Can't keep them on the plantation any mo'

Discussion of current events
User avatar
cassowary
Posts: 4047
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 11:30 pm

Re: Can't keep them on the plantation any mo'

Post by cassowary » Thu Jun 25, 2020 7:19 pm

neverfail wrote:
Thu Jun 25, 2020 5:09 pm
cassowary wrote:
Thu Jun 25, 2020 9:09 am
Brooks fired his stolen taser,....
Yes he did - a wild warning shot (keep away from me!) when he was on the run. Not an aggressive, well aimed gunshot while in pursuit like that of police officer Rolfe.

It makes a difference.
I was under the impression that it was an aggressive well aimed shot that luckily missed the officer. Perhaps I was wrong. What made you think it was not?

Anyway, the jury will have to decide from a two second video whether it was an aggressive shot intended to harm the officer. This is all about what circumstances and degree of danger before an officer is allowed to use lethal force. Also how much slack you want to give someone who risks his life for the public safety. Also do we want to give criminals the impression that officers are hamstrung and might not use lethal force?

It looks like a borderline case and not an open and shut case like you think.
The Imp :D

User avatar
cassowary
Posts: 4047
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 11:30 pm

Re: Can't keep them on the plantation any mo'

Post by cassowary » Thu Jun 25, 2020 7:24 pm

Milo wrote:
Thu Jun 25, 2020 1:16 pm
cassowary wrote:
Thu Jun 25, 2020 9:09 am
neverfail wrote:
Wed Jun 24, 2020 7:02 pm
cassowary wrote:
Tue Jun 23, 2020 11:58 pm

But I agree a gun is more lethal than a taser. That does not rule out the inadmissibility of shooting him. A knife or a sword is not as lethal as a gun. But I have read of a policeman shooting someone armed with a knife or sword without a public outcry. Eg the Attack on London Bridge by a radical Islamist.
Along with defending himself when under attack a policeman has a duty to protect members of the public when threatened with death - as with the London Bridge incident. If killing the attacker is unavoidable then so be it.

But ex-cop Garrett Rolfe were NOT in a situation even remotely like that. The miscreant was NOT attacking either of them (nor endangering bistanders in the vicinity) when Rolfe pulled his service pistol but was instead running away attempting to escape. So what? Would it not have been better to let him go rather than extinguish his life?

"It all happened within seconds" you say (as if that automatically justified the act)?? Have you ever heard of self-control Cassowary? Not letting your excitement run away with you?
Easy for you to say. If you were in his situation, you might have done the same. Brooks fired his stolen taser, which as I pointed out, sometimes do kill. What if Rolfe was hit and stunned unconscious? It is possible, Brooks might have stolen his revolver and shot him.
With another officer standing right there?
In that case, he might have fired the taser again at the second officer. It is up to the jury to accept whether the officer had the right to use deadly force in these circumstances. We need to look at Georgia law as well as the police manual on when to use deadly force. I know nothing about such an esoteric area.
The Imp :D

User avatar
Milo
Posts: 2659
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 10:14 pm

Re: Can't keep them on the plantation any mo'

Post by Milo » Thu Jun 25, 2020 10:33 pm

cassowary wrote:
Thu Jun 25, 2020 7:24 pm
Milo wrote:
Thu Jun 25, 2020 1:16 pm
cassowary wrote:
Thu Jun 25, 2020 9:09 am
neverfail wrote:
Wed Jun 24, 2020 7:02 pm
cassowary wrote:
Tue Jun 23, 2020 11:58 pm

But I agree a gun is more lethal than a taser. That does not rule out the inadmissibility of shooting him. A knife or a sword is not as lethal as a gun. But I have read of a policeman shooting someone armed with a knife or sword without a public outcry. Eg the Attack on London Bridge by a radical Islamist.
Along with defending himself when under attack a policeman has a duty to protect members of the public when threatened with death - as with the London Bridge incident. If killing the attacker is unavoidable then so be it.

But ex-cop Garrett Rolfe were NOT in a situation even remotely like that. The miscreant was NOT attacking either of them (nor endangering bistanders in the vicinity) when Rolfe pulled his service pistol but was instead running away attempting to escape. So what? Would it not have been better to let him go rather than extinguish his life?

