“Why didn’t the cops just shoot her tires out?”
That’s EXACTLY what I was thinking. I just saw a brief video, but it looked like they were several of them right next to the car at one time.
I was listening to the radio on the way home tonight. The 2 hosts lean liberal (need to hear what the other side thinks from time to time). They both thought that the police acted appropriately because they must have thought it was a potential terror act and/or sucicide bomber. I get that; however, after I saw the video on TV, and saw that they didn’t shoot her when they were right next to her, I just didn’t get why they didn’t shoot out her tires. The radio hosts said that they probably saw the baby in the back and didn’t want to shoot her for fear of endangering the baby. That makes no sense to me at all - if they didn’t want to endager the baby then when they were right next to her, why on earth would they open fire when they were at a distance (at least that’s what it appears to be, based on the video I saw).
BTW - who knew we had an Arabic,US government-funded TV org? I surely didn’t. Apparently, they’re the ones that took the video.
You are reading my thoughts, as well. That moment in the video, where
she was at a stop and was surrounded by keystone cops was the moment
to either shoot and kill her or disable the vehicle. By allowing her to speed
off, she could have run over pedestrians or hit another vehicle. So, if they
thought she had a bomb, why didn’t they shoot her there or disable the vehicle, when they had the perfect moment? By allowing her to speed off
others became endangered.
The DC elites are in CYA mode.