sure as hell weren't "protected".

In announcing charges yesterday, the DA meticulously detailed why the OP is full of shit, and how the officers violated both stated police practices, and the law - at every turn in this encounter.

 

[TemplarKormac]

I won't dive into the federal offenses he committed before he died. I am making the case that the police followed Georgia law to the letter. A grand jury will likely not convict Rolfe and Bronson based on these facts.

I challenge you, the reader, to prove me otherwise.

Twinkie, the cop shot this guy in the back.

I repeat. He shot the guy in the back. Twice. Over a parking violation.

I agree with Joe. That doesn’t happen often. The cop committed murder. He deserves a long prison sentence.

I really don’t understand these Americans who think cop killing and brutality is justified. Apparently they WANT to live in a police state.

Of course you do. You're running scared. You also want to sound sympathetic without considering the actual facts of the matter.

This wasn't "brutality". It was a justifiable use of deadly force.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Rayshard Brooks: A justified use of deadly force, explained

What Brooks did by punching an officer in the face was an aggravated misdemeanor, punishable by a $5,000 fine and up to 1 year in jail (see Ga. Code Ann. § 17-10-4.).

GA CODE § 16-5-23 (e)

(e) Any person who commits the offense of simple battery against a police officer, correction officer, or detention officer engaged in carrying out official duties shall, upon conviction thereof, be punished for a misdemeanor of a high and aggravated nature.

Brooks, by resisting arrest, punching the officer in the face and later firing a taser at the police officer was guilty of a felony under Georgia Law, punishable by a maximum of five years in jail:

GA CODE § 16-10-24 (b)

Whoever knowingly and willfully resists, obstructs, or opposes any law enforcement officer, prison guard, correctional officer, probation supervisor, parole supervisor, or conservation ranger in the lawful discharge of his official duties by offering or doing violence to the person of such officer or legally authorized person is guilty of a felony and shall, upon conviction thereof, be punished by imprisonment for not less than one nor more than five years.


GA CODE § 16-11-123

As soon as Brooks gained possession of the taser, he was facing five years in jail for illegally possessing a firearm. As the law states:

"A person commits the offense of unlawful possession of firearms or weapons when he or she knowingly has in his or her possession any sawed-off shotgun, sawed-off rifle, machine gun, dangerous weapon, or silencer, and, upon conviction thereof, he or she shall be punished by imprisonment for a period of five years."

GA CODE § 16-11-106 (a)

Tasers are considered firearms under Georgia Law:

(a) For the purposes of this Code section, the term "firearm" shall include stun guns and tasers. A stun gun or taser is any device that is powered by electrical charging units such as batteries and emits an electrical charge in excess of 20,000 volts or is otherwise capable of incapacitating a person by an electrical charge.

GA CODE § 16-5-21 (c)(1)(A)

What Brooks did with the taser he stole would have warranted 10 to 20 years in jail under Georgia law had he survived the encounter. As stated above (in § 16-11-106), tasers are classified as firearms:

(c)

(1) A person who knowingly commits the offense of aggravated assault upon a public safety officer while he or she is engaged in, or on account of the performance of, his or her official duties shall, upon conviction thereof, be punished as follows:

(A) When such assault occurs by the discharge of a firearm by a person who is at least 17 years of age, such person shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than ten nor more than 20 years.

GA CODE § 16-3-21 (a)

First conclusion: Officer Rolfe was justified in using deadly force to prevent the commission of a "forcible felony" (as defined in GA CODE § 16-11-131), given that the one or more of the above offenses committed by Brooks would have resulted in imprisonment of more than one year in jail:

(a) A person is justified in threatening or using force against another when and to the extent that he or she reasonably believes that such threat or force is necessary to defend himself or herself or a third person against such other's imminent use of unlawful force; however, except as provided in Code Section 16-3-23-, a person is justified in using force which is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm only if he or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent death or great bodily injury to himself or herself or a third person or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.

