Should Fleeing Motorcylists in High-Speed Chases Be Shot By Police ?

[protectionist]

To answer the question of the OP title, perhaps we should evaluate the cost/benefit analysis of it. If cops don't shoot the jerk, rampaging through traffic at 100 MPH (or even at much lesser speeds), then a number of motorists might get killed, or badly injured. At some points in a high speed chase, the motorcylist may have full control of his vehicle (as on straightaways where traffic is absent). But as soon as he gets into traffic, everyone there is at huge risk.

Question is why ? Why should law abiding drivers have their lives jeopardized, when they could be protected just by having the cops blast this loon right off his vehicle, when the chase encounters an open road, free of traffic ? Shouldn't we take action to protect the public, and if the motorcycle criminal fool dies, from being shot, wouldn't that cop who shot him have done us all a favor ? (other than the guy who has to come along and clean up the mess)

I say blast him.

 

[Indeependent]

You are presuming that officers of the law possess sharp shooter ability.
On Long Island, where officers are hired based on nepotism, I would hesitate to encourage such behavior.

 

[Katzndogz]

Sniper from a helicopter.

 

[Moonglow]

Should Fleeing Motorcylists in High-Speed Chases Be Shot BY Police ?

If you can shoot well.....

 

[whitehall]

Give some statistics to support your proposal. How many people (aside from the driver) have been killed by high speed motorcycles? Not many?

 

[OnePercenter]

yes!!!​

 

[R.C. Christian]

This isn't grand theft auto people. Aiming from a moving vehicle is hard, trust me.

 

[protectionist]

Give some statistics to support your proposal. How many people (aside from the driver) have been killed by high speed motorcycles? Not many?

Another stat freak huh? Why ? Is common sense not good enough ? Even if the statistic were zero, a high speed chase mc loon could kill a lot of people tomorrow. You don't get that ? Stats unecessary.

 

[protectionist]

This isn't grand theft auto people. Aiming from a moving vehicle is hard, trust me.

A guy on a motorcycle, out in the open, is an open target. I don't think it would be too hard to hit him. Nah. Troops in Afghanistan do it every day. In World War II, 50 Russian ROTC girls 19 years old, with less than 3 months training, flew fighter planes, and knocked over 200 Luftwaffe planes out of the sky. And those planes were moving faster than any motorcycle.

As long as there's no chance for collateral damage, where the mc is riding past undeveloped land (like in a Caught on Camera show I just saw), I say go for it.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

To answer the question of the OP title, perhaps we should evaluate the cost/benefit analysis of it. If cops don't shoot the jerk, rampaging through traffic at 100 MPH (or even at much lesser speeds), then a number of motorists might get killed, or badly injured. At some points in a high speed chase, the motorcylist may have full control of his vehicle (as on straightaways where traffic is absent). But as soon as he gets into traffic, everyone there is at huge risk.

Question is why ? Why should law abiding drivers have their lives jeopardized, when they could be protected just by having the cops blast this loon right off his vehicle, when the chase encounters an open road, free of traffic ? Shouldn't we take action to protect the public, and if the motorcycle criminal fool dies, from being shot, wouldn't that cop who shot him have done us all a favor ? (other than the guy who has to come along and clean up the mess)

I say blast him.

If cops shoot the jerk, rampaging through traffic at 100 MPH (or even at much lesser speeds), then a number of motorists might get killed, or badly injured.


hmm, not as simple as your mind

I would agree to shooting them if cops could guarantee what is impossible

 

[whitehall]

Give some statistics to support your proposal. How many people (aside from the driver) have been killed by high speed motorcycles? Not many?

Another stat freak huh? Why ? Is common sense not good enough ? Even if the statistic were zero, a high speed chase mc loon could kill a lot of people tomorrow. You don't get that ? Stats unecessary.

Common sense is good but if you want the authorization to put a pill in a guy on a bike you need more than anecdotal pop stupidness.

 

[protectionist]

To answer the question of the OP title, perhaps we should evaluate the cost/benefit analysis of it. If cops don't shoot the jerk, rampaging through traffic at 100 MPH (or even at much lesser speeds), then a number of motorists might get killed, or badly injured. At some points in a high speed chase, the motorcylist may have full control of his vehicle (as on straightaways where traffic is absent). But as soon as he gets into traffic, everyone there is at huge risk.

