Another stupid move by cops in Atlanta.

Of course you have been following the shooting death of Rayshard Brooks by Altanta police that has now resulted in the termination of the cop that offed him and the voluntary resignation of the police chief of Atlanta.

I watched the videos frame by frame and here is the straightforward no spin analysis:

• Rayshard Brooks was driving while intoxicated and decided to go through the Wendy's drive in as drunk drivers often do.
• But the line was moving slowly and he fell asleep at the wheel in line.
• This caused a small disturbance as people had to go around him.
• Cops were eventually notified and they came across Brooks asleep at the wheel with the engine running.
• Of course they jacked him out of the car and determined he was drunk.
• For whatever reason, perhaps because he was a drunken fool, Brooks decided to fight the cops.  He was clearly a strong young man because he broke free with one of the cop's tazers in hand.  In fact, it looked like he himself had been shot with a tazer but for whatever reason it was not having good effect.
• While on chase, Brooks turned around and pointed the taser at one of the cops who then pulled his service revolver and killed him while Brooks was still running away.

Brooks should of course not been drinking and driving.  At the same time, police know for a fact that the first thing that you lose when you are drinking is your judgement.  And to fall asleep at the wheel, Brooks must have been pretty toasted.  But when they went to apprehend him the fight or flight instinct kicked in and he fought them and then ran.

So now let's think about this.  So far Brooks is pretty assured to be in trouble for DWI and for resisting arrest.  But this not a violent crime.  This is the cops mishandling a drunk.  But it is not a shoot-able offense.  Brooks did steal the taser from the cop but that is a nonlethal weapon.  So when Brooks, in his drunken stupidity which the cops should have realized was just drunken stupidity, pointed the taser at the lead cop, the correct response was not to shoot him with a real gun.  And certainly not to kill.  Do cops ever shoot at the legs? NO.  Why?  Why shoot at center body mass for nonviolent crimes where the only thing at stake is the cop's pride for having gotten taken in a fight by a drunk?

In addition, it's not like he's going to get away.  The cops got his car and they already ID'd him.  If Brooks had managed to out run them, the cops should simply have said, we'll get him later this evening when he goes home or goes to his friend's house.  In other words, let the situation de-escalate, put out an APB for him, notify his family and friends about what happened and ask them to tell him to turn himself in if they hear from him and if he does they will take into account his impaired judgement for being drunk which was corrected by turning himself in after sobering up.  Tell them he will have to face charges for the DWI but that they will drop resisting arrest with the understanding that his lack of judgement was understandable.

Is this really so difficult?  The only real problem here is that Nazi police think that failure to follow their every command is actually a good reason to take someone's life.  That is just fucking outrageous and wrong.  How low of an opinion about the value of another human being's life must the cops have to shoot a DWI suspect who is fleeing on foot?  Brooks was no danger to society in that condition.  When will the cops learn that killing someone is FOREVER.  FOREVER is a long time.  FOREVER is not something you do easily or on a whim.

In this whole thing there is only one thing done by the police that I have to applaud and that is the voluntary resignation of Atlanta police chief Erika Shields. While it was absolutely the right thing to do and which sent a clear message about accountability at the top, she really didn't have to fall on her own sword for the actions of her cop.  She could have made excuses and promised change blah blah blah like so many other police chiefs have done.  Now, maybe she was pressured to do it by the mayor.  We will never know.  But she could have fought that and she didn't.  She accepted the idea that the captain must go down with the ship regardless of whose idea it was.  And so it should be with all police chiefs whose officers do not behave according to the wishes of the people.  IF the chief cannot control the cops, the chief must go.

But again I must thank and applaud Erika Shields for being among the first police chiefs to do the right thing under these circumstances.  This is clearly the honorable thing to do and I wish her good fortune in her future endeavors.

And yes, of course I know what she is.  I still wish her best of luck.