Getting back to the topic, lets look at a few details: Did the Cadillac collide with the deputy's car, or did the deputy's car collide with the Cadillac? There is no dispute, however, about whether Harris stopped after the collision. He did not. Instead, he fled up another highway "reaching speeds of at least 90 miles per hour." There is also no dispute about whether Harris should have refrained, as he was fleeing, from repeatedly crossing double-yellow lines and passing cars on the wrong side of the highway. He did not. Nor is there a dispute about whether Harris stopped when he came to red lights. He did not. Now, it could have been that I would be saying that the chase ended when Harris drove his Cadillac head-on into a van full of high school kids. He did not -- thank God. He killed no one that night. You see, Deputy Scott made a decision. Realizing Harris posed a threat to innocent people, he secured approval from his supervisor to try to stop Harris with a "Precision Intervention Technique," which is designed to bump a fleeing vehicle at such an angle that it spins to stop. Because Harris was driving so fast, however, Scott could only manage to bump the Cadillac in the rear. He waited to do so where the road was flat and free of traffic. The Cadillac careened off the pavement and rolled over. Harris, of course, should have fastened his seat belt. Alas, he did not. He is now a paraplegic. Even so, you might have thought Harris would end up in court, considering all the things he did not do. And he did. But he is not the one in trouble. Deputy Scott is. Harris sued him. He argues Scott's action that night violated his Fourth Amendment right to be free from "unreasonable" seizures. The case was argued in the Supreme Court on Monday. If common sense governed in this case, there would be no case. Deputy Scott acted reasonably under the circumstances. But common sense has not governed in this case, federal judges have. Over the years, federal judges have encrusted the common sense language of the Constitution with convoluted legalisms. The Fourth Amendment guarantee against "unreasonable" seizures is no exception. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit, ruling against Scott, decided the relevant encrustation in this case was a Supreme Court precedent called Tennessee v. Garner. It examined an instance where a policeman shot a fleeing unarmed burglar as he climbed a fence. "A police officer may not seize an unarmed, non-dangerous suspect by shooting him in the head," ruled the Supreme Court. At the same time, the Supreme Court said: "Where the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a threat of serious physical harm, either to the officer or to others, it is not constitutionally unreasonable to prevent escape by using deadly force." With telling irony, the 11th Circuit decided that Harris in his speeding car was "unarmed" and "non-dangerous," but that Scott unconstitutionally endangered him by turning his sheriff's car into an instrument of "deadly force." It would be nice to believe the judges who decided this case in the lower courts put the legitimate interests of law-abiding citizens above the claimed rights of reckless lawbreaker. They did not. Nuff said
I, as a civilian, have a legitimate interest to be safe on the roads.
Yes, Officer Scott was very lucky not to have killed anyone while doing his "Precision Intervention Technique". But does this make it right ?
As i have said numerous times in this thread already, we have lost lives, real lives, not the scum bags your refer to, because a police office is to proud to let a chase go when he sees he is causing more harm than good.
The guy was doing 15mph over, sure this is ilegal, did he deserved to be rammed and have his livelyhood taken away from him because of that.
No one deserves this from elected officials.
If speeding is so dangerous, why did the officer continue to follow him when all it di was make him go faster ?
Which ultimately led to him becoming a paraplegic.
Im not saying that the guy has a right to speed, i just think the police should make a bit more of a moral choice before electing to risk my life under the guise of my 'legitimate interests', trying telling the 9yo girl who was killed over here that they were protecting her legitimate interests.
If you only answer one of my questions, please answer this one though.
How would you feel if your son/daughter was killed by a police officer giving chase through a residential/school area, loosing control (even the greatest race drivers in highly tuned and engineered machines loose control some times) and careening through your front fence ?
How would you feel if the police saw a speeder and did nothing since they shouldn't be concerned with speeders and that same speeder lost control and ran into your family and killed them? Who would you blame the guy in the car or the police for not doing anything?
And to answer the question if this had happend would I be mad and upset yes, but I would not be mad at the police I would be mad at the asshole who was fleeing the police and put them into that situation.
DOAC is still the MMO I judge other games by, My first and still my favorite.
How would you feel if the police saw a speeder and did nothing since they shouldn't be concerned with speeders and that same speeder lost control and ran into your family and killed them? Who would you blame the guy in the car or the police for not doing anything?
And to answer the question if this had happend would I be mad and upset yes, but I would not be mad at the police I would be mad at the asshole who was fleeing the police and put them into that situation.
