Court: High-speed chase suspects can't sue police

A car is a very public item while a gun is not. You wouldn't permit an 18 year old to set up a gun range on a busy street but we do allow him to get behind the wheel of a 500 HP 3000 pound car on that same street.

Everybody likes to talk about driving not being a right, well let me hit you with one similar: when you pull out on the road, you are assuming a certain degree of risk. In short, it is legal in this country for an 18 year old to drive a 300, 400, or even 500 hp sports car. Take this fact into consideration before you get into a car, period.

Police should never have to stop chasing a suspect who refuses to pull over. By definition, anyone who does not does a lawful order to stop is either insane or more likely has committed a crime. I don’t want either one driving thru my neighborhood.

This is one of the best law and order decisions to come down all year. One can only hope that the next case will eliminate frivilous lawsuits from injured bystanders against the police who engage in such chases to apprehend felons. Anyone who is injured should sue the criminal, not the LEO.

You got that right. In order to satisfy the liberal trial lawyers, maybe we should just have a standing order to open fire on anyone who decides to run. That would put an end to these chases pretty quickly without risk to other drivers.

Of course, you can’t really blame felons for running - it’s human nature. As Cruise noted in Minority Report, “Everybody runs.” But the funny thing is, I’ve never felt the need to run. Guess I was just raised to obey the police.

Some intelligence from the SCOTUS.

And some contrast with the Dhimmicrats:

Codey ‘upset’ over focus on Corzine’s speed, seatbelt
Star-Ledger
Posted on 04/20/2007 7:54:49 PM EDT by Omega Man II
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1820964/posts

By that rationale, we should lock up everyone who commits any crime for life, because there might be a chance, someday down the road, that they will do something worse.

What, by my rational backed up by scripture, I simply prove that ignoring small crimes leads up to bigger crimes. (example: Clinton not taking action on the first WTC bombing with a truck bomb, directly lead to OBL to try his second deadly attack).. I am not saying that if you jaywalk you should be held in forever in prison, I am saying that if you get away with a crime once, you might be inclined to try it again and again until you get the message that it will not be tolerated.

And furthermore, the risk of injury to innocent person or property is simply too great from wild police chases.

I just proved that ignoring what you called a "petty" crime lead to the death of a fine man. Anyone with any semblance of common sense knows that people that are allowed to do evil and get away with it does not stop crime, it only encourages it. Compare crime statistics from the US to other countries where crime is held accountable, and see which country is floundering, and it seems wealth does not play a role because the poorer middle-east countries have nearly zero crime.

I will leave you with some more pearls.. I don't know if I cast them before swine or not... we will see..

* Let grace be shown to the wicked, yet he will not learn righteousness... Isa. 26:10

* A man of great wrath will suffer punishment; for if you rescue him, you will have to do it again. Prov. 19:19

"because lawlessness will abound, the love of many will grow cold" (Mat. 24:12).

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.