"It all happened within seconds" you say (as if that automatically justified the act)?? Have you ever heard of self-control Cassowary? Not letting your excitement run away with you?
Easy for you to say. If you were in his situation, you might have done the same. Brooks fired his stolen taser, which as I pointed out, sometimes do kill. What if Rolfe was hit and stunned unconscious? It is possible, Brooks might have stolen his revolver and shot him.
With another officer standing right there?
In that case, he might have fired the taser again at the second officer. It is up to the jury to accept whether the officer had the right to use deadly force in these circumstances. We need to look at Georgia law as well as the police manual on when to use deadly force. I know nothing about such an esoteric area.
It's quite disingenuous to throw up your hands whenever the argument goes against you but only then. You assert no proof of racism, not knowing the law, but now use of force may go against your case, it's all about waiting for the court to figure it out.

neverfail
Posts: 5453
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2016 3:47 am
Location: Singapore

Re: Can't keep them on the plantation any mo'

Post by neverfail » Fri Jun 26, 2020 12:40 am

cassowary wrote:
Thu Jun 25, 2020 7:24 pm

In that case, he might have fired the taser again at the second officer. It is up to the jury to accept whether the officer had the right to use deadly force in these circumstances. We need to look at Georgia law as well as the police manual on when to use deadly force. I know nothing about such an esoteric area.
:lol: Oh, but did the news video show him as having done so? No, it did not! Your case collapses, Cass.

User avatar
cassowary
Posts: 4047
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 11:30 pm

Re: Can't keep them on the plantation any mo'

Post by cassowary » Fri Jun 26, 2020 1:24 am

neverfail wrote:
Fri Jun 26, 2020 12:40 am
cassowary wrote:
Thu Jun 25, 2020 7:24 pm

In that case, he might have fired the taser again at the second officer. It is up to the jury to accept whether the officer had the right to use deadly force in these circumstances. We need to look at Georgia law as well as the police manual on when to use deadly force. I know nothing about such an esoteric area.
:lol: Oh, but did the news video show him as having done so? No, it did not! Your case collapses, Cass.
Of course not. Brooks was shot dead before he could have done that.
The Imp :D

User avatar
cassowary
Posts: 4047
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 11:30 pm

Re: Can't keep them on the plantation any mo'

Post by cassowary » Fri Jun 26, 2020 1:26 am

Milo wrote:
Thu Jun 25, 2020 10:33 pm
cassowary wrote:
Thu Jun 25, 2020 7:24 pm
Milo wrote:
Thu Jun 25, 2020 1:16 pm
cassowary wrote:
Thu Jun 25, 2020 9:09 am
neverfail wrote:
Wed Jun 24, 2020 7:02 pm
cassowary wrote:
Tue Jun 23, 2020 11:58 pm

But I agree a gun is more lethal than a taser. That does not rule out the inadmissibility of shooting him. A knife or a sword is not as lethal as a gun. But I have read of a policeman shooting someone armed with a knife or sword without a public outcry. Eg the Attack on London Bridge by a radical Islamist.
Along with defending himself when under attack a policeman has a duty to protect members of the public when threatened with death - as with the London Bridge incident. If killing the attacker is unavoidable then so be it.

But ex-cop Garrett Rolfe were NOT in a situation even remotely like that. The miscreant was NOT attacking either of them (nor endangering bistanders in the vicinity) when Rolfe pulled his service pistol but was instead running away attempting to escape. So what? Would it not have been better to let him go rather than extinguish his life?

"It all happened within seconds" you say (as if that automatically justified the act)?? Have you ever heard of self-control Cassowary? Not letting your excitement run away with you?
Easy for you to say. If you were in his situation, you might have done the same. Brooks fired his stolen taser, which as I pointed out, sometimes do kill. What if Rolfe was hit and stunned unconscious? It is possible, Brooks might have stolen his revolver and shot him.
With another officer standing right there?
In that case, he might have fired the taser again at the second officer. It is up to the jury to accept whether the officer had the right to use deadly force in these circumstances. We need to look at Georgia law as well as the police manual on when to use deadly force. I know nothing about such an esoteric area.
It's quite disingenuous to throw up your hands whenever the argument goes against you but only then. You assert no proof of racism, not knowing the law, but now use of force may go against your case, it's all about waiting for the court to figure it out.
What about you? You assert racism without proof. You assert Rolfe was guilty without knowing Georgia law or police manual on use of lethal force.
The Imp :D

User avatar
Milo
Posts: 2659
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 10:14 pm

Re: Can't keep them on the plantation any mo'

Post by Milo » Fri Jun 26, 2020 6:11 am

cassowary wrote:
Fri Jun 26, 2020 1:26 am
Milo wrote:
Thu Jun 25, 2020 10:33 pm
cassowary wrote:
Thu Jun 25, 2020 7:24 pm
Milo wrote:
Thu Jun 25, 2020 1:16 pm
cassowary wrote:
Thu Jun 25, 2020 9:09 am
neverfail wrote:
Wed Jun 24, 2020 7:02 pm


Along with defending himself when under attack a policeman has a duty to protect members of the public when threatened with death - as with the London Bridge incident. If killing the attacker is unavoidable then so be it.

