Posted on 05/27/2014 9:31:07 AM PDT by BuckeyeTexan
The Arkansas police officers who fired 15 rounds into a fleeing vehicle, killing both the driver and passenger, were justified in doing so, the Supreme Court ruled Monday.
In 2004, police officers in West Memphis ended a high-speed car chase by firing shots into the fleeing vehicle. The drivers of the car weren’t armed and were killed as a result of the firing, leading many to argue the use of force by the police squad was excessive. Not so, declared Justice Samuel Alito, who wrote the decision for the court.
“Under the circumstances present in this case,” Mr. Alito said, “we hold that the Fourth Amendment did not prohibit petitioners from using the deadly force that they employed to terminate the dangerous car chase.” “If police officers are justified in firing at a suspect in order to end a severe threat to public safety,” the high court held, “the officers need not stop shooting until the threat has ended.”
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
Bonnie and Clyde were shooting at the cops.
I don’t disagree with your point, generally speaking. They are high on adrenaline in those situations.
I have seen a few videos of the police assisting a passenger who wanted out of the vehicle.
“Donald Rickard led police officers on a high-speed car chase that came to a temporary halt when Rickard spun out into a parking lot. Rickard resumed maneuvering his car, and as he continued to use the accelerator even though his bumper was flush against a patrol car, an officer fired three shots into Rickard’s car. Rickard managed to drive away, almost hitting an officer in the process. Officers fired 12 more shots as Rickard sped away, striking him and his passenger, both of whom died from some combination of gunshot wounds and injuries suffered when the car eventually crashed.”
I don’t like police shootings. I’ve been involved in one and they (the police shooters) were a menace to innocents all around. That said, this is a justified action.
I also don’t like Monday morning quarterbacking. If you want to remove sovereign immunity, I’m with you. If you want to argue that in the heat of the moment you’d coolly shoot out the tires...
If you’re going to argue the cops cannot be expected to follow protocol because they are in the “heat of the moment” then I’m not with you.
Some police shootings are justified but the threshold is extremely low.
How many police shootings are judged to be wrong? Heck even the one in SF where they had the kid handcuffed and on the ground with 4 cops kneeling on him was initially ruled a good shoot.
As always the evil will twist good intentions to further its agenda.
I didn't see him attacking anyone...I did see the police kill an innocent woman in the passenger's seat...I did see a guy who was shot by the police drive into someone's house...If there would have been kids in the back seat they'd be dead too...
And if the guy would have survived, they'd likely have beat the crap out of him...Maybe they did anyway...
But one thing that strikes me is the cops had time to get out of their vehicles to try to smash the windows to get into the car, why was there not a cop car pulled up behind the guy so he couldn't back up...
Appears as tho the cops didn't want to arrest him, they wanted to shoot him...
Maybe its always been this way but when I was growing up I don’t remember cops being so quick to use deadly force.
The cops today seem to think they are our masters. We need law and order but not at this price.
But that didn't happen, did it???
Are cops biased in favor of cops? Yes. Are there bad shootings? Yes. Should there be sovereign immunity? No.
That said, this is a good shooting. The shoot for the tires nonsense isn’t convincing.
Donald Rickard led police officers on a high-speed car chase that came to a temporary halt when Rickard spun out into a parking lot. Rickard resumed maneuvering his car, and as he continued to use the accelerator even though his bumper was flush against a patrol car, an officer fired three shots into Rickard’s car. Rickard managed to drive away, almost hitting an officer in the process. Officers fired 12 more shots as Rickard sped away, striking him and his passenger, both of whom died from some combination of gunshot wounds and injuries suffered when the car eventually crashed.
Yes, it did.
No he didn't...At least not on the video...
Karma is a b*tch.
Side note: a vehicle moving at any speed is considered a deadly weapon, wait until driverless cars go renegade.
“Side note: a vehicle moving at any speed is considered a deadly weapon, “
So the cops can shoot at any vehicle at any time? No, there has to be intent.
We’ve all seen videos of cops stepping in front of cars and opening fire. The threshold for deadly force is too low.
As long as its only the cops deciding it was a good shoot I will rarely agree.
Thank you.
I hear ya,, Although until you stand in their shoes and stare into the eyes of the driver,, expect debate to continue.
Discharging a firearm at a moving vehicle can also be a risky deal. The line between fleeing arrest and wreaking fiery chaos and worse.. ? I don’t know.
One more reason just to stay in the bunker and play Fast and Furious racing games. :-/
This will quickly escalate into “Killing drivers that speed”. Before the summer is out, we will see a cop shoot someone going 20 mph over the limit, which is a felony in many States. The cop will not be prosecuted.
I understand what the case WAS!
The rules of engagement for police shooting American citizens are much less stringent than those for our Military in a war zone.
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.