Its a double edged sword. The cops should chase, but should also know when to just get the plates and let the guy go. Innocent people will always be in harms way during a high speed chase, both from the perpetrator and also the police. We just have to hope that the police are smart enough to know when to use force or back off.
How would you feel if the police saw a speeder and did nothing since they shouldn't be concerned with speeders and that same speeder lost control and ran into your family and killed them? Who would you blame the guy in the car or the police for not doing anything?
And to answer the question if this had happend would I be mad and upset yes, but I would not be mad at the police I would be mad at the asshole who was fleeing the police and put them into that situation.
Ok here is a hypothetical situation for you and outfctrl to think about.
A man breaks into a house next door to you. A cop sees it and runs straight into the house weapon drawn. The cop confronts the thief who appears to be armed. Without saying anything the cop opens fire. Bullets start flying and one bullet goes through the walls and hits your 3 year old son in the chest killing him.....
Now whose fault is it? Who is responsible?
The cop has clear rules and procedures he MUST follow. And in that situation he followed none of them. He didnt call for back up. Didnt give the guy a chance to give up. He just opened fire.
Cops have procedures and rules they must follow in regards to high speed pursuits as well. While some states really dont care most have a clear set of rules that must be followed. If Georgia has a set of rules similiar to most states then the cop was in the wrong also. Yes the idiot speeder was a moron and deserved what he got for being dumb enough to flee but the cop shouldnt have pursued him in the first place. Honestly I think the cop should have been suspended for a few weeks and reprimanded. But not sued.
Here is the real question. Do you want a police force that makes up things as they go along? You want a police force that follows whatever rules are conveniant and ignores the rest?
This is a bit of a multi issue, I seriously doubt the guy will see one dollar of the money due to the fact that here in the US you are not allowed to profit from a crime. He could specify that the money be given to a charity but he would not be allowed to keep any of it. The ruling is probably more of a token slap in the face to the officer, and a highlight of the need for a uniform code on a federal level, not just local or state. Even better would be to force the automotive industry to put a device in all cars that could be electronically triggered to slow or stop a car and for the law to make it a felony to tamper with that device, or not have one installed after a set date.
I do know the other side of this coin, I was born with a lead foot. I started driving when I was 14 and was never comfortable at any speed less than 120mph, it's one of the reasons I no longer drive except for emergencies. I didn't give a damn if I took my own self out, but after seeing the aftermath of a couple crashes, including one where my aunt was the passenger in a speeding car and wound up in a coma for 3 months before dying, afer which the &^%^&&^ went to the junkyard and tried to get the tires from her car which he had been driving at the time of the accident, I found myself not wanting to injure anyone else with my own insanity. If I had ever hit some child and killed, or crippled them for life, I probably would have shot myself. I only got caught once, I had slowed down from 140 to 78 to pass a group of cars and a trooper was hiding behind a bridge, I didn't run because my own personal code says when you're caught you suck it up and take what's coming to you like a man, few people are of a like opinion.
As to the arguments about police abuse I've seen all different types of cops, there's good cops out there, but not all are good. Old school cops are usually the better ones, we use to have old school cops on our west side, they knew the people, even the most diverse ones. The old cops would never harass punk rockers here back in the 80's, they got to know them and knew that most were just harmless kids shaving their heads and having fun, our biggest problem came from rich snots from the suburbs who would come in, start fights, and destroy property. A few years back they closed down the local stations, retired a lot of the older cops, and started having police from other "richer" sections patrol the west side, now most of the cops are jerks.
When I was growing up I noticed how it was mostly the bullies and biggest troublemakers who would go on to become officers, some would mellow and become good streetwise cops, others never grew out of the bully phase. I've seen police get away with everything including murder. We had an incident here back in the 70's when a group of off duty police beat a kid to death, he'd been a busboy at a restaurant where the police would come after they got off and people here all believe that he overheard something. For the savage beating they lost their jobs, and were sent to a local "white collar" prison here, BUT just for weekends. The prison has no fence, it does have a tennis court, pools, racquet ball courts, and all kinds of other amenities. A police officer has a position of trust in the community, but when that trust is abused they should be subject to even harsher penalties, not coddled.
I don't believe that the officer in the case this post is about abused that trust, or that he should be punished for it, the fault lies with the driver, if he hadn't been acting the fool he wouldn't have gotten injured. If he'd been a real man in the first place, stopped and taken the ticket and fine, instead of running and risking the lives of everyone his car passed, he wouldn't be a quadriplegic today. So for him I say simply, tough, you caused it now live with it.
