• TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
    Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
    Join free Log in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

How many cops does it take to stop a car? 23

#83
Jared Lash said:
I think the police were right to assume that he was armed. He had his own gun during the earlier robbery and left the scene of the struggle and shooting with the officer with his squad car and gun. It was absolutely reasonable to suspect that he had at least one, if not two guns in the car with him meaning that both occupants of the car could have been armed.

My issue isn't with that assumption. It's with the officers recklessly shooting 377 rounds at a disabled car. They had them pinned down and should have used better tactics. That's the case whether the suspect had a gun or not.
Click to expand...
agreed,but.....whether or not one is critical of cops,it is very difficult to second guess them in the middle of a firefight.....in this case it should be the cops that get the benefit of any doubt.....but for the perp,none of this would have happened and the danger was very real,and very immediate......
 
#84
Jim Campbell said:
agreed,but.....whether or not one is critical of cops,it is very difficult to second guess them in the middle of a firefight.....in this case it should be the cops that get the benefit of any doubt.....but for the perp,none of this would have happened and the danger was very real,and very immediate......
Click to expand...
Seems they could have done the shoot-up polka-style. "3 shots -wait. 3 shots - wait". this was more like a rave with free ecstasy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: eyeballkid
#88
will33 said:
A lot of peoples loved ones very much were threatened.....by 350 extra rounds flying all over the neighborhood....fired by police.
Click to expand...

I see your point and I don't disagree.

I should have said "threatened by the bad guy." If you were the lady who originally had a knife held to her throat, I doubt you'd give half a s##t about how the bad guy got his or who was endangered in the process. Maybe you would. Maybe you're a better man than I.

But it's still my opinion that MOST victims would not show any concern for the methods used to capture/kill/stop the bad guy.

And yes, the public at large was threatened by this entire ordeal; the chase, the shoot out, the original crime(s). But let's please always remember and never forget-- the BAD GUYS are at fault! They cause every iota of it (excepting rare cases of police misconduct). THEY are to blame. I hesitate to criticize the police at all, because to do so is to take the eye off the real wrongdoers, even if only for an instant.

If not for the bad guy, those cops would be sitting on the side of the road, eating donuts behind a billboard waiting for a speeder to go by...
 
  • Like
Reactions: blue4 and Tbone76
#89
ChrisB2 said:
I see your point and I don't disagree.

I should have said "threatened by the bad guy." If you were the lady who originally had a knife held to her throat, I doubt you'd give half a s##t about how the bad guy got his or who was endangered in the process. Maybe you would. Maybe you're a better man than I.

But it's still my opinion that MOST victims would not show any concern for the methods used to capture/kill/stop the bad guy.

And yes, the public at large was threatened by this entire ordeal; the chase, the shoot out, the original crime(s). But let's please always remember and never forget-- the BAD GUYS are at fault! They cause every iota of it (excepting rare cases of police misconduct). THEY are to blame. I hesitate to criticize the police at all, because to do so is to take the eye off the real wrongdoers, even if only for an instant.

If not for the bad guy, those cops would be sitting on the side of the road, eating donuts behind a billboard waiting for a speeder to go by...
Click to expand...
Fighting bad acts by citizens with bad acts by cops doesn't result in canceling bad acts out, it simply increases the bad acts.
 
#90
Was all this day or night? Not that it makes a lot of difference, but you have to figure the only cops firing anything should have been marksmen with long rifles that could "guarantee" not missing. All the rest had very limited visibility of what was behind the baddies (or baddie and fool ). Afaik they are trained not to shoot without a clear sight of what is downrange.
 
#92
Unrepresented said:
Fighting bad acts by citizens with bad acts by cops doesn't result in canceling bad acts out, it simply increases the bad acts.
Click to expand...

That has nothing to do with my post that you quoted.

...unless you're just disagreeing with me in general. If that's the case, then yeah. I don't think the cops acted "badly" in the sense you're using the word. Someone said "sloppy." Yes, I agree with sloppy. Someone said excessive. Can't argue there. Maybe even irresponsible and unprofessional. I'd go along with all of those. But since you're using the same word "bad" to describe the cops and the evildoer(s), you're making a moral judgment on the cops with which I totally disagree.

I think some are having trouble seeing the distinction between the good guys and the bad guys... or, are there no bad guys anymore? Is that a politically incorrect term? o_O
 
#94
ChrisB2 said:
I think some are having trouble seeing the distinction between the good guys and the bad guys... or, are there no bad guys anymore? Is that a politically incorrect term? o_O
Click to expand...
nope,no more bad guys...only those unfortunates accused of criminality due to varying degrees of unhappy or abused childhoods in which the severity is based on the quality of lawyer(s) they can afford
 
  • Like
Reactions: edpal
#98
Downunderwonder said:
Was all this day or night? Not that it makes a lot of difference, but you have to figure the only cops firing anything should have been marksmen with long rifles that could "guarantee" not missing. All the rest had very limited visibility of what was behind the baddies (or baddie and fool ). Afaik they are trained not to shoot without a clear sight of what is downrange.
Click to expand...
This wasn't a well-planned assassination. Firing into a broader target zone is a reasonable practice, particularly if your firepower is not such that it is guaranteed to penetrate any obstructing material. The handguns most cops in that situation were using would only have about a 50/50 chance of penetrating the various materials of the car and striking the target. The cops knew they were in the passenger compartment and swiss-cheesed the car. In this case it was that fine baby swiss with lots of tiny holes.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back