Atlanta Police Fatally Shoot Black Man in the Back at Wendy's Drive-Thru

[Picton]

That is clearly up to him with his behavior after he grabbed cops gun. Thats not hyperbole... you can see them fighting over it.

I get that, in this case, but I'm speaking more generally. We all know these things are about more than one single incident.

 

[Deleted member 12999]

Rather than kill him?

I'd expect LE to do almost anything to avoid that, quite frankly.

I would too. I would also expect that a citizen who commits a crime, takes responsibility for it and go quietly, but that's not the world we live in

 

[Deleted member 12999]

I get that, in this case, but I'm speaking more generally. We all know these things are about more than one single incident.

It's all well and good to talk about things generally, but I'm talking about this case specifically, and you don't get to take a case that is specifically relevant to a black man not complying, and trying to take a cops gun, and then apply that generally to everything else people complain about

 

[mav]

As a cop I can’t disagree more with the bolded part.
Yes we’re all sick of the outrage and cancel culture, it’s retarded liberal tantrums.

But where your thoughts have the opposite affect is here;
considering if this whole story is true, he was unarmed, drunk/high and resisting, how does that justify any semblance of deadly force to take him into custody? And should all of us that get a good buzz on this weekend be subjected to being shot for it if we stumble outside in our drunken state to pee on a tree? Those are PSGWSP instances.

Drunk people are impossible to reason with. You can’t talk them down, you can’t make any sense to them and a high percentage of time they’ll get violent at some point because they’re drunk, they don’t know WTH they’re doing, and a lot of them would profusely apologize the next day if they’re still alive to do so. a**h***s? Maybe. But if being an a**h*** were a death sentence NES would be a ghost town, myself included

But again, when you see so many folks being killed who are unarmed and just basically resisting with some physical violence (no weapons) to get away, and it happens over and over, the next 10 people who get stopped are already thinking “Oh f***, I’m drunk AF (or high) and have a pouch of weed on me, these MF’s are gonna kill me tonight.”

People are legit thinking these days that they have a 50/50 chance of surviving a police encounter for even misdemeanor traffic offenses, I’d run or fight to if it was me, just simple survival instincts kicking in, and I’m a pasty white guy.

It’s instantaneous fight or flight and being reinforced 24/7 into everybody by the media machine AND the rogue cops that’re actually doing it, whether it’s true or not, highly inflated or not, this is what people are starting to think everyday now and they’re legit scared.

I’m not excusing criminal behavior, and I’m not painting all cops with a death brush, I know that’s BS because I know a lot of outstanding cops who would risk life and limb for strangers in trouble, but other folks don’t, and all they hear and see is murder squads looking for pot smokers to waste and it triggers their survival instincts.

I’m not a cop or a police apologist, but I’m not going to second guess the guy on the ground in the middle of the scrum. Is the suspect trying for the cop’s gun? Is the cop hitting muscle failure and the fear factor is kicking in? Here’s reality: Fighting on the ground is the worst. You are vulnerable to anyone coming up on you. You are limited in your ability to retreat or find cover when you’re on the ground. It’s a dangerous situation. I don’t know how old the cop is, but I’m 46 with 2 bad knees and my conditioning has gone. I’m not wrestling you to the ground, I’m not retreating because my conditioning and mobility won’t beat a younger/lighter guy. See where I’m going? You come at me, even unarmed, and I’m “in fear of my life”, I’m pulling and shooting, whether you are armed or not.

As to your point about being drunk or whatever, that is absolutely a PSGWSP. Choices were made to get to this point and many of them poor.

 

[Picton]

I would too. I would also expect that a citizen who commits a crime, takes responsibility for it and go quietly, but that's not the world we live in

But that's a false equivalency. The State killing a man without trial is far worse than a suspect resisting. For one thing, I as a member of the public have no right to expect anything of a suspect, but I certainly can expect that the police, acting in my name, would at least be able to avoid killing people without trial.

That resistant suspect is answerable for his crimes, but the police generally are not. That's a problem.

