Not sure what "walking catalogue of locally available illicit substances" is a reference to, as that describes none of the recent police murders AFAIK.
Also FYI, in the case of Rayshard Brooks (the victim who took the officer's Taser), the District Attorney said that the Taser "had already been fired twice and was thus empty and no longer a threat". https://www.chicagotribune.com/nation-world/ct-nw-atlanta-ra...
That's misleading to the point of lying. The "already" here means the split second between Brooks firing it at the officer and the officer shooting him.
I’ll point out, by the way, that a taser is one of these “non-lethal” weapons with which we should be fine with cops firing at groups of protesters indiscriminately. But apparently when someone uses one against a cop it’s worth the immediate death penalty. I wonder what’d happen if a protester shot a cop with a rubber bullet?
Split second? The officer hadn't even drawn his gun when Brooks fired the Taser. He made the decision to draw his gun in the first place already knowing that the Taser Brooks held was depleted.
Are you serious? It's clearly true. The officer's gun remains in its holster until after Brooks fires the Taser — you can tell because his right arm is still vertical. The NYT has a good breakdown: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/14/us/videos-rayshard-brooks...
And regardless, let's not move the goalposts to consider only the time after Brooks fired the Taser. After all, it's not like that was the first opportunity the officer had to calculate how many shots it had left.
>He made the decision to draw his gun in the first place already knowing
Which is different from the gun being drawn. You can clearly see the officer pass his tazer from his right to left hand and then reach for his gun prior to the tazer shot.
>And regardless, it's not like the moment that Brooks fired the Taser was the first opportunity the officer had to calculate how many shots it had left.
Having a second potentially valid argument doesn't change the accuracy of the one made.
> You can clearly see the officer pass his tazer from his right to left hand and then reach for his gun prior to the tazer shot.
Reaching for a holstered handgun and deciding to draw it are two separate things.
> Having a second potentially valid argument doesn't change the accuracy of the one made.
I'm making exactly one argument: the officer who killed Rayshard Brooks did so knowing that the Taser in his hand was useless. You've yet to offer any evidence to the contrary.
Also FYI, in the case of Rayshard Brooks (the victim who took the officer's Taser), the District Attorney said that the Taser "had already been fired twice and was thus empty and no longer a threat". https://www.chicagotribune.com/nation-world/ct-nw-atlanta-ra...