GA CODE § 17-4-20 (b)

Second conclusion: Rolfe was permitted to use deadly force to apprehend the felon or misdemeanant:

(b) Sheriffs and peace officers who are appointed or employed in conformity with Chapter 8 of Title 35 may use deadly force to apprehend a suspected felon only when the officer reasonably believes that the suspect possesses a deadly weapon or any object, device, or instrument which, when used offensively against a person, is likely to or actually does result in serious bodily injury; when the officer reasonably believes that the suspect poses an immediate threat of physical violence to the officer or others; or when there is probable cause to believe that the suspect has committed a crime involving the infliction or threatened infliction of serious physical harm. Nothing in this Code section shall be construed so as to restrict such sheriffs or peace officers from the use of such reasonable nondeadly force as may be necessary to apprehend and arrest a suspected felon or misdemeanant.


I won't dive into the federal offenses he committed before he died. I am making the case that the police followed Georgia law to the letter. A grand jury will likely not convict Rolfe and Bronson based on these facts.

I challenge you, the reader, to prove me otherwise.

Facts aren't feelings....the leftists will not understand anything in your post.

His reading of the facts ignored standard police practices, which is not to shoot into a crowd of bystanders, and not to shoot suspects in the back, unless the suspect poses an imminent threat. Rayshard Brooks was not a threat. A taser is NOT a deadly weapon under Georgia law, and after he fired the taser in the direction of the officer, it was out of charge, and not a threat to anyone.

Police aren't supposed to be shooting and killing suspects. Templar's OP is looking for JUSTIFICATIONS for the use of deadly force, all of which totally ignores all issues of best policing practices and public safety, all in the desperate mission of excusing a murder.

The goal of policing isn't to kill offenders, it's to "serve and protect". Nothing that was done by the police officers in that parking lot, did either. Serving and protecting would be to ensure that Brooks, who was polite, cooperative, and reasonable when first encountered by the police, got home safely. Brooks offered to give police his car keys so they knew he wasn't driving. He pointed to his sister's house, so they could see where he lived. They had his driver's license to confirm that information. "Serving and protecting" would have seen Mr. Brooks safely home, no risk to the community, problem solved.

Instead, Mr. Brooks is dead, his children will grow up without their father, and a police officer is going to jail, the community is inflamed, and the Wendy's lies in ashes. No one was "served", and they sure as hell weren't "protected".

In announcing charges yesterday, the DA meticulously detailed why the OP is full of shit, and how the officers violated both stated police practices, and the law - at every turn in this encounter.

I asserted facts, and you do nothing but spew emotion.

I have legal precedent, you have your feelings.

 

[Dragonlady]

And this is the same Police Dept.... These are now all subject to attempted murder... Careful where you go here...

Furthermore, the taser appears to have been fired once, not twice, meaning he was an ACTIVE threat.

I love how you just tried to spin the argument around on me. Are you that desperate?

Furthermore, the DA announced on TV yesterday that the taser was fired twice, and the officer HAD to know that, and hence he was disarmed.

We're not trying to "spin the argument around" on you. You're pointing out that your arguments are DEEPLY flawed, and it is you who are desperate.

Your argument seeks a rationale and an excuse for what happened, instead of looking at what SHOULD have happened. Had the police followed policy and used best practices, everybody would be home and dry today. What should have the police done that night? How did their failure to follow best pratices escalate this event? Were the results a reasonable response to the threat posed by the victim? Was their use of force reasonable?

What is most troubling, is the OP's complete dismissal of Mr. Brook's humanity and life. We're just looking for an excuse to kill him. It also ignores the implications to the broader community. If you permit the police to gun down somebody who fell asleep in the drive through, it doesn't say much for the kind of society you live in.

 

[CowboyTed]

Well now you have just created a huge amount of criminal and civil cases against Police Force...

By doing or asserting what, precisely?

Unjustified use of a deadly force... They did used a weapon to sub due but a weapon to cause serious body harm or death.

Any time you use a tazer in future it has to be considered the same as a gun under the eyes of the law... That is your definition...

And by the way cops are allowed to shoot people running away with a knife in there hand either...

