No, collateral damage is never acceptable. But I have no problem with lethal force being used to stop fleeing drivers.
Well, I was sort of kidding on the square, but in war, collateral damage is often justified, though, with the computer control I envisioned, kept to a minimal risk. I thought you were going to say something about that Lapua going through the car, blowing it up, then going another 3 miles to go through two homes and hit a baby crib or something like that.
Actually, I see us heading to a future where every car will have an electronic radio passcode that can be read and accessed by police to just shut a car down (among a number of other uses). You and I might not see it, but it is coming--- I saw first hand folks working on such a goal back in the 1990s---
Time will come where operatives in the government (and world) very much want total control of people's lives both in surveillance, data gathering and control that people today simply do not imagine.
With that (similar to carbon credits) will be an effort to regulate what and how you eat by penalizing people for not "eating well" (a new way to tax the public). It is already here now being justified against the very poorest and sickest of people because they are the most vulnerable and easy, and once done, now they will have their foot in the door to justify more control over you and I.
And just wait until you see how they work AI into the equation. Day will come when machines will be telling people how to live, and they will do it.