Excessive force my ass! I think they showed great judgment in dealing with the perp. Throwing the car into reverse and taking another run at the perp - now that would be excessive…
I was reminded of the same one.
Very true.
“I will see your 930 foot-pounds of muzzle energy, and raise you eleventy million foot-pounds of CVPI.”
I think at the point we’re talking hitting someone with a CVPI, “knockdown power” is finally an appropriate term.
Truff.
Assuming an impact speed of 40mph a loaded CVPI has about 235,000 ft-lbs of energy!
I’ll bet he sues and gets a fat check. I already saw his lawyer saying "excessive force "
Only in America.
If he was shot, he could sue for that as well.
This is why there needs to be civil law that covers this. In my opinion, if you are injured anywhere in the U.S. while committing a felony, you should not have the ability to file a lawsuit.
That’s it! Thanks for sharing.
Agree with others that suing LE for UOF while resisting should not be legal.
He already crossed lethal force thresholds, hopefully the judge will tell him to get the **** out of Dodge with that bullshit and fine his lawyer court costs.
+1 This country is in desperate need of tort reform.
Yeah when a society permits an oxygen thief to sue a home owner for a broken leg sustained from falling through a sky light in a botched burglary or sue a rape victim for custody of a child spawned from the offense that society’s expiration date is in sight.
“but we’re progressive!”
Agree 100%, but I’d make it even more far reaching. Injury or death resulting during the commission of any crime = no civil case by the criminal, their survivors of anyone on their behalf. Criminal action for excessive force or other violations that resulted in said injury is OK. For example. You jay walk and squished = tough shit for you. No suing the driver cause you shouldn’t have been here in the first place. Break into a home and have the home owner melt your testicles off with an iron while he waits for the cops to show = tough shit for you and your family as far as civil suit, but homeowner goes to jail for whatever that charge would be.
People who chose to live and act outside the law should be treated as such.
Kind of puts the 9mm vs 45ACP into context…
Jaywalking is not a felony in most states. Torture with an iron is not acceptable when holding a crime suspect in most states. In either case, I cannot say this holds true for every part of the country, because things are really stacked against the hard working tax payer in this day and age.
Example: A homeowner shoots a home invader in the middle of the night, the home invader and his family should have no civil recourse.
Example: A burglar slips on loose carpeting on your stairs and breaks his leg while you are away from home. There should be no civil recourse.
The concept should apply to everyone.
Only problem is that most of congress, and pretty much all judges are lawyers… So yeah, we’re kinda effed there.
Imagine a tort reformed America… How wonderful would that be.
I’ve been seeing this video making the rounds on all sorts of social media with a lot of high five-ing and chest thumping going on. Before I say the next statement please believe that I have many close friends in LE and I respect what they do and am often the first one to defend them against those who hate the uniform often because they can’t exercise self control in an effort to keep from breaking the law. Was this really the best way to resolve the situation? When I look at this video my first reaction was: what if there was someone else within about a 25-30’ path that car just bashed through? A small child playing in the front yard or some other innocent person who was hiding in fear when they heard the gun shots, perhaps laying under a vehicle or behind the wall or something. Then what? We still all chest thumping if his actions killed three people? I can live with a stray bullet from a firearm because that’s a more effective method of dealing with such problems. You train regularly using firearms with this exact situation in mind. He effectively used a rocket launcher to dispatch a fly and in this case there was no collateral damage as a result so the explosion is entertaining but if there had been collateral damage… then what? Let’s be realistic, it’s hard to control a 5,000lb car at that speed and if there had been an innocent nearby he couldn’t have simply swerved to avoid them if they were in the direct path of that car. As soon as he left the road at that speed he was no longer in control and anyone who says he was would have just as much luck convincing me he could have bent the bullet after firing it to avoid innocent bystanders. I’m glad it all worked out for everyone (after the not-so-small tab of damages is paid by tax payers) but this could have very easily had a gruesome result and I don’t think people would have been so gung ho on his actions. In this day & age of cop hating reporting I’m VERY glad for everyone involved and everyone who wears a badge that this worked out but had it not it would have been yet another black eye on the profession and I’m not sure how that would have swung the pendulum in light of recent events. I guess I’m saying that the more I see it the less I support the actions of that officer. In fact, the immediate reaction from the to p radio chatter of the officer in charge of the scene seem to echo this same sentiment. I’m just not sure this is the best example of police control for those bringing it into question right now.
so people wouldnt be in danger if the officers had started shooting at the suspect or simply allowed him to go about his way?