You are mandating that a Tazer is a Firearm and thus Rolfe could shoot him in the back running away

Because the law backs my assertions.


GA CODE § 17-4-20 (b)

Second conclusion: Rolfe was permitted to use deadly force to apprehend the felon or misdemeanant:

(b) Sheriffs and peace officers who are appointed or employed in conformity with Chapter 8 of Title 35 may use deadly force to apprehend a suspected felon only when the officer reasonably believes that the suspect possesses a deadly weapon or any object, device, or instrument which, when used offensively against a person, is likely to or actually does result in serious bodily injury; when the officer reasonably believes that the suspect poses an immediate threat of physical violence to the officer or others; or when there is probable cause to believe that the suspect has committed a crime involving the infliction or threatened infliction of serious physical harm. Nothing in this Code section shall be construed so as to restrict such sheriffs or peace officers from the use of such reasonable nondeadly force as may be necessary to apprehend and arrest a suspected felon or misdemeanant.

Begone with you.

He was running away with a spent tazer gun... The tazer gun is effectively a piece of plastic, the officer was trained to know this as he was trained in how to use it...

Are Georgia Police saying that a tazer can cause serious bodily injury?

Uh yeah? What do you think happens to the human body when you apply a sufficient electrical charge to it?

One way or the other, Brooks established himself as a violent threat the moment he was willing to use violence against the police. Spent or not, he could not be permitted to assimilate back into the community at large. He was a threat. Hands down. Period. Full stop.

Well now you have just created a huge amount of criminal and civil cases against Police Force...

Remember this...


Unarmed, confirmed by his partner as unarmed and the cop attempted to tazer him...

Or this

US police dept faces backlash online after officer uses taser on 87-year-old grandmother

An officer used the taser on the woman when she didn't obey an order commands to drop the knife in her hand. However, the woman's relatives said said she doesn't speak English and was merely cutting dandelions with a kitchen knife near her home.

indianexpress.com

And this is the same Police Dept.... These are now all subject to attempted murder... Careful where you go here...


There is more

11-year-old girl shocked with police Taser will not face charges

The 11-year-girl who was struck by a Taser deployed by a Cincinnati police officer at a Kroger on Monday will not face charges.

eu.cincinnati.com

You are now upgrading all of these charges...

This is Georgia law NOT OHIO, you blithering shill. Pay attention.

First one is Ahmaud Arbery... That was Georgia...

 

[Dragonlady]

Rayshard Brooks: A justified use of deadly force, explained

What Brooks did by punching an officer in the face was an aggravated misdemeanor, punishable by a $5,000 fine and up to 1 year in jail (see Ga. Code Ann. § 17-10-4.).

GA CODE § 16-5-23 (e)

(e) Any person who commits the offense of simple battery against a police officer, correction officer, or detention officer engaged in carrying out official duties shall, upon conviction thereof, be punished for a misdemeanor of a high and aggravated nature.

Brooks, by resisting arrest, punching the officer in the face and later firing a taser at the police officer was guilty of a felony under Georgia Law, punishable by a maximum of five years in jail:

GA CODE § 16-10-24 (b)

Whoever knowingly and willfully resists, obstructs, or opposes any law enforcement officer, prison guard, correctional officer, probation supervisor, parole supervisor, or conservation ranger in the lawful discharge of his official duties by offering or doing violence to the person of such officer or legally authorized person is guilty of a felony and shall, upon conviction thereof, be punished by imprisonment for not less than one nor more than five years.


GA CODE § 16-11-123

As soon as Brooks gained possession of the taser, he was facing five years in jail for illegally possessing a firearm. As the law states:

"A person commits the offense of unlawful possession of firearms or weapons when he or she knowingly has in his or her possession any sawed-off shotgun, sawed-off rifle, machine gun, dangerous weapon, or silencer, and, upon conviction thereof, he or she shall be punished by imprisonment for a period of five years."