Question is why ? Why should law abiding drivers have their lives jeopardized, when they could be protected just by having the cops blast this loon right off his vehicle, when the chase encounters an open road, free of traffic ? Shouldn't we take action to protect the public, and if the motorcycle criminal fool dies, from being shot, wouldn't that cop who shot him have done us all a favor ? (other than the guy who has to come along and clean up the mess)

I say blast him.

If cops shoot the jerk, rampaging through traffic at 100 MPH (or even at much lesser speeds), then a number of motorists might get killed, or badly injured.


hmm, not as simple as your mind

I would agree to shooting them if cops could guarantee what is impossible

That was covered/answered on the OP. Try reading it a bit slower.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

To answer the question of the OP title, perhaps we should evaluate the cost/benefit analysis of it. If cops don't shoot the jerk, rampaging through traffic at 100 MPH (or even at much lesser speeds), then a number of motorists might get killed, or badly injured. At some points in a high speed chase, the motorcylist may have full control of his vehicle (as on straightaways where traffic is absent). But as soon as he gets into traffic, everyone there is at huge risk.

Question is why ? Why should law abiding drivers have their lives jeopardized, when they could be protected just by having the cops blast this loon right off his vehicle, when the chase encounters an open road, free of traffic ? Shouldn't we take action to protect the public, and if the motorcycle criminal fool dies, from being shot, wouldn't that cop who shot him have done us all a favor ? (other than the guy who has to come along and clean up the mess)

I say blast him.

You haven't thought this out very well, but then, you're kind of stupid, so.....

 

[protectionist]

Give some statistics to support your proposal. How many people (aside from the driver) have been killed by high speed motorcycles? Not many?

Another stat freak huh? Why ? Is common sense not good enough ? Even if the statistic were zero, a high speed chase mc loon could kill a lot of people tomorrow. You don't get that ? Stats unecessary.

Common sense is good but if you want the authorization to put a pill in a guy on a bike you need more than anecdotal pop stupidness.

Well, you already HAVE more than anecdotal pop stupidness. You have common sense and intelligence. Shoot the guy when it won't harm someone else, before he harms someone else. Get it ?

 

[protectionist]

To answer the question of the OP title, perhaps we should evaluate the cost/benefit analysis of it. If cops don't shoot the jerk, rampaging through traffic at 100 MPH (or even at much lesser speeds), then a number of motorists might get killed, or badly injured. At some points in a high speed chase, the motorcylist may have full control of his vehicle (as on straightaways where traffic is absent). But as soon as he gets into traffic, everyone there is at huge risk.

Question is why ? Why should law abiding drivers have their lives jeopardized, when they could be protected just by having the cops blast this loon right off his vehicle, when the chase encounters an open road, free of traffic ? Shouldn't we take action to protect the public, and if the motorcycle criminal fool dies, from being shot, wouldn't that cop who shot him have done us all a favor ? (other than the guy who has to come along and clean up the mess)

I say blast him.

You haven't thought this out very well, but then, you're kind of stupid, so.....

I have thought it out quite well, as you fail to see, revealing you to be the stupidity possessor. If you feel like you must display that, so be it.

 

[Tank]

Shoot him, don't shoot him?

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=urgQKNMdTQM]Motorcycle Runs From Police In Wheelie Cops Chase Stunt Bike ROC Ride Of The Century Blox Starz TV - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Tank]

Shoot him, don't shoot him?

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rCA8JM2bRPk]Wildest Police Chase with Motorcycle, Cop Crashes - YouTube[/ame]

 

[protectionist]

Shoot him, don't shoot him?

Motorcycle Runs From Police In Wheelie Cops Chase Stunt Bike ROC Ride Of The Century Blox Starz TV - YouTube

Don't shoot him unless he refuses to pull over for police. Cite him for reckless driving, and impound the motorcycle.

 

[protectionist]

Shoot him, don't shoot him?

Wildest Police Chase with Motorcycle, Cop Crashes - YouTube

Classic case for the idiot to have been shot. There were plenty of open road opportunities, where he could have been blasted right off his motorcycle, and no one hurt but him. Restrictive stupid rules must be preventing the cops from doing that.

 

[protectionist]

already posted - please delete