That’s right; I fail to see how the actions the cops engaged, the results of which we KNOW, represent higher risk than the actions you recommended, which actions have unknown but indisputably high risk.
Maybe you should look up the definition of risk. Hint: after the fact, when the outcome is KNOWN, there IS none.
Put another way — a) it was said they shot at the tires and b) no one was injured by gunfire. These are FACTS. Therefore, maybe instead of pumping round after round of gunfire INTO the van — as you suggest — maybe the cops really DID shoot only at the tires — apparently, skillfully and successfully. I have fact based evidence of this. You have only conjecture on your side.
What’s more, only an idiot or a hyperpartisan with an agenda would deny that hitting a tire-flattening strip in a loaded van at high speed does NOT constitute a serious risk to the physical well-being of its occupants, and of those nearby.
You think those kids were all buckled in by a loving, caring mom?
They pumped multiple round at a moving target full of kids. There is no “at the tires”. They could easily have hit someone in another vehicle.
For a woman guilty of a minor traffic violation.
Hitting a spike strip which deflates the tires gradually is certainly less risky then shooting out those tires and risking collateral damage.
You think those kids were all buckled in by a loving, caring mom?
Do you know that until I was in my 30’s I always drove without using seat belts?
Man, I should have been locked up with ted Bundy.
I also used to J-Walk, and roll through stop signs with out stopping, hitch hike on freeways, shoot fireworks on the 4th of July, drink beer in a public park with children around, and I even smoked inside federal buildings.
Wow, I never realized how badly I needed to be shot by those law officers hired to enforce such laws in America.