How would you feel if the police saw a speeder and did nothing since they shouldn't be concerned with speeders and that same speeder lost control and ran into your family and killed them? Who would you blame the guy in the car or the police for not doing anything?
And to answer the question if this had happend would I be mad and upset yes, but I would not be mad at the police I would be mad at the asshole who was fleeing the police and put them into that situation.
Ok here is a hypothetical situation for you and outfctrl to think about.
A man breaks into a house next door to you. A cop sees it and runs straight into the house weapon drawn. The cop confronts the thief who appears to be armed. Without saying anything the cop opens fire. Bullets start flying and one bullet goes through the walls and hits your 3 year old son in the chest killing him.....
Now whose fault is it? Who is responsible?
The cop has clear rules and procedures he MUST follow. And in that situation he followed none of them. He didnt call for back up. Didnt give the guy a chance to give up. He just opened fire.
Cops have procedures and rules they must follow in regards to high speed pursuits as well. While some states really dont care most have a clear set of rules that must be followed. If Georgia has a set of rules similiar to most states then the cop was in the wrong also. Yes the idiot speeder was a moron and deserved what he got for being dumb enough to flee but the cop shouldnt have pursued him in the first place. Honestly I think the cop should have been suspended for a few weeks and reprimanded. But not sued.
Here is the real question. Do you want a police force that makes up things as they go along? You want a police force that follows whatever rules are conveniant and ignores the rest?
Kai
I want a cop to stay out of my house even if someone else is robbing it. My security is my business.
I strongly disagree with the use of speed cameras. What if the car is being driven by someone other than the owner? I've been in cases where my friend didn't want to drive so he gave me his keys. Also, catching someone for a traffic violation is a good way to run their record and if they have a warrant. Also, if they are drunk the speed camera will not know.
I'm totaly with you on this one, I think they are completely ignoring the spirit of the law, in favor of trying to get the city a few extra bucks.
Actually in the uk we use modern speed cameras that take a picture of the drivers face too and within 2 years we are getting speed cameras that work from 5 miles away.
Comments
Yes, Officer Scott was very lucky not to have killed anyone while doing his "Precision Intervention Technique". But does this make it right ?
As i have said numerous times in this thread already, we have lost lives, real lives, not the scum bags your refer to, because a police office is to proud to let a chase go when he sees he is causing more harm than good.
The guy was doing 15mph over, sure this is ilegal, did he deserved to be rammed and have his livelyhood taken away from him because of that.
No one deserves this from elected officials.
If speeding is so dangerous, why did the officer continue to follow him when all it di was make him go faster ?
Which ultimately led to him becoming a paraplegic.
Im not saying that the guy has a right to speed, i just think the police should make a bit more of a moral choice before electing to risk my life under the guise of my 'legitimate interests', trying telling the 9yo girl who was killed over here that they were protecting her legitimate interests.
If you only answer one of my questions, please answer this one though.
How would you feel if your son/daughter was killed by a police officer giving chase through a residential/school area, loosing control (even the greatest race drivers in highly tuned and engineered machines loose control some times) and careening through your front fence ?
How would you feel if the police saw a speeder and did nothing since they shouldn't be concerned with speeders and that same speeder lost control and ran into your family and killed them? Who would you blame the guy in the car or the police for not doing anything?
And to answer the question if this had happend would I be mad and upset yes, but I would not be mad at the police I would be mad at the asshole who was fleeing the police and put them into that situation.
Ditto!!!
Exactly how I feel.
A man breaks into a house next door to you. A cop sees it and runs straight into the house weapon drawn. The cop confronts the thief who appears to be armed. Without saying anything the cop opens fire. Bullets start flying and one bullet goes through the walls and hits your 3 year old son in the chest killing him.....
Now whose fault is it? Who is responsible?
The cop has clear rules and procedures he MUST follow. And in that situation he followed none of them. He didnt call for back up. Didnt give the guy a chance to give up. He just opened fire.
Cops have procedures and rules they must follow in regards to high speed pursuits as well. While some states really dont care most have a clear set of rules that must be followed. If Georgia has a set of rules similiar to most states then the cop was in the wrong also. Yes the idiot speeder was a moron and deserved what he got for being dumb enough to flee but the cop shouldnt have pursued him in the first place. Honestly I think the cop should have been suspended for a few weeks and reprimanded. But not sued.