But ex-cop Garrett Rolfe were NOT in a situation even remotely like that. The miscreant was NOT attacking either of them (nor endangering bistanders in the vicinity) when Rolfe pulled his service pistol but was instead running away attempting to escape. So what? Would it not have been better to let him go rather than extinguish his life?

"It all happened within seconds" you say (as if that automatically justified the act)?? Have you ever heard of self-control Cassowary? Not letting your excitement run away with you?
Easy for you to say. If you were in his situation, you might have done the same. Brooks fired his stolen taser, which as I pointed out, sometimes do kill. What if Rolfe was hit and stunned unconscious? It is possible, Brooks might have stolen his revolver and shot him.
With another officer standing right there?
In that case, he might have fired the taser again at the second officer. It is up to the jury to accept whether the officer had the right to use deadly force in these circumstances. We need to look at Georgia law as well as the police manual on when to use deadly force. I know nothing about such an esoteric area.
It's quite disingenuous to throw up your hands whenever the argument goes against you but only then. You assert no proof of racism, not knowing the law, but now use of force may go against your case, it's all about waiting for the court to figure it out.
What about you? You assert racism without proof. You assert Rolfe was guilty without knowing Georgia law or police manual on use of lethal force.
I haven't asserted any of that.

neverfail
Posts: 5453
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2016 3:47 am
Location: Singapore

Re: Can't keep them on the plantation any mo'

Post by neverfail » Fri Jun 26, 2020 6:39 am

cassowary wrote:
Fri Jun 26, 2020 1:24 am
. Brooks was shot dead before he could have done that.
Over a minor traffic offence?

Why do you keep on publishing specious arguments to justify murder?

User avatar
cassowary
Posts: 4047
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 11:30 pm

Re: Can't keep them on the plantation any mo'

Post by cassowary » Fri Jun 26, 2020 7:39 am

neverfail wrote:
Fri Jun 26, 2020 6:39 am
cassowary wrote:
Fri Jun 26, 2020 1:24 am
. Brooks was shot dead before he could have done that.
Over a minor traffic offence?

Why do you keep on publishing specious arguments to justify murder?
Its not a minor traffic offence. It started out as a DUI, but later escalated to assaulting and shooting a police officer. Its mostly the fault of Brooks that he was dead. He got drunk, drove while intoxicated, resisting arrest, hit a police officer in his face, stole his taser and tried to shoot him. Had he not done any of that, he would be alive today.

You don't like the idea of personal responsibility. Stop excusing his bad behavior and turn him into some sort of martyr.
The Imp :D

User avatar
cassowary
Posts: 4047
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 11:30 pm

Re: Can't keep them on the plantation any mo'

Post by cassowary » Fri Jun 26, 2020 7:42 am

Milo wrote:
Fri Jun 26, 2020 6:11 am
cassowary wrote:
Fri Jun 26, 2020 1:26 am
Milo wrote:
Thu Jun 25, 2020 10:33 pm
cassowary wrote:
Thu Jun 25, 2020 7:24 pm
Milo wrote:
Thu Jun 25, 2020 1:16 pm
cassowary wrote:
Thu Jun 25, 2020 9:09 am


Easy for you to say. If you were in his situation, you might have done the same. Brooks fired his stolen taser, which as I pointed out, sometimes do kill. What if Rolfe was hit and stunned unconscious? It is possible, Brooks might have stolen his revolver and shot him.
With another officer standing right there?
In that case, he might have fired the taser again at the second officer. It is up to the jury to accept whether the officer had the right to use deadly force in these circumstances. We need to look at Georgia law as well as the police manual on when to use deadly force. I know nothing about such an esoteric area.
It's quite disingenuous to throw up your hands whenever the argument goes against you but only then. You assert no proof of racism, not knowing the law, but now use of force may go against your case, it's all about waiting for the court to figure it out.
What about you? You assert racism without proof. You assert Rolfe was guilty without knowing Georgia law or police manual on use of lethal force.
I haven't asserted any of that.
Not you? I must have mixed you up with someone else. Well, I don't know enough of Georgian law to decide whether Rolfe is guilty of murder or not. Let's wait and see.
The Imp :D

Post Reply