Regarding the recent Supreme Court ruling (8 - 1 ) in favor of justifying the police, in essence, to "take out" a fleeing vehicle that is posing a threat of serious bodily injury or death to anyone else on the road. Why was this not a 9 -0 ruling? What is wrong with Justice Stevens? Why did the lower courts not throw out the lawsuit against the police?
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinio..._v_harris.rmvb
I see this type of situation to be very analogous to a situation in which an individual is walking down a public street randomly shooting a gun all over the place. We all know that when the police show up, the perpetrator's best case scenario is that he/she will be instructed to drop the gun and surrender. We also all know that if that option is offered and refused, the perpetrator is going to get shot and most likely killed.
After viewing the video, IMHO the judge(s) of the lower court(s) who
ruled that the lawsuit could proceed is a (are) dimwit(s) and Justice John Paul Stevens needs to retire. I wonder if he still has a driver's license?
If I were king, I would authorize VTV missiles if/when the vehicle entered a location where there was no risk of collateral damage.
Twice I've come very close to being taken out by a vehicle fleeing the police in a high speed chase. Each time I would have likely been killed by the collision as I then owned a Honda Civic.
P.S. The next time I see a police dashboard video like this, I hope the last transmission I hear on the police radio is "I've got tone...I'm taking the shot."
In all seriousness, perhaps someday soon some technowhiz will come up with an "electronic dart" or something that will disable the vehicle. In the meantime though, I believe the Supreme Court was right in their majority opinion. The police have to be able to defend the public from a clear and present danger such as the one shown in the video.
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinio..._v_harris.rmvb
I see this type of situation to be very analogous to a situation in which an individual is walking down a public street randomly shooting a gun all over the place. We all know that when the police show up, the perpetrator's best case scenario is that he/she will be instructed to drop the gun and surrender. We also all know that if that option is offered and refused, the perpetrator is going to get shot and most likely killed.
After viewing the video, IMHO the judge(s) of the lower court(s) who
ruled that the lawsuit could proceed is a (are) dimwit(s) and Justice John Paul Stevens needs to retire. I wonder if he still has a driver's license?

If I were king, I would authorize VTV missiles if/when the vehicle entered a location where there was no risk of collateral damage.

Twice I've come very close to being taken out by a vehicle fleeing the police in a high speed chase. Each time I would have likely been killed by the collision as I then owned a Honda Civic.
P.S. The next time I see a police dashboard video like this, I hope the last transmission I hear on the police radio is "I've got tone...I'm taking the shot."

In all seriousness, perhaps someday soon some technowhiz will come up with an "electronic dart" or something that will disable the vehicle. In the meantime though, I believe the Supreme Court was right in their majority opinion. The police have to be able to defend the public from a clear and present danger such as the one shown in the video.
Comment