Posted on 01/17/2014 9:12:59 AM PST by CedarDave
I’d kind of like to shoot every driver who drives badly. If I wear a blue shirt, do you think that will be enough? Or would I need a badge as well...
Tennessee v. Garner, 471 U.S. 1 (1985)
“Held: The Tennessee statute is unconstitutional insofar as it authorizes the use of deadly force against, as in this case, an apparently unarmed, nondangerous fleeing suspect; such force may not be used unless necessary to prevent the escape and the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious physical injury to the officer or others.”
http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/471/1/
If the cop noted her license plate and they looked her up the next day, would she still have been a threat to the public?
Agreed.
Ditto. Prayers to all involved!
Trying to change the discussion and delete/ignore the facts again. After failing to acknowledge any and all verbal instructions, emergency siren and lights she attempted to leave the place where she had just committed a violent felony. She assaulted an on duty LEO with a deadly weapon. That LEO will use what ever amount of force necessary to stop her from escaping and harming others. That is his job.
You said she represented a threat to all those people out at 2am in the morning.
I’m just repeating what you said. She should be shot because she MIGHT hurt someone in the future. That is a very low threshold.
Yes she “assaulted” the officer, probably didnt realize he was there, but she did apparently back into his car. Past tense here though. The threat was over when he shot her.
She represented zero threat to him when he shot her.
Watch the news.
You're right. Fleeing from "authority" is definitely a capital offfense not worthy of such worrysome things as a trial, jury or whatnot. Kill em all, after all, it's not like they are police officers or anything.
Really? It has been thoroughly adjudcated that the police have no responsibilty to protect you whatsoever.
Shoot ‘em all! They DARED not follow every law!!
BS.
The idea that cops should ram any car and cause it to go out of control likely killing someone is more BS.
The laws that allow cops to shoot and drive regardless of the dangers to innocent bystanders is more BS.
That dozens or more citizens are killed in accidental shooting or hit by cop cars in pursuit,yet the cop never has responsibility is BS.
We DO HAVE MORE criminals today and they are wearing police uniforms and robes, and conspiring in courthouses and Congress.
I say this cop hasn’t the temperament an American cop should have;and should be henceforth barred from any government employment or possession of weapons!
If Americans don’t wake up and rein in the police and government this nation will VERY SHORTLY be a police state.
May all the bootlickers choke on the polish.Or do cops polish the boots anymore? I see more and more wearing black uniforms with “ghosted” patches as though they are wannabe-SEALS.
Cops should be restricted to the traditional six shot revolver.
Lots fewer accidental discharges.
Spraying the general direction with a 16 shot magazine is irresponsible.It seems cops can’t stop shooting until the gun goes “click”;it needs to go “click” sooner.
The cops claimed they needed large magazines because the drug dealers had them but when and how often do you hear of shootouts with drug dealers in comparison to the fusillades unleashed against a man in a doorway reaching for his wallet ,an old lady in her living room,a mental patient, the family dog, or a confused driver?
“Fleeing” is one thing. But she tried to ram him with her carr. Different bird entirely.
So she thought it all out in that half of a second and decided that no one was driving that car with the revolving/flashing lights on top of it with a siren blaring. The driverless car had just followed her at high speeds and around shape turns for many minutes, right? OK we got it. She didn't know he, the driver, the cop, was there. What have you been smoking? If he was in the car or not it was still assault with a deadly weapon at the very least. It is a total BS, stupid contention to even suggest to that she didn't know he was there.
Anyone who, while evading legitimate law enforcement, drives at those insane excessive speeds and ignores stop signs in a residential area and uses her automobile as a weapon against a LEO is dangerous and deadly.
The decisions that led to her death were made by her. She is responsible for her own demise.
“No, I don’t think the cop was right to do what he did, but mitigating circumstances as I understand them warrants him finding another job, but not prison time.”
In this circumstance, I agree. I don’t think being a police officer should give one any special protection against prosecution. Yet, if someone just tried to back over me in their car, intentionally, would I, as a private citizen, feel threatened enough to shoot at them? Probably.
So, if I think any reasonable private citizen would be justified firing in self defense, I can’t rightly condemn a police officer for doing so.
This is different from that case a few weeks back, where the person led police on a chase, then, after exiting the vehicle, the police shot him down. In this case, the person was still behind the wheel, and whether they were going forward or back, that essentially meant they were still armed and dangerous.
“Should we start shooting everyone who drives with excessive speed?”
Meh, if someone just nearly killed me, and I think it was intentional, I’m shooting to kill them. I don’t care if they try to run, because I have no guarantee they won’t just throw it back in reverse and come back at me. So, I’d give the cop a pass on this one.
Well, let me ask you something. Say someone had just shot at a police officer with a firearm, and then was fleeing the scene, still armed with their weapon. Would the officer be justified in chasing them and trying to take them down, with lethal force if necessary?
Perhaps. Difference being, I’m not entirely sure she attempted to use her car as a weapon, any more than he did. Of course, you call it ‘assault with a deadly weapon’ when a police officer uses his car to try to force someone else to lose control of theirs. By the same token, it’s apparently never murder when cops kill citizens because we simply don’t matter to the powers that be.
Also, does that death sentence he was apparently so eager to hand out also include the passenger as well? I guess the passenger, had he been killed, would have just been more collateral damage for the police state.
Well, there is at least a difference of degree between ramming someone in a car with your car, and ramming someone not in a car with your car. Cops trying to run people off the road is certainly warranted in some situations, but like anything, they can abuse it.
Yet another case of a badgemonkey executing someone for contempt of cop. The Honda was moving AWAY from the asshat....he had to CHASE AFTER IT ON FOOT in order to murder the driver. Absolutely NO legal justification for
the use of deadly force.
“no, the cop says HE had the red light, therefore she had a green one. HE ran the red light to initiate the chase.”
Thanks for the correction.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.