Tuesday, June 16, 2020

Observe here that not only many police hate the black colour skin people, some blacks too. If the observer here, observes closely, would notice how the former police officer on the right put a false statement on the situation: David Thomas said: “that choice of using discretion, what actually happens in that process is, if I let him go, there’s nothing to keep him from returning to that vehicle and driving it. And he is impaired. So, because of that, the police do nothing, and if he kills somebody, then the police are going to be held liable for that. So, it is a double-edged sword.” …observe that Mr. David Thomas is, and clearly is, indirectly, justifying the killing of Rayshard Brooks in Atlanta, based on supposition …Houston, we have a problem. First what David Thomas supposes, is not a fact that can be attributed to how Rayshard Brooks is going to react, do or had done. Attribution of happenings to a person that had not done such a “happening”, is a clear show of prejudice. “if you are black, you are a mean person”, and the said by me here is pure prejudice. So, Mr. David Thomas here has prejudice against black people been he himself, BLACK. https://youtu.be/TdubWAgPybs?t=887 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killing_of_Rayshard_Brooks Now, both of them, the police officer and Rayshard Brooks, acted wrongly but, should a man who is unarmed (as Mr. Brooks was) had to be killed because he run away from the police officer and at the same time use a taser of one of the police officer against the police officer himself? If a taser is not a lethal weapon, why to kill Rayshard Brooks. Police carry tasers and use then against anyone, mostly seen against black people, just to control them and avoid accidentally in killing them. Could not the police officer aim at the lower part of Mr. Brooks to stop him going away? Why aiming to his trunk body that could cause a greater possibility in causing death to a man that has created a simple violation, supposedly, of the law of Atlanta city? Is that when a black person commit any violation to the law, they deserve to be killed? I am not a lawyer but I think what I wrote in “Something is missing in the police training and way to function, what is it?” has weight on restructuring the Police force designated in US or even changing by eradicating the police force as it is known today and creating another form of department that would protect the people in US rather than kill, systematically, anyone that a police “think” should be killed based on prejudice existing in the spirit of people that have where incrusted hate to a sector of the American population.


Observe here that not only many police hate the black colour skin people, some blacks too.
If the observer here, observes closely, would notice how the former police officer on the right put a false statement on the situation: David Thomas said: “that choice of using discretion, what actually happens in that process is, if I let him go, there’s nothing to keep him from returning to that vehicle and driving it. And he is impaired. So, because of that, the police do nothing, and if he kills somebody, then the police are going to be held liable for that. So, it is a double-edged sword.”
…observe that Mr. David Thomas is, and clearly is, indirectly, justifying the killing of Rayshard Brooks in Atlanta, based on supposition …Houston, we have a problem.
First what David Thomas supposes, is not a fact that can be attributed to how Rayshard Brooks is going to react, do or had done. Attribution of happenings to a person that had not done such a “happening”, is a clear show of prejudice.  “if you are black, you are a mean person”, and the said by me here is pure prejudice.
So, Mr. David Thomas here has prejudice against black people been he himself, BLACK.



Now, both of them, the police officer and Rayshard Brooks, acted wrongly but, should a man who is unarmed (as Mr. Brooks was) had to be killed because he run away from the police officer and at the same time use a taser of one of the police officer against the police officer himself?  If a taser is not a lethal weapon, why to kill Rayshard Brooks.  Police carry tasers and use then against anyone, mostly seen against black people, just to control them and avoid accidentally in killing them.  Could not the police officer aim at the lower part of Mr. Brooks to stop him going away?  Why aiming to his trunk body that could cause a greater possibility in causing death to a man that has created a simple violation, supposedly, of the law of Atlanta city?  Is that when a black person commit any violation to the law, they deserve to be killed?
I am not a lawyer but I think what I wrote in “Something is missing in the police training and way to function, what is it?” has weight on restructuring the Police force designated in US or even changing by eradicating the police force as it is known today and creating another form of department that would protect the people in US rather than kill, systematically, anyone that a police “think” should be killed based on prejudice existing in the spirit of people that have where incrusted hate to a sector of the American population.
...ad-on: if some one who could be drunk, sits inside of a car, parked, engine off: a police have the legal justify right to kill him?
...if someone is drunk, it is illegal to rest or sleep by the driver seat?
...am confused.

No comments: