Should Fleeing Motorcylists in High-Speed Chases Be Shot By Police ?

[protectionist]

I prefer opening a car door at the last moment

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=31zsFTcWH5g

Not bad. Not bad at all.

 

[S.J.]

Nothing more pathetic than a loser who doesn't know when to quit. It's a good thing this is a message forum and not a gambling casino or projectionist would be in the poor house.

 

[protectionist]

What?? off topic?? ya ok

Yeah, he gets a little nuts when the convo doesn't go his way.

He claims to be 68 but that has to be his IQ because nobody except a moron would go to such lengths to advocate executing a kid on a motorcycle for speeding. Protectionist is the kind of nut case we read about in the news.

So you would not advise a cop to shoot (and maybe "executing" to use your word) a criminal who pulls a gun on him ? So you'd rather have dead cops killed by criminals ? And you'd rather have dead motorists killed by a speeding, reckless motorcyclist ? Who would advocate THAT ? (other than a moron with an IQ of 68 maybe ?)

 

[protectionist]

Yeah, he gets a little nuts when the convo doesn't go his way.

He claims to be 68 but that has to be his IQ because nobody except a moron would go to such lengths to advocate executing a kid on a motorcycle for speeding. Protectionist is the kind of nut case we read about in the news.

If he is 68 (and I question that), he is one of those old men yelling for kids to get off his lawn.

I wonder if he does it with a shotgun in his hand?

Oh wait, I guess my comments are OFF TOPIC!

You're still oblivious to what's being discussed here. Did you go to college and major in stupidity ? A kid on a lawn isn't going to get a bunch of people killed. A speeding, reckless motorcyclist will do just that. GET IT ????

 

[protectionist]

Motorcyclists don't generally kill car drivers. They put big dents in vehicles or scuff up trees or stain asphalt. I'm a two wheel guy and dislike the crotch rocket guys as much as anyone but the Harley guys with the loud pipes piss me off more. Car drivers can't get away with that loud an exhaust, why do they?

"Generally ?" If you or someone you care about happens to be THE ONE who gets killed because of the crotch rocket guys, suddenly "generally" won't carry too much weight, will it ?

I agree with you about the loud pipes.

 

[S.J.]

Yeah, he gets a little nuts when the convo doesn't go his way.

He claims to be 68 but that has to be his IQ because nobody except a moron would go to such lengths to advocate executing a kid on a motorcycle for speeding. Protectionist is the kind of nut case we read about in the news.

So you would not advise a cop to shoot (and maybe "executing" to use your word) a criminal who pulls a gun on him ? So you'd rather have dead cops killed by criminals ? And you'd rather have dead motorists killed by a speeding, reckless motorcyclist ? Who would advocate THAT ? (other than a moron with an IQ of 68 maybe ?)

"Pulls a gun"? When did your hypothetical motorcyclist become a gun-wielding cop killer too?

 

[protectionist]

I'll just put him in negative rep territory.

Yeah ? And why would that be ? (If you're not a speeding, reckless motorcyclist)

Because you're nuttier than a sack of cashews!

Welcome to the growing list of airheads with no answer to the question >> "Why should law abiding drivers have their lives jeopardized, when they could be protected just by having the cops blast this loon right off his vehicle, when the chase encounters an open road, free of traffic ?"

Ho Hum. Yawn **********

 

[protectionist]

Actually, a smart rider on a sportbike will usually get away in this area. By the time the first cop calls for and gets any help, the dude has stashed the bike someplace.

Who are you ? The president of Crime, Incorporated ? You talk like you'd like him to get away.

I live in the real world, child. No more and no less. I drive for a living & spend every day on the road. (I do 40-50,000 miles/year.)

All the more reason why you should be concerned about being protected from speeding, reckless motorcyclists. On the other hand, if you get killed by one of these screwballs, you could have somebody read off a statement at your funeral, that you're glad that no harm came to the motorcyclist who caused your death.