Here is the real question. Do you want a police force that makes up things as they go along? You want a police force that follows whatever rules are conveniant and ignores the rest?
Kai
This is a bit of a multi issue, I seriously doubt the guy will see one dollar of the money due to the fact that here in the US you are not allowed to profit from a crime. He could specify that the money be given to a charity but he would not be allowed to keep any of it. The ruling is probably more of a token slap in the face to the officer, and a highlight of the need for a uniform code on a federal level, not just local or state. Even better would be to force the automotive industry to put a device in all cars that could be electronically triggered to slow or stop a car and for the law to make it a felony to tamper with that device, or not have one installed after a set date.
I do know the other side of this coin, I was born with a lead foot. I started driving when I was 14 and was never comfortable at any speed less than 120mph, it's one of the reasons I no longer drive except for emergencies. I didn't give a damn if I took my own self out, but after seeing the aftermath of a couple crashes, including one where my aunt was the passenger in a speeding car and wound up in a coma for 3 months before dying, afer which the &^%^&&^ went to the junkyard and tried to get the tires from her car which he had been driving at the time of the accident, I found myself not wanting to injure anyone else with my own insanity. If I had ever hit some child and killed, or crippled them for life, I probably would have shot myself. I only got caught once, I had slowed down from 140 to 78 to pass a group of cars and a trooper was hiding behind a bridge, I didn't run because my own personal code says when you're caught you suck it up and take what's coming to you like a man, few people are of a like opinion.
As to the arguments about police abuse I've seen all different types of cops, there's good cops out there, but not all are good. Old school cops are usually the better ones, we use to have old school cops on our west side, they knew the people, even the most diverse ones. The old cops would never harass punk rockers here back in the 80's, they got to know them and knew that most were just harmless kids shaving their heads and having fun, our biggest problem came from rich snots from the suburbs who would come in, start fights, and destroy property. A few years back they closed down the local stations, retired a lot of the older cops, and started having police from other "richer" sections patrol the west side, now most of the cops are jerks.
When I was growing up I noticed how it was mostly the bullies and biggest troublemakers who would go on to become officers, some would mellow and become good streetwise cops, others never grew out of the bully phase. I've seen police get away with everything including murder. We had an incident here back in the 70's when a group of off duty police beat a kid to death, he'd been a busboy at a restaurant where the police would come after they got off and people here all believe that he overheard something. For the savage beating they lost their jobs, and were sent to a local "white collar" prison here, BUT just for weekends. The prison has no fence, it does have a tennis court, pools, racquet ball courts, and all kinds of other amenities. A police officer has a position of trust in the community, but when that trust is abused they should be subject to even harsher penalties, not coddled.
I don't believe that the officer in the case this post is about abused that trust, or that he should be punished for it, the fault lies with the driver, if he hadn't been acting the fool he wouldn't have gotten injured. If he'd been a real man in the first place, stopped and taken the ticket and fine, instead of running and risking the lives of everyone his car passed, he wouldn't be a quadriplegic today. So for him I say simply, tough, you caused it now live with it.
µV
A man breaks into a house next door to you. A cop sees it and runs straight into the house weapon drawn. The cop confronts the thief who appears to be armed. Without saying anything the cop opens fire. Bullets start flying and one bullet goes through the walls and hits your 3 year old son in the chest killing him.....
Now whose fault is it? Who is responsible?
The cop has clear rules and procedures he MUST follow. And in that situation he followed none of them. He didnt call for back up. Didnt give the guy a chance to give up. He just opened fire.
Cops have procedures and rules they must follow in regards to high speed pursuits as well. While some states really dont care most have a clear set of rules that must be followed. If Georgia has a set of rules similiar to most states then the cop was in the wrong also. Yes the idiot speeder was a moron and deserved what he got for being dumb enough to flee but the cop shouldnt have pursued him in the first place. Honestly I think the cop should have been suspended for a few weeks and reprimanded. But not sued.
Here is the real question. Do you want a police force that makes up things as they go along? You want a police force that follows whatever rules are conveniant and ignores the rest?
Kai
I want a cop to stay out of my house even if someone else is robbing it. My security is my business.
Actually in the uk we use modern speed cameras that take a picture of the drivers face too and within 2 years we are getting speed cameras that work from 5 miles away.
We won't need speed camera's at all once they install the satelitte tracking pay as you drive thing in your car.