‘Lawful but awful’: Atlanta police had better options than using lethal force in Rayshard Brooks shooting, experts say
Granted, Brooks took the cops taser and ran with it – not a smart thing to do – just for resisting arrest and being drunk. That foolish move cost him his life. Should it have, is the question.
If Brooks was shot in the back, it has to mean his back was toward the cop when he was fired upon. Is it illegal for a cop to shoot someone in the back that is running away from them when they are really no danger?? Absolutely not.
This one is a very tough call to make. The outcome may cost this country dearly.
It is very easy to second guess anyone after the fact; especially if you were not in their shoes and say what you would have done.
Was Brooks spinning around and going to fire the taser at the cop?? Would that have put the cop in the danger of being killed?? Many say no. So, should the cops have shot Brooks in the back?? It is very tough to say unless we were in that position ourselves.
That is all this country needed – Mr Corona – the Floyd killing that was intentional – now the killing of Brooks. The only light I see at the end of the tunnel is a freight train coming at us 200 miles an hour.
As bad as it may seem (and it is) in the USA’s hours of desperation and lawlessness; I will always contend that we DEFINITELY need good cops patrolling the streets. Take a look at Seattle if you want to see what a life without cops looks like, than multiply that my 1,000.
My recommendation/suggestion of POLICE POLICING POLICE to get a handle on the rogue cops is still the best I have hard. Who better to control the bad cops but the good ones that are on the scene with them. Sooner or later, they can be all weeded out.