 

[Deleted member 12999]

But that's a false equivalency. The State killing a man without trial is far worse than a suspect resisting. For one thing, I as a member of the public have no right to expect anything of a suspect, but I certainly can expect that the police, acting in my name, would at least be able to avoid killing people without trial.

That resistant suspect is answerable for his crimes, but the police generally are not. That's a problem.

Well.... its not really a false equivalency because if you want a police department that can effectively police society without violence... society is part of that equation.

 

[Picton]

Well.... its not really a false equivalency because if you want a police department that can effectively police society without violence... society is part of that equation.

Without killing. "Without violence" is a pipe dream. What I want is that the police, once the going gets rough, backs down and avoids shooting people, instead opting to grab them later.

Obviously that wouldn't work perfectly. But the status quo most definitely is not, and it's also killing people. I'd argue that's much much worse.

 

[SFC13557]

FOX just did a segment on the shooting and they reported he grabbed the cops taser.

 

[Deleted member 12999]

Without killing. "Without violence" is a pipe dream. What I want is that the police, once the going gets rough, backs down and avoids shooting people, instead opting to grab them later.

Obviously that wouldn't work perfectly. But the status quo most definitely is not, and it's also killing people. I'd argue that's much much worse.

Lol. Ok man. Pipe Dream. So IN THIS CASE... a dude grabs a cops gun (beyond reasonable) and continues to fight, but we just call ollie ollie oxenfree while he runs off to the neighborhood to do god knows what, when we have clear evidence he is violent, in addition to the fact we have no idea what his history or crime was.

Now... I agree that time and distance are critical with use of force, but there is a bright line here and this dude crossed it.

 

[whatluck]

Completely blows me away the number of people who have no grasp on lethality in fighting. Death comes at you quick.

 

[SFC13557]

Completely blows me away the number of people who have no grasp on lethality in fighting. Death comes at you quick.

and these are the Libs who hate Cops but couldn't defend themselves or their families from the scum they defend.

 

[whatluck]

There are guys that if you swing on and miss, can grab you by the collar of your jacket and toss you to the ground, but set up a choke while you're mid-air and choke you out as soon as you hit the ground. There are people out there that can kill you in an instant and there's nothing you can do about it, nothing to stop them. There's more of these people out there than you think. The 'well most people aren't deadly' fallacy is the kind of thing that causes you to fatally under-estimate your attacker. We're all basically at eachother's mercy. This is the secret to armed polite society. None of us are ever really safe.

 

[Deleted member 12999]

I have to admit, I take it somewhat personally when I read about cases like this. I had to take a 6' 4 330 pound dude that was naked and scaring the krapp out of people into custody... he was wasted. I did everything I could to talk him into going to the hospital, and that didn't work, then he took a swing at me, and the fight was on. He tried to grab my gun in the course of the fight, and I f***ing smashed him into submission. Then I got hung out to dry initially because I was told I started the fight. This happens all the time and never hits news. He got a nice harvard lawyer and I got dragged through mud. Ive come to accept that we are never right.... but it wears on you.

I could have put that dude in a coffin, but didn't and Im still wrong. Fix THAT in my job, and Im all for any reform you want.

 

[whatluck]

Once someone crosses a certain line where they're legit a threat to the community the cops shouldn't be backing off. We have an obligation to clean that up ASAP. I think the cops should be free to use whatever force necessary to effect an arrest in that case, and shouldn't be put under a microscope every time it happens. This is how you lose good cops, and wind up with only shitty cops. You take the people who have that natural warrior ethic, the instinct to run into danger, protect, put their own health on the line, and you muzzle them. Of course the cops who decide to stay become numbed, they have to make themselves numbed to the whole broken system not only because you took away their identity and humanity, but because you took away their warrior ethic, the one thing that drove them to be a cop in the first place.

I am by far not a cop apologist, but for f***s sake these people are doing a civil service and working in a broken system, and most of them truly are good people.

