/sci/ - Science & Math

>>11805500
He wasn't attacking them with a taser, he was running away. He was shot in the back.

>>11805507
>shooting is ok if someone’s running away

if this some third world muttmerican logic?

>stole a taser
How the fuck did a police man allow his weapon to be stolen in the 1st place? As >>11805507 said he didn't even use it to attack. He just tried to run away, but if he was violent he could have stolen the gun and shot the officer. How could that cop be so incompetent to allow a weapon to just be stolen?

>what's wrong with police shooting a person who resisted arrest
People responding to non-violent problems shouldn't even be armed.
Imagine if there was gun wielding store clerks enforcing the 15 item limit at the express check out line? If you got caught with more than 15 and resist arrest they can just shoot you.

Why the fuck would a store clerk feel the need to shoot you for having more than 15 items? Because they're fucking armed, so by default they're suppose to use those arms to solve their problems. The very act of having a weapon is the problem. It's like that old saying, if the only tool you have in your toolbox is a hammer, every problem you see begins to look like a nail. Or in this case, if the only tool in your toolbox is a gun, then every human being begins to look like a violent criminal.

>>11805548
>non-violent
Dude was serving a seven year sentence for beating up his children. He was out on early release due to COVID19 and it took him all of a couple of months to drive around drunk. Dude was violent and a danger to society.
Maybe you think adults beating up children is a good thing but most people find it abhorrent.

>>11805548
pussy. might is right

>>11805507
he resisted arrest, he stole a taser and then he pointed it back at the police while running

>>11805500
There isn't anything wrong with this. Put yourself in the cops situation. If you get tasered the criminal could kill you and you have no way of defending yourself.

Why did he run away? He was driving while drunk also, he could have killed innocent civilians.

>>11805548
He didnt just resist arrest though did he. He stole a taser and then aimed it a cop while running away.

>>11805580
1) that's all untrue
2) even if it were true, you don't just shoot those people
3) the officer who killed him is the violent maniac. He has an extensive record of complaints and uses of force.

>>11805507
>>11805515
>>11805548
>>11805643
meanwhile, the policeman was immediately fired for doing his job and Wendy's got torched. you have to be especially retarded or in bad faith to defend this

>>11805671
You can simultaneously denounce the killing and also the burning of the Wendy's, were you aware of this?

>>11805694
Copper gets shot at, shoots back.
In the heat of the moment you don't assume it wasn't a gun or you end up dead.

>>11805507
> attempted to use it against a law enforcement officer

> he wasn't attacking them with a taser, he was running away

strawman argument, also in what world does one run away and aim at the police with a stolen taser at the same time?


Also guys let's keep it /sci/ - can someone be paralysed for life if shot with a taser in a wrong spot? If yes, the killing was justified.

>>11805694
the reaction of the policeman was justified by Brooks' behaviour alone, he had to be neutralized, and later he died for his injuries. So no, I don't denounce his death at all. You are defending a criminal that proved to be violent until the very end, and the video proves it.

Why wasn't this guy allowed to simply walk home? I've been found passed out drunk in my car in a parking lot before. Cop knocked on my window and asked if I was ok. He was glad I wasn't driving.

>>11805671
The function of the police is to create order and peace. It's that plain and simple. Not complicated. All their actions should be to further this purpose alone. To create order and peace.

So when a cop murders a man, in what can only be described as an unnecessary death, and the immediate reaction is an angry mom burns down the Wendy's where it occurs. Ask yourself, were the actions of the police creating order and peace? What purpose did the murder of this man serve? Was it to create order and peace? This is why police are fundamentally broken. This is the crux of defund the police. They're broken, and don't serve the job they were designed to do. This is why we need something different.

>>11805836
>angry mob burns down the Wendy's
typo

>>11805836
>The function of the police is to create order and peace.
And steal money from poor people

>>11805836
remember that the policeman acted according to the law, Brooks didn't. The policeman was thrown under a bus and the criminal was made a martyr.
>the immediate reaction is an angry mom burns down the Wendy's where it occurs. Ask yourself, were the actions of the police creating order and peace?
so he had to think about the reaction of the angry mob beforehand? What about the Wendy's that got burned down? What did they do to deserve this? Did they have to think about the angry mob as well?
>This is the crux of defund the police. They're broken, and don't serve the job they were designed to do. This is why we need something different.
what you are describing is a pipedream recipe for disaster. Defunding and criminalizing the police is an incentive to violent behaviour and will lead to mob rule. In fact, it should be the opposite: better education and more training in dealing with these violent situations in order to avoid deaths.

>>11805836
>murder
It was arguably justified self defence after violently failing to comply.

>>11805924
>better education and more training in dealing with these violent situations in order to avoid deaths.
this
Deaths are already very low considering the number of incidents attended. 97% of black deaths are black on black.