GA CODE § 16-11-106 (a)

Tasers are considered firearms under Georgia Law:

(a) For the purposes of this Code section, the term "firearm" shall include stun guns and tasers. A stun gun or taser is any device that is powered by electrical charging units such as batteries and emits an electrical charge in excess of 20,000 volts or is otherwise capable of incapacitating a person by an electrical charge.

GA CODE § 16-5-21 (c)(1)(A)

What Brooks did with the taser he stole would have warranted 10 to 20 years in jail under Georgia law had he survived the encounter. As stated above (in § 16-11-106), tasers are classified as firearms:

(c)

(1) A person who knowingly commits the offense of aggravated assault upon a public safety officer while he or she is engaged in, or on account of the performance of, his or her official duties shall, upon conviction thereof, be punished as follows:

(A) When such assault occurs by the discharge of a firearm by a person who is at least 17 years of age, such person shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than ten nor more than 20 years.

GA CODE § 16-3-21 (a)

First conclusion: Officer Rolfe was justified in using deadly force to prevent the commission of a "forcible felony" (as defined in GA CODE § 16-11-131), given that the one or more of the above offenses committed by Brooks would have resulted in imprisonment of more than one year in jail:

(a) A person is justified in threatening or using force against another when and to the extent that he or she reasonably believes that such threat or force is necessary to defend himself or herself or a third person against such other's imminent use of unlawful force; however, except as provided in Code Section 16-3-23-, a person is justified in using force which is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm only if he or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent death or great bodily injury to himself or herself or a third person or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.

GA CODE § 17-4-20 (b)

Second conclusion: Rolfe was permitted to use deadly force to apprehend the felon or misdemeanant:

(b) Sheriffs and peace officers who are appointed or employed in conformity with Chapter 8 of Title 35 may use deadly force to apprehend a suspected felon only when the officer reasonably believes that the suspect possesses a deadly weapon or any object, device, or instrument which, when used offensively against a person, is likely to or actually does result in serious bodily injury; when the officer reasonably believes that the suspect poses an immediate threat of physical violence to the officer or others; or when there is probable cause to believe that the suspect has committed a crime involving the infliction or threatened infliction of serious physical harm. Nothing in this Code section shall be construed so as to restrict such sheriffs or peace officers from the use of such reasonable nondeadly force as may be necessary to apprehend and arrest a suspected felon or misdemeanant.


I won't dive into the federal offenses he committed before he died. I am making the case that the police followed Georgia law to the letter. A grand jury will likely not convict Rolfe and Bronson based on these facts.

I challenge you, the reader, to prove me otherwise.

Facts aren't feelings....the leftists will not understand anything in your post.

His reading of the facts ignored standard police practices, which is not to shoot into a crowd of bystanders, and not to shoot suspects in the back, unless the suspect poses an imminent threat. Rayshard Brooks was not a threat. A taser is NOT a deadly weapon under Georgia law, and after he fired the taser in the direction of the officer, it was out of charge, and not a threat to anyone.

Police aren't supposed to be shooting and killing suspects. Templar's OP is looking for JUSTIFICATIONS for the use of deadly force, all of which totally ignores all issues of best policing practices and public safety, all in the desperate mission of excusing a murder.

The goal of policing isn't to kill offenders, it's to "serve and protect". Nothing that was done by the police officers in that parking lot, did either. Serving and protecting would be to ensure that Brooks, who was polite, cooperative, and reasonable when first encountered by the police, got home safely. Brooks offered to give police his car keys so they knew he wasn't driving. He pointed to his sister's house, so they could see where he lived. They had his driver's license to confirm that information. "Serving and protecting" would have seen Mr. Brooks safely home, no risk to the community, problem solved.

Instead, Mr. Brooks is dead, his children will grow up without their father, and a police officer is going to jail, the community is inflamed, and the Wendy's lies in ashes. No one was "served", and they sure as hell weren't "protected".

In announcing charges yesterday, the DA meticulously detailed why the OP is full of shit, and how the officers violated both stated police practices, and the law - at every turn in this encounter.

I asserted facts, and you do nothing but spew emotion.