 

[Deleted member 12999]

Once someone crosses a certain line where they're legit a threat to the community the cops shouldn't be backing off. We have an obligation to clean that up ASAP. I think the cops should be free to use whatever force necessary to effect an arrest in that case, and shouldn't be put under a microscope every time it happens. This is how you lose good cops, and wind up with only shitty cops. You take the people who have that natural warrior ethic, the instinct to run into danger, protect, put their own health on the line, and you muzzle them. Of course the cops who decide to stay become numbed, they have to make themselves numbed to the whole broken system not only because you took away their identity and humanity, but because you took away their warrior ethic, the one thing that drove them to be a cop in the first place.

I am by far not a cop apologist, but for f***s sake these people are doing a civil service and working in a broken system, and most of them truly are good people.

That's kind of my point. These cops are in a no win situation. If they had leveled enough violence when they had their hands on him to get him into handcuffs, they would be all over the news for beating a black guy. Now they're in the news for shooting a black guy. There's just no good answer, because if you take the alternative route which is just back off and let them go, then what happens? He carjacks a family down street?

There is no good answer. Either way they are f***ed, and the other way... society is f***ed.

 

[SFC13557]

I have no idea why anyone would want to be a Cop these days. You're damned if you do and damned if you don't. The average sheeple will cry about Police brutality even thou they have no clue what it's like to be in a fight for your life. They'd be the first to cower in their basement and dial 911 pleading for help from the young men they claim are being harassed by the Police.

 

[HorizontalHunter]

That's kind of my point. These cops are in a no win situation. If they had leveled enough violence when they had their hands on him to get him into handcuffs, they would be all over the news for beating a black guy. Now they're in the news for shooting a black guy. There's just no good answer, because if you take the alternative route which is just back off and let them go, then what happens? He carjacks a family down street?

There is no good answer. Either way they are f***ed, and the other way... society is f***ed.

It’s a no win situation for sure. The worst part about this is that it will be in the back of every officers mind and it will cause an officer to second guess themselves. In the end it will cost him or her their life.

Bob

 

[cams]

I’m not a cop or a police apologist, but I’m not going to second guess the guy on the ground in the middle of the scrum. Is the suspect trying for the cop’s gun? Is the cop hitting muscle failure and the fear factor is kicking in? Here’s reality: Fighting on the ground is the worst. You are vulnerable to anyone coming up on you. You are limited in your ability to retreat or find cover when you’re on the ground. It’s a dangerous situation. I don’t know how old the cop is, but I’m 46 with 2 bad knees and my conditioning has gone. I’m not wrestling you to the ground, I’m not retreating because my conditioning and mobility won’t beat a younger/lighter guy. See where I’m going? You come at me, even unarmed, and I’m “in fear of my life”, I’m pulling and shooting, whether you are armed or not.

As to your point about being drunk or whatever, that is absolutely a PSGWSP. Choices were made to get to this point and many of them poor.

That’s all well and good for your situation, and not to say you’re preaching to the choir but I’ve been doing this a long time. I understand all of that all too well.

I’d never tell anyone when or how to feel that they’re life is being threatened, but in your case individually there’s a maybe 1% chance of you ever having to do that, in the reality of police work it happens not just every day, but dozens of times a day around the country, week after week, year after year, so the scrutiny is never ending and we have to be better at what we do than the average Joe who very rarely will find himself in a hairy situation.

 

[snd1t]

That’s all well and good for your situation, and not to say you’re preaching to the choir but I’ve been doing this a long time. I understand all of that all too well.

I’d never tell anyone when or how to feel that they’re life is being threatened, but in your case individually there’s a maybe 1% chance of you ever having to do that, in the reality of police work it happens not just every day, but dozens of times a day around the country, week after week, year after year, so the scrutiny is never ending and we have to be better at what we do than the average Joe who very rarely will find himself in a hairy situation.

Any discussion amongst popo of going a different route with "non lethal" methods?

Possibly of the "Pharmacological" variety?

If we can tranq elephants/other mammals safely why havent we considered doing the same for some of the more "combative" subjects?