 

[protectionist]

And you think the average patrol cop is capable of reliably hitting a moving target at such ranges? I think the preparation you want should be yours.

The video wasn't there when I first came to the thread. And no, the officers should NOT endanger other lives by pursuing a high speed chase in traffic. On the open road it is better, but their chances of catching a motorcycle without backup or unless the iker wrecks are slim.

1. Yeah, I think the average cop can get close enough to the fool to hit him or his bike, and knock them off the road. If you watch the video you'll see a number of times where they were pretty close to one another. A second cop in the passenger seat could whack him with a shotgun and probably take him out on the first shot. And if he misses, so what ? A few shotgun shells ? No biggee. It's worth it, to save innocent lives. (maybe yours)

You have never fired a gun from a moving vehicle in your life and have no idea what you are blathering about! You have watched too many bad movies.

2. The thread is not about pursuing a high speed chase in traffic. Please don't change the subject. We have enough to talk about with the topic of the OP.

3. I see no reason why the cop couldn't catch up to a motorcycle, and you haven't shown any. I'll show you reasons why he could.
a. at any point the mc could lose control momentarily and be forced to slow down or even stop. When starting again, the cop could be right behind him.
b. There could be obstructions in the road (broken down vehicle, cows crossing road, construction cones, etc)
c. The mc could encounter a rough road condition, or start raining. etc etc.

You clearly do not understand the YAWNING CHASM the between performance of a bike and a car. Even a medium-sized (600-750cc) sportbike has performance that will equal a supercar. A true superbike (1000+cc) will dust ANY street car, period, end of discussion. A GSXR1300 will hit 100MPH before a new Corvette hits 60. It will run a 1/4 mile before a Mustang GT runs an 1/8 mile.

"Obstructions" will HELP a motorcyclist get away--it's much easier to slip through a work zone, a flock of geese, or past a disabled vehicle on a bike than in a car!

Fool post! A number of variables can cause a mc to have to slow down (just as I said-you haven't refuted a thing I said) You're just trying (obviously) to twist the discussion to how you think you can win (which is dumb)

As for what never has occured, you have never known if I have ever fired a gun from a moving vehicle, and YOU have no idea what you are blathering about! Actually, I've fired guns from moving vehicles quite a few times, both when I was in the US Army AND when I was in the Army National Guard.

You just canceled out any credibility you might have had. Be advised: never make assumptions on what you don't have the foggiest idea about.

And this whole discussion about firing at a motorcycle is idiocy. You point a pistol or a shotgun and you shoot. Nothing hard about it at all. The cop car could pull up right behind the mc, or even right alongside it. This doesn't even have to be discussed at all. What needs to be addressed is THIS >> "Why should law abiding drivers have their lives jeopardized, when they could be protected just by having the cops blast this loon right off his vehicle, when the chase encounters an open road, free of traffic ?"

...and nothing else.

 

[WinterBorn]

Dude! If I have to correct you repeatedly, I'm might have to start calling you DUMMY. You've been told repeatedly now, that we're talking about a very open stretch of road which is unpopulated, and only that. Got it now ?

From the OP and at least a half dozen posts >> "Why should law abiding drivers have their lives jeopardized, when they could be protected just by having the cops blast this loon right off his vehicle, when the chase encounters an open road, free of traffic ?"

Yeah, looks like I'm giving you shit about not being prepared (and not listening also)

Right, and the area around these roads are always empty?? Or are you expecting the cops to know when there are no people off the side of the road? The bullets travel quite a long way.

I am listening. I also know the definition of "bullets".

You didn't watch the video did you ? Yeah, I would expect the cops to know when there are no people off the side of the road. Did you think they were wearing blinders ? Pheeeeeww!! (high-pitched whistle)

The cops are focused on the suspect, not the area around the road. Given the distances the bullets will travel, plus the speed the squad car is travelling, they do not know with any certainty that there is no one within range.

 

[WinterBorn]

What?? off topic?? ya ok

Yeah, he gets a little nuts when the convo doesn't go his way.