I have legal precedent, you have your feelings.

YOU HAVE NOTHING. It is you who are ignoring facts, logic and sanity, in a desperate and highly emotional attempt to justify shooting an unarmed man in the back, in public. You are laser focused on justifying this shooting. So much so that you ignore the laws that the officers broke, assaulting not only Mr. Brooks, but two other innocent bystanders. Bullets struck at least one other car in the parking lot, narrowly missing the occupants.

The first obligation of the police is to protect the public, not endanger them shooting at a fleeing suspect, who was no danger to anyone.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Furthermore, the DA announced on TV yesterday that the taser was fired twice, and the officer HAD to know that, and hence he was disarmed.

I just saw that video, the taser was fired into the air, out of view of both officers who were both on the ground after tussling with Brooks.

Meaning neither of them saw the first shot go off. In other words, they did not know the taser was spent after the second shot.

Regardless of the status of the taser, Brooks presented himself as a threat to the officers and to the community at large. He was willing to do anything to impede his own arrest. You don't let an established threat loose into the community. Sorry.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Rayshard Brooks: A justified use of deadly force, explained

What Brooks did by punching an officer in the face was an aggravated misdemeanor, punishable by a $5,000 fine and up to 1 year in jail (see Ga. Code Ann. § 17-10-4.).

GA CODE § 16-5-23 (e)

(e) Any person who commits the offense of simple battery against a police officer, correction officer, or detention officer engaged in carrying out official duties shall, upon conviction thereof, be punished for a misdemeanor of a high and aggravated nature.

Brooks, by resisting arrest, punching the officer in the face and later firing a taser at the police officer was guilty of a felony under Georgia Law, punishable by a maximum of five years in jail:

GA CODE § 16-10-24 (b)

Whoever knowingly and willfully resists, obstructs, or opposes any law enforcement officer, prison guard, correctional officer, probation supervisor, parole supervisor, or conservation ranger in the lawful discharge of his official duties by offering or doing violence to the person of such officer or legally authorized person is guilty of a felony and shall, upon conviction thereof, be punished by imprisonment for not less than one nor more than five years.


GA CODE § 16-11-123

As soon as Brooks gained possession of the taser, he was facing five years in jail for illegally possessing a firearm. As the law states:

"A person commits the offense of unlawful possession of firearms or weapons when he or she knowingly has in his or her possession any sawed-off shotgun, sawed-off rifle, machine gun, dangerous weapon, or silencer, and, upon conviction thereof, he or she shall be punished by imprisonment for a period of five years."

GA CODE § 16-11-106 (a)

Tasers are considered firearms under Georgia Law:

(a) For the purposes of this Code section, the term "firearm" shall include stun guns and tasers. A stun gun or taser is any device that is powered by electrical charging units such as batteries and emits an electrical charge in excess of 20,000 volts or is otherwise capable of incapacitating a person by an electrical charge.

GA CODE § 16-5-21 (c)(1)(A)

What Brooks did with the taser he stole would have warranted 10 to 20 years in jail under Georgia law had he survived the encounter. As stated above (in § 16-11-106), tasers are classified as firearms:

(c)

(1) A person who knowingly commits the offense of aggravated assault upon a public safety officer while he or she is engaged in, or on account of the performance of, his or her official duties shall, upon conviction thereof, be punished as follows:

(A) When such assault occurs by the discharge of a firearm by a person who is at least 17 years of age, such person shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than ten nor more than 20 years.

GA CODE § 16-3-21 (a)

First conclusion: Officer Rolfe was justified in using deadly force to prevent the commission of a "forcible felony" (as defined in GA CODE § 16-11-131), given that the one or more of the above offenses committed by Brooks would have resulted in imprisonment of more than one year in jail:

(a) A person is justified in threatening or using force against another when and to the extent that he or she reasonably believes that such threat or force is necessary to defend himself or herself or a third person against such other's imminent use of unlawful force; however, except as provided in Code Section 16-3-23-, a person is justified in using force which is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm only if he or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent death or great bodily injury to himself or herself or a third person or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.

