I don't speed down streets where little children can dart out. That's the whole point. I gauge my speed to the conditions.
This is what it looks like where I speed. As you can see your supposition is completely false.
I don't speed down streets where little children can dart out. That's the whole point. I gauge my speed to the conditions.
This is what it looks like where I speed. As you can see your supposition is completely false.
I'll grant you that little kids darting out from behind bushes won't be there, and you're OK on that, but how about some of these guys ? >>>
https://www.google.com/search?q=ame...QTY54KIBA&sqi=2&ved=0CCgQsAQ&biw=1024&bih=605
For that matter, how about everyone who's in your car if you get a blowout ?
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.
I don't speed down streets where little children can dart out. That's the whole point. I gauge my speed to the conditions.
This is what it looks like where I speed. As you can see your supposition is completely false.
I'll grant you that little kids darting out from behind bushes won't be there, and you're OK on that, but how about some of these guys ? >>>
https://www.google.com/search?q=ame...QTY54KIBA&sqi=2&ved=0CCgQsAQ&biw=1024&bih=605
For that matter, how about everyone who's in your car if you get a blowout ?
I don't get blowouts. I use Z rated tires and they are retired after 20,000 miles. I have a friend who uses them for racing after I've used them up on the street. I am not your average speeder, I used to hold a Super License (I could race anything up to a F1 race car) I am used to living at high speed, but, I am a responsible speeder.
If it's not safe I don't do it. There are roads that I have sped on many, many times before, but if I come up to them and there is gravel or other crap on them, I don't speed there, the conditions have changed which makes it unsafe.
My car is maintained to perfection. It doesn't break, ever. If I am a little under the weather (like I am today) I don't speed, my reflexes are off. Hell today I didn't even drive, my wife did because I am taking a medication that I know impairs my ability to drive properly. Most would drive and I certainly could drive, but I chose not to.
Do you get the idea yet? I'm not you average speeder.
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.
High speed pursuit is always dangerous and is always under the supervision of a trained Sgt. or higher. Decisions on go, no go are made to protect the public. Shooting someone off a high speed bike is the stuff of video games and not something most agencies would consider except under very extraordinary situations. Today, in most urban areas, aircraft is used to follow in pursuit and vehicles on the ground follow at a safe distance and speed.
Area agencies know the bike or car will eventually run out of gas, crash or be picked up by next jurisdiction; trying to out run LE usually ends badly for the fools who attempt it.
I never seen video of a bike going 100 MPH after it hit a spike strip, though I know I wouldn't want to be on the bike when that happened.
You ARE stupid, aren't you. I wasn't calling the cops morons, I was calling YOU a moron. The cops aren't morons for wanting more power to use deadly force, they're the ones with the guns and the badges! YOU, on the other hand, have no power and are at their mercy, so if you want to give them even more power to kill citizens, that makes YOU a moron because you might be their next victim. But if it's true that God watches out for stupid people, you're probably safe.