I don't care one iota about the conversation going my way or any other way. I asked the question > "Why should law abiding drivers have their lives jeopardized, when they could be protected just by having the cops blast this loon right off his vehicle, when the chase encounters an open road, free of traffic ?

And neither you or anyone else I recall in this thread, has yet answered it. Burden is on YOU to come up with an answer. So far, you haven't.

Absolute nonsense! The burden is not on the people who require a trial before execution. The burden is on you to show that there is impending danger to anyone. Is there a chance that lives could be lost? Sure. Is there any certainty that lives will be lost if they do not execute the biker? Absolutely not.

 

[WinterBorn]

To answer the question of the OP title, perhaps we should evaluate the cost/benefit analysis of it. If cops don't shoot the jerk, rampaging through traffic at 100 MPH (or even at much lesser speeds), then a number of motorists might get killed, or badly injured. At some points in a high speed chase, the motorcylist may have full control of his vehicle (as on straightaways where traffic is absent). But as soon as he gets into traffic, everyone there is at huge risk.

Question is why ? Why should law abiding drivers have their lives jeopardized, when they could be protected just by having the cops blast this loon right off his vehicle, when the chase encounters an open road, free of traffic ? Shouldn't we take action to protect the public, and if the motorcycle criminal fool dies, from being shot, wouldn't that cop who shot him have done us all a favor ? (other than the guy who has to come along and clean up the mess)

I say blast him.

You are advocating that a cop execute the motorcyclist for speeding?? The OP says nothing about any other crime being committed.

Also, the cop's ability to remove the shotgun from the rack, maneuver it in the passenger seat and fire it out a window is very questionable. At close range it is certainly a death sentence. And you want him to kill the kid (because most of these crotch-rocket riders are kids or are at least very young adults) without any questions being asked?

Oh, and when you referred to "bullets" you ruled out the shotgun. The handgun the cop would use has a range of at least 1/4 mile if he misses. So if the motorcycle rider is in the open, on a road with no houses within 1/4 mile......

Yeah, you have made a fool of yourself.

NO, YOU just made a fool out of YOURself.

1. No, to remove a shotgun from its rack, maneuver it in the passenger seat , and fire it out a window is not questionable at all.

2. Death sentence ? No more so than a criminal committing a crime, who pulls out a gun and is shot by a cop (happens all the time). And the reason it happens is self-defense. Same reason for shooting the speeding, reckless motorcyclist. And if at this point you don't know why, you doing even worse in this thread than before (and that's not too good)

3. I ruled out nothing. The cop can choose what he wants to shoot with - either one or both. (Nice try, fool)

4. "if the motorcycle rider is in the open, on a road with no houses within 1/4 mile..." Yeah, well that's what we're talking about. Are you really asking me to remind you of that AGAINNNNNNNNN..?

1. Oh, and the cop will be firing left-handed. No, it is certainly not simple and the accuracy is certainly questionable. And while the danger to bystanders (unless you are out in the serious rural plains) is less, it still exists.

2. Cops are allowed to shoot in self defense. They are not allowed to shoot a suspect in the back to stop him from fleeing. And certainly not for the heinous crime of speeding.

 

[WinterBorn]

Absolutely OFF TOPIC!! This isn't about a "traffic ticket", and nobody said anything about a "kid"

Learn to READ, before you come bursting into a thread, talking like a fool.

The OP said nothing about any crime other than the speeding. So yeah, it is about a traffic ticket.

You dumbass! How many times do you have to be told that this is about >> THE LIVES OF INNOCENT MOTORISTS ON THE ROAD UP AHEAD ? I've lost count. I've told you this now 4 times ? 6 ? 7 ? Pheeeeewww!!

Yes, you keep repeating the same nonsense. But repeating it does not change the fact that there is not sufficient reason to execute a civilian. Especially for such minor crimes.

 

[WinterBorn]

Yeah, he gets a little nuts when the convo doesn't go his way.

