You have failed at "journalistic writing" it's irrelevant that the criminal was black.
You are already trying to insert a narrative that is not at issue.
Let me reword "Ends up in a 'scuffle' with police....."
(I love the passive verbiage you use, as though any of us going about our daily lives will ("end up in a scuffle with" police.)
.
The man demonstrated a willingness to engage in, or use, violence in order to resist the law, that makes him a danger to the community which must be responded to.
Of course he was "agitated" that he was arrested again, always passive verbiage with a criminal.
Let me now reword "grabs a police officer's taser"
Has demonstrated that he now is not only willing to resist law enforcement with violence, but will in fact, apprehend a potentially dangerous and debilitating weapon with which he is nor trained in order to continue to engage in criminal behavior which endangers the community.
After apprehending a potentially dangerous weapon from police he turns to run and potentially endanger the rest of the community while already demonstrating that he is:
1.)
Willing to engage in violent force against police
2.) Happy to take their non-lethal options and use them against them, and continue to endanger the community.
Let me ask you a question journalistic genius....
What were the cops supposed to do?
Use a non-lethal
tool against the obviously violent criminal taking their weapons into the community?
What should they do? TAZE HIM?
He took that option away
Because she's stupid.
It won't she's an idiot, and probably shouldn't have gotten the job in the first place.
I predict acquittal.
He took down a man willing to engage in violence with law enforcement, take their tools of debilitation, and run into a community with them in a state of willingness to commit violence.
I pray he is afforded then, a long, restful vacation where he is reinstated with full back-pay.
Of course it did...because people write these stories like you do.....
With passive verbiage like:
"A black guy 'got into a scuffle with police' ".
Which is equivalent to:
"A chaste and virginal young woman 'found herself pregnant' ".
Of course it was.
You didn't have to include that information.
I could assume lawless thugs would have done that.
Duh. no surprise there....a good shooting was turned into a National news event thanks to people who think like you....
Again, the passive verbiage....the vehicles "suffered arson".
Not, were lawlessly burned by criminals but "suffered arson"...because "suffering" is a proper verb ascribed to what a vehicle might undergo.
Are you really published?
Who would publish anything you write?
Beautiful coming from an ambulance-chaser....
Police officers, should, in my opinion, all quit right here, right now, not show up, and let lawless thugs kill and destroy until you stop treating them like the enemy and beg them to come back to work.
Because he's an obvious and now armed danger to the community, and some people (like the type of people who become cops) actually want to protect innocent law-abiders from obviously violent criminals.
Clearly, you wouldn't understand that.
But, that answers your question.
All the more reason to have a carry permit... and know how to use it defensively. state’s like Jerz make it extremely difficult to carry. You have to question wether your a victim or the master of your life.
He should have...
He didn't, so the cops responded.
If they were smart, they'd have let him go and gotten a donut, because as government employees, they'd never have been investigated, and they could continue to draw a pay-check while letting the thug terrorize the community.
It's their fault for being stupid enough to care about protecting a community which will crucify them.
They should have stuck with passing out speeding tickets to little old ladies.
They'd still get paid.
At least police training will change after these incidents. Police will certainly be trained to deescalate and make snap judgments that try to avoid the use of force, especially including lethal force.
Maybe.
Then again, we're not out there dealing with what they're dealing with.
Are you willing to surrounding your own life, if it comes down to an innocent bystander or the suspect?
If an officer decides not to take down a dangerous man, and he ends up killing you or a family member, will you be resigned to accept this?
Questions to ponder in this new age.
Are you sure about this?
An untrained guy running around tasering policemen with lethal weapons?
I'm not sure we're equipped to know all that can go wrong in this scenario.
Bare hands can be lethal.
Amen. I was going to join the military before I became disabled. Dying in place of a civilian should be our training. I stood by that for my life back then, even as an unbeliever.
You NEVER EVER EVER aim for anything other than center-mass of the target.
That's true in the military, all police departments, State Police, Corrections, all law-enforcement EVER.
ALWAYS aim and only aim center-mass.
It's not Hollywood.
Small little boy:
I have put over 50,000 rounds through berretta nine-mils...
I am an expert (on a truly epic level) on hand-guns.
I can put two rounds in a chest and one in the brain-box (failure to stop drill) from the holster in One-Half of a second.
It's not that hard...it's all about having been trained.
Anyone could be taught to really, it's simply practicing presentation really. I'm a million times the marksman you could ever dream of being.
You know what?
You still NEVER aim anything but center-mass.
Because his boss was a moral coward who probably never should have gotten the job.....