If you steal a cops taser and point it at him....  I AINT MARCHIN!!!



https://www.foxnews.com/us/atlanta-polic...-black-man

---

I was wondering what was going to happen with this one. Yes the guy was running away, but are we saying it is fair game for criminals to attack cops, take a taser, and the cops still can't shoot the criminal? I guess the cops need to just start showing up and opening their car door and say please get in.

It's never the criminal that is the issue, it is always the cop.

---

I was wondering what was going to happen with this one. Yes the guy was running away, but are we saying it is fair game for criminals to attack cops, take a taser, and the cops still can't shoot the criminal? I guess the cops need to just start showing up and opening their car door and say please get in.

It's never the criminal that is the issue, it is always the cop.

I've been trying to keep a calm disposition about the stuff I see on here but, y'know what... [BLEEP] it.

STOP [BLEEP] KILLING PEOPLE. LETHAL FORCE SHOULD ONLY BE USED ON PEOPLE WHO ARE CLEARLY CAUSING AN IMMEDIATE THREAT TO THE LIVES OF OTHERS. THAT IS [BLEEP] BASIC.

---

I was wondering what was going to happen with this one. Yes the guy was running away, but are we saying it is fair game for criminals to attack cops, take a taser, and the cops still can't shoot the criminal? I guess the cops need to just start showing up and opening their car door and say please get in.

It's never the criminal that is the issue, it is always the cop.

I've been trying to keep a calm disposition about the stuff I see on here but, y'know what... [BLEEP] it.

STOP [BLEEP] KILLING PEOPLE. LETHAL FORCE SHOULD ONLY BE USED ON PEOPLE WHO ARE CLEARLY CAUSING AN IMMEDIATE THREAT TO THE LIVES OF OTHERS. THAT IS [BLEEP] BASIC.

The city’s prosecutor literally just said the use of a taser is deadly force when he arrested those officers. 

Would you rather the officers get tased before shooting? What’s the alternative here?

---

I was wondering what was going to happen with this one. Yes the guy was running away, but are we saying it is fair game for criminals to attack cops, take a taser, and the cops still can't shoot the criminal? I guess the cops need to just start showing up and opening their car door and say please get in.

It's never the criminal that is the issue, it is always the cop.

I've been trying to keep a calm disposition about the stuff I see on here but, y'know what... [BLEEP] it.

STOP [BLEEP] KILLING PEOPLE. LETHAL FORCE SHOULD ONLY BE USED ON PEOPLE WHO ARE CLEARLY CAUSING AN IMMEDIATE THREAT TO THE LIVES OF OTHERS. THAT IS [BLEEP] BASIC.

Why was lethal force used? The DUI driver who was passed out in a drive thru lane was asleep at the wheel. After he failed the test and the police were arresting him, he started fighting the cops. The cops didn't use any excessive force in arresting the criminal (allowing the criminal to escape). The cops didn't even taser him to stop it. He stole a taser, punched a cop, and they still didn't use excessive force. They chased after him and didn't fire until he turned and fired the taser at the cop. A taser is a deadly weapon when used against a cop because the criminal could stun the cop and then take their weapon. There were also people around and the criminal was a threat to them.

You want to get people to care, stop giving the police reasons to shoot you. When you stop committing crimes, stop carrying drugs, etc, then you can film the police harassing you. That will bring change, listen to cops, peacefully comply and video tape it. Then it will be clear that it is a racism issue, otherwise it is just a criminal issue.


The APD needs to stand down and go on strike. Let South Fulton burn.

---

I've been trying to keep a calm disposition about the stuff I see on here but, y'know what... [BLEEP] it.

STOP [BLEEP] KILLING PEOPLE. LETHAL FORCE SHOULD ONLY BE USED ON PEOPLE WHO ARE CLEARLY CAUSING AN IMMEDIATE THREAT TO THE LIVES OF OTHERS. THAT IS [BLEEP] BASIC.

The city’s prosecutor literally just said the use of a taser is deadly force when he arrested those officers. 

Would you rather the officers get tased before shooting? What’s the alternative here?

Don't kill a person.

---

I almost think it's justifiable use of force. Physical altercation, stolen taser, run for it, shoots the taser in the direction of a pursuing officer.