He claims to be 68 but that has to be his IQ because nobody except a moron would go to such lengths to advocate executing a kid on a motorcycle for speeding. Protectionist is the kind of nut case we read about in the news.

So you would not advise a cop to shoot (and maybe "executing" to use your word) a criminal who pulls a gun on him ? So you'd rather have dead cops killed by criminals ? And you'd rather have dead motorists killed by a speeding, reckless motorcyclist ? Who would advocate THAT ? (other than a moron with an IQ of 68 maybe ?)

I have no problem advocating the execution of a criminal who points a gun at a cop. That is threatening deadly force, with a reasonable assumption that the cop would die. There is no such reasonable assumption in the traffic situation you are ranting about.

 

[WinterBorn]

He claims to be 68 but that has to be his IQ because nobody except a moron would go to such lengths to advocate executing a kid on a motorcycle for speeding. Protectionist is the kind of nut case we read about in the news.

If he is 68 (and I question that), he is one of those old men yelling for kids to get off his lawn.

I wonder if he does it with a shotgun in his hand?

Oh wait, I guess my comments are OFF TOPIC!

You're still oblivious to what's being discussed here. Did you go to college and major in stupidity ? A kid on a lawn isn't going to get a bunch of people killed. A speeding, reckless motorcyclist will do just that. GET IT ????

I get it. You cannot fathom the difference between might get someone killed, and a reasonable certainty that someone will die unless the cops take action.

The burden is on you to show that there is a reasonable certainty that someone will die if the cops take no action. In other words, is there a reasonable doubt that anyone will die? Of course there is.

And all your dramatics will not change that.

 

[Noomi]

Yeah ? And why would that be ? (If you're not a speeding, reckless motorcyclist)

Because you're nuttier than a sack of cashews!

Welcome to the growing list of airheads with no answer to the question >> "Why should law abiding drivers have their lives jeopardized, when they could be protected just by having the cops blast this loon right off his vehicle, when the chase encounters an open road, free of traffic ?"

Ho Hum. Yawn **********

If the chase enters an OPEN road, FREE of TRAFFIC, then LAW ABIDING CITIZENS are NOT at risk, ARE THEY????

 

[Noomi]

Yeah, he gets a little nuts when the convo doesn't go his way.

I don't care one iota about the conversation going my way or any other way. I asked the question > "Why should law abiding drivers have their lives jeopardized, when they could be protected just by having the cops blast this loon right off his vehicle, when the chase encounters an open road, free of traffic ?

And neither you or anyone else I recall in this thread, has yet answered it. Burden is on YOU to come up with an answer. So far, you haven't.

Absolute nonsense! The burden is not on the people who require a trial before execution. The burden is on you to show that there is impending danger to anyone. Is there a chance that lives could be lost? Sure. Is there any certainty that lives will be lost if they do not execute the biker? Absolutely not.

Lets run with his example, though. He believes the rider should be shot because he MIGHT endanger someone's life. Fair enough. Lets play with that.

Someone driving at one mile over the speed limit should be shot, while in their car, because they MIGHT endanger a life.

Someone walking down the street carrying their gun (which they may be legally allowed to do) should be shot because they MIGHT be planning on going on a shooting spree.

Someone who buys a set of steak knives should be shot because who knows, they might start stabbing people.

Protectionist could well be planning to endanger lives, yet no one is going to shoot him because of what he MIGHT do.

He's an ass.

 

[WinterBorn]

Yeah ? And why would that be ? (If you're not a speeding, reckless motorcyclist)

Because you're nuttier than a sack of cashews!

Welcome to the growing list of airheads with no answer to the question >> "Why should law abiding drivers have their lives jeopardized, when they could be protected just by having the cops blast this loon right off his vehicle, when the chase encounters an open road, free of traffic ?"

Ho Hum. Yawn **********

Care to show that there is any factual evidence that someone will die unless the cops act??

Here are some FACTS for you.

There are 7 million motorcycles registered in the US. There were a little over 5,000 motorcycle related traffic fatalities in 2012.