Safer for you
Safer for the subject
Less expensive for taxpayers

 

[PATRON]

If you are more concerned about the liberal backlash, than you are outraged by the shooting then there is definitely something wrong with you.

This liberal bullshit BLM stuff is costing me money.Is my livelihood more important than some drunk,or drugged out guy who got himself
killed while fighting with some cops,HELL YEA! That's what's wrong with me I don't care for stupid people,and I should not have to pay for them.

 

[jaypap]

Well I hoped he learned his lesson.

 

[cams]

I get that, in this case, but I'm speaking more generally. We all know these things are about more than one single incident.

This brings up another point, as far as ‘just letting people go’ if they decide to fight and you’re on the losing end of it so far.

Depending on the call, whether it’s dispatched to the officer or if it’s self initiated action due to visual cues that must be investigated, information is always limited and a lot of times not accurately disseminated to you from dispatch.

For example, you’re the cop on vehicle/mobile patrol, you observe what appears to be a speeder on the roads, driving aggressively and quickly turning into what appears to be road rage type behavior.

You follow along for a bit to keep observing and make sure of what you’re actually witnessing before initiating a M/V stop on the party. He finally pulls over and is agitated, uncooperative and hostile. He immediately gets out of the vehicle and approaches yours, arms waving and yelling profanities.

You know absolutely nothing about him, and have no time to even do a simple query over the radio or computer because he’s now almost at your window and you’re feeling threatened already by his obviously over aggressive behavior so you have to get out the vehicle and take a protective stance at the least and try to sort out wth is going on.

He’s completely uncooperative and is now refusing to comply and attempting to get back in his vehicle to leave.

Do you A let him go to save a fight on the side of the highway? You have his Reg # so you can find him later it seems after he’s calmed down, and it’s only traffic violations so far anyway. And that’s IF the plate on the vehicle isn’t in fact stolen to disguise his address, but you haven’t had time to even run it yet because of his aggressive behavior towards you. You know with every fiber of your being just from experience that something has got this guys balls in a bind and isn’t right, but you have no idea what. Is he an EDP off his meds? Is the car stolen? Is he just an a**h*** in general or is he fleeing a crime he just committed? Has the car been reported stolen yet? Couple of few things happening real quick and no time to sort it out yet before a wrestling match breaks on the side of the road.

Or B do you do what’s needed to keep him there because you feel that letting him go right now will indeed put others in danger almost immediately and you need some time to figure out what the whole situation is about.

Since nobody can know what that particular person has been up to the last 48hrs, we don’t know if his wife is dead in the trunk or on the bedroom floor at home, and that is what’s keyed up his desire to either attack you or to try and punk you out and then simply drive off to make his escape before anyone notices she’s missing, AND he’s now on his way to her sisters house to whack her too for interfering in their marriage.

Now I know that’s a drastic and long explanation just to say, “you just never know” and I made up the scenario to get you thinking how involved it can be, but those almost exact scenarios have turned out to be very real in the past, you can’t just let people walk if you’re involved in a legitimate lawful stop simply because they’re being uncooperative and they want to leave at the moment.

Lots of things to sort out in a very short time period and often times under duress of an overly aggressive party who may also be armed and who’s within arms reach, yelling in your face and you’re trying to keep your natural adrenaline down just so you think clearly.

 

[wilson911]

This liberal bullshit BLM stuff is costing me money.Is my livelihood more important than some drunk,or drugged out guy who got himself
killed while fighting with some cops,HELL YEA! That's what's wrong we me I don't care for stupid people,and I should not have to pay for them.

The stupid people you are paying for are the police.

 

[jhblaze1]

This seems a simple PSGWSP case. He was being arrested. He was resisting. Was he drunk? High? He failed a field sobriety test.