Here's why I think the cops were in the wrong, and if my understanding of tasers is fundamentally wrong, tell me and I'll back down. Tasers are single-shot cartridges. After that cartridge is fired, the taser is rendered useless as a ranged weapon. It can still fry the living [BLEEP] out of someone if you pin it to their body, but based upon where everyone was and was going, that taser's potential to be a deadly weapon had passed. So now you're firing a few rounds into someone who has rendered their own weapon useless by firing it wildly, stacking the deck dramatically in favor of the guy with the gun and, imo, making it an unnecessary escalation. I don't buy for a second that race played into it. I think it was instinct, and that instinct was wrong. Again, if semiautomatic tasers are a thing now, I'll retract all of that and agree that use of deadly force was warranted.

There's no doubt the victim wasn't an angel. I mean, how many angels pass out drunk at Wendy's? But is running from the police and badly missing with a single-shot weapon grounds to kill someone? No, I don't think so. If the taser had been rendered useless as a ranged threat, using a firearm was a poor decision.

---

I think the shooting was justified, but there are reports the officers were picking up the shell casings right after the shooting.

---

Whether someone has a liberal, or conservative viewpoint, a authoritative figure should not lock a thread for the sole purpose to get the last word in all the while prohibiting someone else from being able to respond.

The city’s prosecutor literally just said the use of a taser is deadly force when he arrested those officers. 

Would you rather the officers get tased before shooting? What’s the alternative here?

Don't kill a person.

So you don’t know what to do then?

---

Dude, if you hesitate to think of your options at the heat of the moment, you die.

---

Justified in law or justified in morality?

---

Dude, if you hesitate to think of your options at the heat of the moment, you die.

If you can't handle thinking about whether or not shooting someone is a good idea, you should probably hand in your badge before you ever have to make that call.

---

tasering a cop = deserving of being murdered?

You're heads are warped

---

I almost think it's justifiable use of force. Physical altercation, stolen taser, run for it, shoots the taser in the direction of a pursuing officer.

Here's why I think the cops were in the wrong, and if my understanding of tasers is fundamentally wrong, tell me and I'll back down. Tasers are single-shot cartridges. After that cartridge is fired, the taser is rendered useless as a ranged weapon. It can still fry the living [BLEEP] out of someone if you pin it to their body, but based upon where everyone was and was going, that taser's potential to be a deadly weapon had passed. So now you're firing a few rounds into someone who has rendered their own weapon useless by firing it wildly, stacking the deck dramatically in favor of the guy with the gun and, imo, making it an unnecessary escalation. I don't buy for a second that race played into it. I think it was instinct, and that instinct was wrong. Again, if semiautomatic tasers are a thing now, I'll retract all of that and agree that use of deadly force was warranted.

There's no doubt the victim wasn't an angel. I mean, how many angels pass out drunk at Wendy's? But is running from the police and badly missing with a single-shot weapon grounds to kill someone? No, I don't think so. If the taser had been rendered useless as a ranged threat, using a firearm was a poor decision.

There are 2 shot models so that if you miss on the 1st shot there is a backup. I don't know what models the police had though. Once you threaten the cops, they do not know if you have another weapon. You have already fired a taser at them, you cannot assume a criminal doesn't have another weapon. There were a bunch of bystanders who could have been injured or taken hostage.


The cop has been fired already, not even placed on administrative leave but out right fired. Cops really need to think about striking. Watch the video of the struggle, the cops could have easily ended that situation if they would have just used force then. There wouldn't have been an escape if they used force to restrain him.

---

I almost think it's justifiable use of force. Physical altercation, stolen taser, run for it, shoots the taser in the direction of a pursuing officer.

Here's why I think the cops were in the wrong, and if my understanding of tasers is fundamentally wrong, tell me and I'll back down. Tasers are single-shot cartridges. After that cartridge is fired, the taser is rendered useless as a ranged weapon. It can still fry the living [BLEEP] out of someone if you pin it to their body, but based upon where everyone was and was going, that taser's potential to be a deadly weapon had passed. So now you're firing a few rounds into someone who has rendered their own weapon useless by firing it wildly, stacking the deck dramatically in favor of the guy with the gun and, imo, making it an unnecessary escalation. I don't buy for a second that race played into it. I think it was instinct, and that instinct was wrong. Again, if semiautomatic tasers are a thing now, I'll retract all of that and agree that use of deadly force was warranted.