So only 0.071% of motorcycles are involved in fatal traffic accidents. And since the overwhelming majority of those fatalities will be the motorcyclists themselves, the burden is on YOU to show the need to execute bikers for speeding.

 

[WinterBorn]

Who are you ? The president of Crime, Incorporated ? You talk like you'd like him to get away.

I live in the real world, child. No more and no less. I drive for a living & spend every day on the road. (I do 40-50,000 miles/year.)

All the more reason why you should be concerned about being protected from speeding, reckless motorcyclists. On the other hand, if you get killed by one of these screwballs, you could have somebody read off a statement at your funeral, that you're glad that no harm came to the motorcyclist who caused your death.

If he drives for a living, I am betting he is not in some tiny Smartcar or Prius. Other than the tiniest of minicars, a motorcycle is unlikely to kill the driver. It might mess up his vehicle, but won't kill him.

As someone who has put 50k miles a year on my work truck, I feel no threat from crotch-rockets. I have driven by or seen many, many accidents. I do not recall a single one involving a motorcyclist who killed a car driver.

I do recall having had numerous near misses from idiots texting or doing something else stupid and not paying attention. How about the cops just shoot them?

 

[WinterBorn]

1. Yeah, I think the average cop can get close enough to the fool to hit him or his bike, and knock them off the road. If you watch the video you'll see a number of times where they were pretty close to one another. A second cop in the passenger seat could whack him with a shotgun and probably take him out on the first shot. And if he misses, so what ? A few shotgun shells ? No biggee. It's worth it, to save innocent lives. (maybe yours)

You have never fired a gun from a moving vehicle in your life and have no idea what you are blathering about! You have watched too many bad movies.

2. The thread is not about pursuing a high speed chase in traffic. Please don't change the subject. We have enough to talk about with the topic of the OP.

3. I see no reason why the cop couldn't catch up to a motorcycle, and you haven't shown any. I'll show you reasons why he could.
a. at any point the mc could lose control momentarily and be forced to slow down or even stop. When starting again, the cop could be right behind him.
b. There could be obstructions in the road (broken down vehicle, cows crossing road, construction cones, etc)
c. The mc could encounter a rough road condition, or start raining. etc etc.

You clearly do not understand the YAWNING CHASM the between performance of a bike and a car. Even a medium-sized (600-750cc) sportbike has performance that will equal a supercar. A true superbike (1000+cc) will dust ANY street car, period, end of discussion. A GSXR1300 will hit 100MPH before a new Corvette hits 60. It will run a 1/4 mile before a Mustang GT runs an 1/8 mile.

"Obstructions" will HELP a motorcyclist get away--it's much easier to slip through a work zone, a flock of geese, or past a disabled vehicle on a bike than in a car!

Fool post! A number of variables can cause a mc to have to slow down (just as I said-you haven't refuted a thing I said) You're just trying (obviously) to twist the discussion to how you think you can win (which is dumb)

As for what never has occured, you have never known if I have ever fired a gun from a moving vehicle, and YOU have no idea what you are blathering about! Actually, I've fired guns from moving vehicles quite a few times, both when I was in the US Army AND when I was in the Army National Guard.

You just canceled out any credibility you might have had. Be advised: never make assumptions on what you don't have the foggiest idea about.

And this whole discussion about firing at a motorcycle is idiocy. You point a pistol or a shotgun and you shoot. Nothing hard about it at all. The cop car could pull up right behind the mc, or even right alongside it. This doesn't even have to be discussed at all. What needs to be addressed is THIS >> "Why should law abiding drivers have their lives jeopardized, when they could be protected just by having the cops blast this loon right off his vehicle, when the chase encounters an open road, free of traffic ?"

...and nothing else.

Please tell us all what reason you had for shooting a gun from a moving car?

I would call that reckless and would say you endangered lives doing it.

Oh, and you still have not shown any evidence that the biker is going to harm anyone else. The chances are increased, but not to the point to allow execution for speeding.