Here’s a hint, stop doing stupid crap if you don’t want to interact with cops. If you’re being arrested, don’t resist, it will go bad. I can’t stand Police brutality as much as the next guy. No knock raids, crooked cops, etc. Until more facts come out, I’m not getting “outraged”. In fact, I’m sick of outrage culture.

maybe, but there's hardly ever a legit reason to shoot someone in the back...Aside from stopping someone on a rampage who's heading off to hurt others....IDK the details here though.

We have a system of Due Process and if we're just going to shrug it off and say oh well let the cops execute people on the side of the road rather than fulfill their actual objective of delivering a perp to the court system, then we may as well just throw in the towel on this whole American experiment.

 

[mav]

Meh, it literally takes a fraction of a second for someone to turn their body, and it may even be an involuntary reaction to being shot at. Doesn’t mean the person was fleeing. If armed, it doesn’t mean the person is no longer a threat. Too many variables.

I agree that an unarmed suspect 25 yards away and running away shouldn’t be shot in the back. Circumstances matter.

 

[wilson911]

SO? Happens every day but only gets coverage when a Black person gets shot.

If it happens every day, wouldnt you admit that's a problem? Whether they're black or not, I think we can agree that it's not a good outcome.

That's kind of my point. These cops are in a no win situation. If they had leveled enough violence when they had their hands on him to get him into handcuffs, they would be all over the news for beating a black guy. Now they're in the news for shooting a black guy. There's just no good answer, because if you take the alternative route which is just back off and let them go, then what happens? He carjacks a family down street?

There is no good answer. Either way they are f***ed, and the other way... society is f***ed.

No win situation? One result is the guy gets beaten, thenother resulting the cop kills him. And you dont see a clear winning outcome there?

I have read several of your posts in this thread, and I am truly concerned. I would be terrified if you were a cop in my town....the eventual lawsuit you will be guilty of will not be inexpensive. You do not seem to have the skills, demeanor or integrity to be a cop.

 

[Deleted member 12999]

If it happens every day, wouldnt you admit that's a problem? Whether they're black or not, I think we can agree that it's not a good outcome.



No win situation? One result is the guy gets beaten, thenother resulting the cop kills him. And you dont see a clear winning outcome there?

I have read several of your posts in this thread, and I am truly concerned. I would be terrified if you were a cop in my town....the eventual lawsuit you will be guilty of will not be inexpensive. You do not seem to have the skills, demeanor or integrity to be a cop.

I guess my 25 years of working with all sorts of humans of all races and creeds without issue is out the window.

 

[Picton]

Lol. Ok man. Pipe Dream. So IN THIS CASE... a dude grabs a cops gun (beyond reasonable) and continues to fight, but we just call ollie ollie oxenfree while he runs off to the neighborhood to do god knows what, when we have clear evidence he is violent, in addition to the fact we have no idea what his history or crime was.

Now... I agree that time and distance are critical with use of force, but there is a bright line here and this dude crossed it.

As I said, at the end of the day, it's yet another police interaction resulting in death. And that's a big big problem at any time, but especially right now.

This brings up another point, as far as ‘just letting people go’ if they decide to fight and you’re on the losing end of it so far.

Depending on the call, whether it’s dispatched to the officer or if it’s self initiated action due to visual cues that must be investigated, information is always limited and a lot of times not accurately disseminated to you from dispatch.

For example, you’re the cop on vehicle/mobile patrol, you observe what appears to be a speeder on the roads, driving aggressively and quickly turning into what appears to be road rage type behavior.

You follow along for a bit to keep observing and make sure of what you’re actually witnessing before initiating a M/V stop on the party. He finally pulls over and is agitated, uncooperative and hostile. He immediately gets out of the vehicle and approaches yours, arms waving and yelling profanities.

You know absolutely nothing about him, and have no time to even do a simple query over the radio or computer because he’s now almost at your window and you’re feeling threatened already by his obviously over aggressive behavior so you have to get out the vehicle and take a protective stance at the least and try to sort out wth is going on.

He’s completely uncooperative and is now refusing to comply and attempting to get back in his vehicle to leave.