There's no doubt the victim wasn't an angel. I mean, how many angels pass out drunk at Wendy's? But is running from the police and badly missing with a single-shot weapon grounds to kill someone? No, I don't think so. If the taser had been rendered useless as a ranged threat, using a firearm was a poor decision.

There are 2 shot models so that if you miss on the 1st shot there is a backup. I don't know what models the police had though. Once you threaten the cops, they do not know if you have another weapon. You have already fired a taser at them, you cannot assume a criminal doesn't have another weapon. There were a bunch of bystanders who could have been injured or taken hostage.


The cop has been fired already, not even placed on administrative leave but out right fired. Cops really need to think about striking. Watch the video of the struggle, the cops could have easily ended that situation if they would have just used force then. There wouldn't have been an escape if they used force to restrain him.

The cop would have know what taser model he was carrying. If it was a two-shot model and there was another cartridge ready to go, then I would say lethal force was absolutely justified.

---

Manufacturing consent :

https://twitter.com/nyt_diff/status/1271...78625?s=19

---

I almost think it's justifiable use of force. Physical altercation, stolen taser, run for it, shoots the taser in the direction of a pursuing officer.

Here's why I think the cops were in the wrong, and if my understanding of tasers is fundamentally wrong, tell me and I'll back down. Tasers are single-shot cartridges. After that cartridge is fired, the taser is rendered useless as a ranged weapon. It can still fry the living [BLEEP] out of someone if you pin it to their body, but based upon where everyone was and was going, that taser's potential to be a deadly weapon had passed. So now you're firing a few rounds into someone who has rendered their own weapon useless by firing it wildly, stacking the deck dramatically in favor of the guy with the gun and, imo, making it an unnecessary escalation. I don't buy for a second that race played into it. I think it was instinct, and that instinct was wrong. Again, if semiautomatic tasers are a thing now, I'll retract all of that and agree that use of deadly force was warranted.

There's no doubt the victim wasn't an angel. I mean, how many angels pass out drunk at Wendy's? But is running from the police and badly missing with a single-shot weapon grounds to kill someone? No, I don't think so. If the taser had been rendered useless as a ranged threat, using a firearm was a poor decision.

There are 2 shot models so that if you miss on the 1st shot there is a backup. I don't know what models the police had though. Once you threaten the cops, they do not know if you have another weapon. You have already fired a taser at them, you cannot assume a criminal doesn't have another weapon. There were a bunch of bystanders who could have been injured or taken hostage.


The cop has been fired already, not even placed on administrative leave but out right fired. Cops really need to think about striking. Watch the video of the struggle, the cops could have easily ended that situation if they would have just used force then. There wouldn't have been an escape if they used force to restrain him.

this entire view is exactly what's wrong with American police. It is not a capital crime to resist arrest and tasering someone should not = murder 

Just because they're cops doesn't give them the right of execution for dealing with a difficult arrest

---

There are 2 shot models so that if you miss on the 1st shot there is a backup. I don't know what models the police had though. Once you threaten the cops, they do not know if you have another weapon. You have already fired a taser at them, you cannot assume a criminal doesn't have another weapon. There were a bunch of bystanders who could have been injured or taken hostage.


The cop has been fired already, not even placed on administrative leave but out right fired. Cops really need to think about striking. Watch the video of the struggle, the cops could have easily ended that situation if they would have just used force then. There wouldn't have been an escape if they used force to restrain him.

this entire view is exactly what's wrong with American police. It is not a capital crime to resist arrest and tasering someone should not = murder 

Just because they're cops doesn't give them the right of execution for dealing with a difficult arrest

Perfectly said.

---

---

It's worthy of self-defense for one reason. If tazed, it renders the police officer's body useless. The suspect could then obtain his weapon and shoot the officer. If every single death is going to be made public, I think it will result in disarming the police. This puts police at a major disadvantage and crime will increase. There's no winning with this narrative.

Sucks for the dude who was shot.

---