GA CODE § 17-4-20 (b)

Second conclusion: Rolfe was permitted to use deadly force to apprehend the felon or misdemeanant:

(b) Sheriffs and peace officers who are appointed or employed in conformity with Chapter 8 of Title 35 may use deadly force to apprehend a suspected felon only when the officer reasonably believes that the suspect possesses a deadly weapon or any object, device, or instrument which, when used offensively against a person, is likely to or actually does result in serious bodily injury; when the officer reasonably believes that the suspect poses an immediate threat of physical violence to the officer or others; or when there is probable cause to believe that the suspect has committed a crime involving the infliction or threatened infliction of serious physical harm. Nothing in this Code section shall be construed so as to restrict such sheriffs or peace officers from the use of such reasonable nondeadly force as may be necessary to apprehend and arrest a suspected felon or misdemeanant.


I won't dive into the federal offenses he committed before he died. I am making the case that the police followed Georgia law to the letter. A grand jury will likely not convict Rolfe and Bronson based on these facts.

I challenge you, the reader, to prove me otherwise.

Facts aren't feelings....the leftists will not understand anything in your post.

His reading of the facts ignored standard police practices, which is not to shoot into a crowd of bystanders, and not to shoot suspects in the back, unless the suspect poses an imminent threat. Rayshard Brooks was not a threat. A taser is NOT a deadly weapon under Georgia law, and after he fired the taser in the direction of the officer, it was out of charge, and not a threat to anyone.

Police aren't supposed to be shooting and killing suspects. Templar's OP is looking for JUSTIFICATIONS for the use of deadly force, all of which totally ignores all issues of best policing practices and public safety, all in the desperate mission of excusing a murder.

The goal of policing isn't to kill offenders, it's to "serve and protect". Nothing that was done by the police officers in that parking lot, did either. Serving and protecting would be to ensure that Brooks, who was polite, cooperative, and reasonable when first encountered by the police, got home safely. Brooks offered to give police his car keys so they knew he wasn't driving. He pointed to his sister's house, so they could see where he lived. They had his driver's license to confirm that information. "Serving and protecting" would have seen Mr. Brooks safely home, no risk to the community, problem solved.

Instead, Mr. Brooks is dead, his children will grow up without their father, and a police officer is going to jail, the community is inflamed, and the Wendy's lies in ashes. No one was "served", and they sure as hell weren't "protected".

In announcing charges yesterday, the DA meticulously detailed why the OP is full of shit, and how the officers violated both stated police practices, and the law - at every turn in this encounter.

I asserted facts, and you do nothing but spew emotion.

I have legal precedent, you have your feelings.

YOU HAVE NOTHING. It is you who are ignoring facts, logic and sanity, in a desperate and highly emotional attempt to justify shooting an unarmed man in the back, in public. You are laser focused on justifying this shooting. So much so that you ignore the laws that the officers broke, assaulting not only Mr. Brooks, but two other innocent bystanders. Bullets struck at least one other car in the parking lot, narrowly missing the occupants.

The first obligation of the police is to protect the public, not endanger them shooting at a fleeing suspect, who was no danger to anyone.

Typing in all bold doesn't make your argument any more valid.

In their duty to protect the public, they stopped Brooks which had presented himself as a threat of violence to them and to the public.

Or did that small fact pass you by?

If someone was just violent with you, can you gauge their propensity to be violent with other people in the public? The officers can't take the risk that he won't be a threat to the public after they let him flee.

 

[TemplarKormac]

You are laser focused on justifying this shooting. So much so that you ignore the laws that the officers broke, assaulting not only Mr. Brooks, but two other innocent bystanders. Bullets struck at least one other car in the parking lot, narrowly missing the occupants.

Can't say the officers broke any of the laws that DA Howard charged them with.

And yes, according to GA law the shooting was justified. My law says I'm right, your feelings say you're right. Guess what wins? The law. Each and every time.

You are going to be sorely disappointed when a grand jury acquits them.