It's only because of that video we are here discussing this now. Otherwise it would just be another 'bad guy thug' who 'must be a drug dealer' shot by 'a good police officer doing his duty'.

I have just seen the footage of this on the news.

What a scumbag that cop is. I'm glad he is being charged with murder...because that's exactly what it was!!

How are you defining "stop"?

A cessation of whatever activity requires the armed person to shoot at the target.

That's the beauty of racism. So easy to practice, yet tremendously difficult to prove. No one knows what's really going on in someone's head, so unless racism is blatant (and even then) no one can say definitively. That's why people can say "Where's the evidence?"

Can you reload a discharged taser quickly? Unless you had another 'clip'. Even if he grabbed it what harm could a discharged taser do? I suppose someone could be hit with it as a small club. He was unarmed, he was running.
One of the worst aspects was the complete lack of any attempt to resuscitate or help. Which I am led to believe is meant to be done if there is no risk to the officer.

Not in America I don't believe... It's all abit strange out there.

The handcuffing behind the back is what they are trained to do. Happens with every shooting case.

I could be wrong but I believe that due to legal reasons police don't administer first aid to those they have shot.

People shouldn't read too much into either of the above as it happens with most, if not all police shootings in America.

I think you need to rephrase that better!

noone can say definitely until there's evidence.innocent until proven guilty.

My grandfather (now deceased) was a policeman in Chicago, they had to administer first aid to anyone they arrested/injured in order to preserve life and obtain statements. It's probably changed since then, for the worse I would suggest. He would be appalled at the state of policing in the US now.

Cessation = The end of

Activity = Something a person is doing

...that requires the person holding the gun to shoot at the target.

That would be fine IF the officer had shouted a warning. Which it appears he didn't.

Bulletguy simply asked me to define "stop" in the general context of using a firearm against a person.

Don't obfuscate. I was responding directly to your comment, "He may well be a murderer but where's the evidence he was a racist?" This was my response, "That's the beauty of racism. So easy to practice, yet tremendously difficult to prove. No one knows what's really going on in someone's head, so unless racism is blatant (and even then) no one can say definitively. That's why people can say "Where's the evidence?"

Your question was not about whether or not he was a murderer, which you acknowledge he may be, but whether there was evidence he was a racist.

You don't need to go "around hunting black guys" to be racist. The question is whether, when you encounter one, you treat him/her any differently to a white person in the same circumstances. We have no way of knowing this at present however he may be judged - possibly unfairly - as racist due to the context, politics and geography.
His behaviour - as far as we can see - is suspect which does not bode well.

I know what cessation means. It was how you'd phrased the sentence.

It's already been answered in post #179

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/0...n_7024404.html

I do think he will walk on this. All that is needed is one person to say not guilty.
It will be an injustice but the us hasn't moved on from Rodney King. I am glad I don't live there anymore.

It's horrific that these incidents keep happening. Not even mass protesting seems to be able to prevent it. The police in America are out of control. It's scary and upsetting to witness.

Yes I didn't dispute that at all. There is no evidence the cop is racist in the video. Let's not let that get in the way of a good patronising comment though eh.

You must live in a world where everything must have occurred because it can't be proven

I agree.

It's not been answered at all, because post #179, your post, makes this fatuous claim


The conversation then steered towards the idea you had that the officer should have aimed for his legs. Myself and other posters simply reminded you that this is a myth, and aiming at the torso to stop a person is what firearms personnel are trained to do.

You seemed to be confused. I am not patronising you. I am not saying the cop is racist. How can anyone possibly know if someone is or isn't racist? It's impossible to prove.

This is an interesting article in the wake of the Brown shooting about when an officer is justified to shoot. It makes the point that it is notoriously difficult to convict officers in these situations.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/201...shoot-ferguson

Interesting article. The perception remains that race is an issue though.
Rodney King was a blatantly perverse decision from an all white jury that set the city aflame. It's no surprise that regardless of video evidence when police are exonerated that there is a backlash.
ETA: neither of the two reasons to shoot were met as far as we know. There also appered to be no shouted warning.