>>11805927
Except he was killed after throwing the weapon away. He wasn't a threat at that point. He was just trying to escape. Supreme court has ruled running from the cops is not evidence of guilt. And it could be argued that the action of Brooks was in self defense as well. With all the recent killings it's likely he felt threatened by the police and feared for his safety. Tragically his instincts were spot on the money, as they did end up killing him in the end.

>>11805924
>so he had to think about the reaction of the angry mob beforehand?
No. Individual officers shouldn't be forced to make this sort of judgement call or depth of decision making. The way it should work is when there's a call for a violent criminal, you send a badge with a gun. When there's some guy napping in the car, you send someone who's unarmed. Simply being in possession of a weapon is too much of a temptation to use for every problem. These officers were well trained, and very recently trained in deescalation tactics. The training didn't prevent them from resorting to violence to solve this dispute. The training doesn't work because the idea of suppressing that instinct to draw a gun and fire in the moment where you don't have enough time to think is fundamentally flawed.

And please don't try to tell me he was violently napping in his car. There was no violence men with guns showed up and escalated the situation.

I say one where a girl got tased in the head and it left a really nasty scar.

>>11805643
I came here to get away /pol

>>11806023
>Except he was killed after throwing the weapon away
So after stealing it and using it, throwing it away makes you innocent?

>Tragically his instincts were spot on the money
he must have been a genius to figure out that if you shoot at the police they usually shoot back

>No. Individual officers shouldn't be forced to make this sort of judgement call or depth of decision making.
that's the opposite of
>Ask yourself, were the actions of the police creating order and peace?

>the way it should work is when there's a call for a violent criminal, you send a badge with a gun. When there's some guy napping in the car, you send someone who's unarmed.
how would they have known that he didn't have a gun?

>And please don't try to tell me he was violently napping in his car.
I never said that. If he had complied instead of reacting aggressively and posing a threat to them and possibly other citizens, this would have not happened.

When I said better education I meant both ways. Policemen need to have cool heads but people must comply for it to be peace and order. If you get arrested you don't suddenly make a run for it, and certainly you don't do it with a policeman's stolen weapon you fire back.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E2JwKAQVVVw
Watch, retards. If you're going to condone social upheaval and the destruction of your own civilization forever over these things, I think it behooves you to spend the hour to bear witness to what you're chimping out over.

>>11806119
The communists and their financial elites have been plotting the downfall of western nations for a century or more.

>>11805836
You wouldn't be crying about unnecessary death if he ran someone over while drunk, if you even heard about it. You know he's right.

>>11806119
incident starts at 41:25 everything before that is calm polite interaction as they assess how drunk he is and why he's blocking a drive though.

He resisted arrest. seized a weapon (the tazer) and fired it upon an officer.

>>11805643
>1) that's all untrue
Here's his biological father:
Mr. Barbine believes officers “prejudged” his son by the color of his skin and his criminal record, which shows several charges of theft, obstructing an officer, battery on a family member, and other misdemeanors.

“They thought they knew who he was before they stopped him,” Mr. Barbine said. “They didn’t know him.”

>>11805671
What's the white thing he holf backwards? Pointing at the cop?

>>11805836
I don't agree with anything you've said, as you clearly have not thought this situation through. But aside from that, what do you think we should replace the cops with?

>>11806200
He stole a tazer and shot it at the cop.

>>11806210
>what do you think we should replace the cops with?
Robocop?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PcPElnvb6bI

>>11805500
https://www.fox43.com/article/news/york-county-man-accused-of-using-taser-device-on-state-trooper-while-resisting-arrest/521-42183b3e-a5c2-45d1-a675-1cd4e58aecff
>At that point, Orvis began resisting attempts to take him into custody, according to police. One trooper attempted to use a Taser device to subdue him, but Orvis grabbed the device from the trooper and fired it, hitting the trooper in the shoulder, police allege.
>Orvis continued trying to deploy the Taser and almost hit another trooper in the head, according to police.
>He was eventually taken into custody.
These police clearly did something wrong here by failing to kill this man, they should be disciplined

>>11806104
>So after stealing it and using it, throwing it away makes you innocent?
>innocent
Nice strawman faggot
It's about whether or not you're a threat
Even pic related wasn't killed when they came for him because he wasn't armed, and it certainly wasn't because he was "innocent"

>If he had complied instead of reacting aggressively
Him being a drunk fucking moron doesn't mean he needs to get shot in the back by the people called to "protect" him

>>11806317
Indeed, he wouldn't be missed.

>>11806334
>pic related wasn't armed didn't resist didn't get killed
that is precisely my point
>faggot
you have run out of arguments. You are shilling and you know it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ymznwY2kbEU
Fund the police properly.

>>11806420
>that is precisely my point
then why did you bring up the "innocence" strawman?

>waaah don't call me names
>sh-shill
ignoring the argument doesn't make it go away, anon
somehow cops managed to not shoot this guy >>11806317 and they also manage to not shoot unhinged mass murderers; surely, they can hold their fire on an unarmed man's back.