Do you A let him go to save a fight on the side of the highway? You have his Reg # so you can find him later it seems after he’s calmed down, and it’s only traffic violations so far anyway. And that’s IF the plate on the vehicle isn’t in fact stolen to disguise his address, but you haven’t had time to even run it yet because of his aggressive behavior towards you. You know with every fiber of your being just from experience that something has got this guys balls in a bind and isn’t right, but you have no idea what. Is he an EDP off his meds? Is the car stolen? Is he just an a**h*** in general or is he fleeing a crime he just committed? Has the car been reported stolen yet? Couple of few things happening real quick and no time to sort it out yet before a wrestling match breaks on the side of the road.

Or B do you do what’s needed to keep him there because you feel that letting him go right now will indeed put others in danger almost immediately and you need some time to figure out what the whole situation is about.

Since nobody can know what that particular person has been up to the last 48hrs, we don’t know if his wife is dead in the trunk or on the bedroom floor at home, and that is what’s keyed up his desire to either attack you or to try and punk you out and then simply drive off to make his escape before anyone notices she’s missing, AND he’s now on his way to her sisters house to whack her too for interfering in their marriage.

Now I know that’s a drastic and long explanation just to say, “you just never know” and I made up the scenario to get you thinking how involved it can be, but those almost exact scenarios have turned out to be very real in the past, you can’t just let people walk if you’re involved in a legitimate lawful stop simply because they’re being uncooperative and they want to leave at the moment.

Lots of things to sort out in a very short time period and often times under duress of an overly aggressive party who may also be armed and who’s within arms reach, yelling in your face and you’re trying to keep your natural adrenaline down just so you think clearly.

Good post, and there's very seldom a right answer. I get that.

But there's a wrong answer, and it's a dead citizen. My sense is that, too often, modern officers go to the gun too quickly. Perhaps that's a misperception on my part, but there must be stats on LEO use of guns, and you LEO types (I would hope) know those stats. My hope is that training and TACSOP decisions are made in accordance with stats like that, rather than on some sort of "officer safety vs citizens' rights" rubric. Because my unshakable belief is that my rights trump your safety every time, and that that's why you're well paid (which is something I don't complain about): for doing an inherently unsafe job.

 

[omega42]

Without killing. "Without violence" is a pipe dream. What I want is that the police, once the going gets rough, backs down and avoids shooting people, instead opting to grab them later.

Obviously that wouldn't work perfectly. But the status quo most definitely is not, and it's also killing people. I'd argue that's much much worse.

Armchair quarterbacking is easy. With what we know about this case so far the officers on the scene had to deal with an violent, intoxicated, and freshly armed person. I wouldn't want him showing up at my house after that kind of de-escalation.

 

[Deleted member 12999]

As I said, at the end of the day, it's yet another police interaction resulting in death. And that's a big big problem at any time, but especially right now.


Good post, and there's very seldom a right answer. I get that.

But there's a wrong answer, and it's a dead citizen. My sense is that, too often, modern officers go to the gun too quickly. Perhaps that's a misperception on my part, but there must be stats on LEO use of guns, and you LEO types (I would hope) know those stats. My hope is that training and TACSOP decisions are made in accordance with stats like that, rather than on some sort of "officer safety vs citizens' rights" rubric. Because my unshakable belief is that my rights trump your safety every time, and that that's why you're well paid (which is something I don't complain about): for doing an inherently unsafe job.

I can tell you for a fact that MY department (and many others) do whatever they can to design policies that make deadly force so narrow that you damn near have to have a criminal sign a waiver to be shot. I'm sure that makes you happy on some level. I don't walk around with a murder boner WHATSOEVER, but the chances my life would be destroyed even if the shoot was 'good' in your eyes, are astronomical. It almost got destroyed for a simple arrest.... TWICE. The first time I got to be one of the the subjects of a Worcester T&G hit piece, and an op-ed by that Clive whatever clown. I am all for cops that murder people to be put in jail, and I'm also all for cops (or citizens) that are forced to stop an violent offender with deadly force... to be celebrated. You can be both at the same time.