Shoplifters meet semi truck
- Thread starter MinGrey02Stg2
- Start date
Eesh. That car straight up PANCAKED itself on that semi. Impressive.
Oh, looks like the Flannigans dude is mimicking mashed potatoes.
No, law enforcement should be allowed to just shoot them and end the chase before it escalates and endangers law abiding citizens.
JMO
If people would work for what they want instead of stealing it there wouldn't be a need for police chases like this. Plain and simple they got what they deserved. I don't feel sorry for them.
I understand your point regarding it being worth chasing them over that crime, but once they fail to yield, it is a felony. The officer could have been pulling them over for expired tags, fail to yield, same scenario. Were really dealing with the same argument with a lot of these high profile shootings. All you have to do is stop.
I disagree. Ive spiked people before. Had hits and misses. We have "no spike" zones pre established. Such as a 1/4 mile before an overpass, certain sections of roads where there are too many intersections/deep ditches, etc. Certain distances from city limits...list is long. The reason is because you dont have time to think about the consequences of where the car might end up if the tires are flat and they lose control. Ive never once thought where the car could end up if he swerves. Youre on the radio making sure the right car is next, making sure your vehicle is out of the way, and you arent gonna get mowed down.
Its not violent, the system is actually called a Controlled Tire Deflation Device (CTDD) so they slowly go flat. If the guy swerves its his fault.
id like to see a shopping list of what they stole lol. xbox one? a tv? iphone? kitty litter and tampons? :bash:
glad it was a big rig and not a mini-van.
Please don't take my comment the wrong way.
The 'end result' of the criminal I couldn't give a shit about. We all have consequences for our actions.
The chase aspect is for the safety of other civilians. The first car just 'happened' to be a semi. I get that it's felony evasion, but many cities won't chase over X mph. They had a chopper on the guy, he wasn't getting away.
Shooting people over shoplifting is just internet talk. Go stand behind a register. Would you shoot some young kid for walking out with candy? I don't like POS meth heads either, but punishments need to fit crimes.
I basically feel they gave the guy a choice of stops sticks or traffic. Given the guy was still in his truck, I find it impromptu. Semi or not, I wouldn't want to sit in there getting hit at 80mph head on. Don't know what's going to be on fire, what might get you scalded in coolant, hell you can still get whiplash.
The question is was the semi there on purpose? The situation totally needs reviewed in how it was handled.
I basically just don't like the idea of endangering people to catch people that hadn't committed violence. NOW, I read a bunch of comments in the links and they definitely were running people off the road and the initial call came in as shots fired. They had it coming. Just don't want to see a family get smeared by 4000lbs of methhead at 80mph. A police vehicle should always be the buffer if they can.
The 'end result' of the criminal I couldn't give a shit about. We all have consequences for our actions.
The chase aspect is for the safety of other civilians. The first car just 'happened' to be a semi. I get that it's felony evasion, but many cities won't chase over X mph. They had a chopper on the guy, he wasn't getting away.
Shooting people over shoplifting is just internet talk. Go stand behind a register. Would you shoot some young kid for walking out with candy? I don't like POS meth heads either, but punishments need to fit crimes.
I basically feel they gave the guy a choice of stops sticks or traffic. Given the guy was still in his truck, I find it impromptu. Semi or not, I wouldn't want to sit in there getting hit at 80mph head on. Don't know what's going to be on fire, what might get you scalded in coolant, hell you can still get whiplash.
The question is was the semi there on purpose? The situation totally needs reviewed in how it was handled.
I basically just don't like the idea of endangering people to catch people that hadn't committed violence. NOW, I read a bunch of comments in the links and they definitely were running people off the road and the initial call came in as shots fired. They had it coming. Just don't want to see a family get smeared by 4000lbs of methhead at 80mph. A police vehicle should always be the buffer if they can.
Thats how I see it.
Oh my.
I agree with RSBeast 100%. Couldn't care less about the criminals but there was no reason to chase at those speeds because someone stole from walmart. Walmart doesn't care, they'll just write it off and get refunded. As said, cops were lucky it was a semi and not a van/car full of family members.
- Joined
- Jun 27, 2002
- Messages
- 2,908
Every department has its own policies on pursuits. And every one is different. Some let you go to the ends of the earth for a failure to yield, some call them off immediately for non violent crimes.
Theres an agency i know of that if a pursuit takes them out of their jurisdiction/or any other reason and the call is made to end it..they want them to say "they are terminating pursuit, deactiviting lights, and turning the other way" (or taking the next exit) Why? Because some shithead fled, they chased him, discontinued their pursuit but maintained a visual from a distance. Asshole got smashed at an intersection and sued. He claimed that he continued to flee because even tho the officer was far behind and obeying traffic control devices, he felt scared he was still behind him, so he ran. You cant make this shit up.
I dont know what this dept's policy is. Alot has to do with time of day, vehicle traffic, speed, weather, etc. whatever the case is this was the end result. Im interested to see the result in this if its considered unreasonable.
Theres an agency i know of that if a pursuit takes them out of their jurisdiction/or any other reason and the call is made to end it..they want them to say "they are terminating pursuit, deactiviting lights, and turning the other way" (or taking the next exit) Why? Because some shithead fled, they chased him, discontinued their pursuit but maintained a visual from a distance. Asshole got smashed at an intersection and sued. He claimed that he continued to flee because even tho the officer was far behind and obeying traffic control devices, he felt scared he was still behind him, so he ran. You cant make this shit up.
I dont know what this dept's policy is. Alot has to do with time of day, vehicle traffic, speed, weather, etc. whatever the case is this was the end result. Im interested to see the result in this if its considered unreasonable.
Last edited by a moderator:
No none forced the suspects to drive at those speeds. If you look at the video, the following officers were fairly far behind. The officers had ample time to stop and in an undramatic fashion. No one forced them to flee Walmart at over 100 mph. So much emapthy over truly stupid people who have no problem putting so many others in danger by their actions.
I agree. Our spike policy is pretty restrictive now. It really is a case by case with a shift supervisor monitoring the pursuit. If it wasnt already, Im guessing that will be a no spike zone in for that dept. now.
There is consequences for every action.
Justice has been served.
Courts adjourned..
Justice has been served.
Courts adjourned..
This was a local story. Nice to see the chlorine is working in this part of the pool called Kansas LOL.
F.u.b.a.r
Nobody is showing empathy for the criminals. We're weighing pros and cons of chasing them once they have shown they are willing to run at high speeds.
we all want them either in jail or dead, but neither at the cost of somebody on the way to get their kids from school.
Users who are viewing this thread
