Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
That ladys ticket and small fine is going to pale in comparison to what shes going to get from that police dept in her settlement.
Ticket and small fine? I thought she's already been charged with multiple counts of felony evasion and child endangerment. Also, the 14 year old who got out of the vehicle was arrested as well for assaulting the officer. Sure, there will be legal wrangling, and there may be a good size settlement, but the charges should still stick and they should include jail time. You make it sound like she got caught jaywalking.
71 MPH in a 55 MPH Zone
She drove off then stops again. Son attacks cop, children screaming.
She fled the scene speeding with her children in the van weaving in and out of traffic even on the wrong side of the road. She could have killed innocent people along with her children due to her actions.
The mother placed herself and her children in danger. The way the woman was driving attempting to get away the media headlines could have read: Mother in speeding van fleeing from police crashed into another family killing entire family and her own children.
I do agree the cop firing his gun at the van was wrong, bad bad move on his part.
Yes, the entire situation was bad but who is at fault here?
I have received tickets in the past. I have pulled over, stopped, got out my license, registration and proof of insurance, accepted the warning or ticket and drove away. If I had a problem I showed up in court to fight the ticket.
Be fair here, this lady instigated the problems with the exception of the cop shooting at her. That is definitely wrong. Perhaps he was attempting to shoot out her tires.
Shooting out the tires, really?
71 in a 55 zone, are you kidding me? That is common place in many parts of the country as routine.
No one is excusing the woman's behavior but somehow that always comes up. This about shooting at people.
Firing a gun at someone is using lethal force. Lethal means deadly in case there is some misunderstanding.
Take the officer who smashed out the rear passenger side window with his baton. What was he going to do after that, jump in? Maybe open the door and drag out one of the kids as the minivan was moving? That is ok to do?
Lets not forget something here, the woman was stopped for speeding, not a hit and run, not anything else, just speeding. She took off. Got it. Now follow her and she has to stop somewhere right? Is that minivan going to outrun the police? Nope.
It comes down to some common sense. The police had backup and plenty of it. She wasn't going to get away.
Now, instead of an arrest for lots of violated traffic laws and the arrest of the 14 year old for assault/battery, there is going to be the internal affairs investigation, the lawsuits the police will lose, the taxpayers paying for the lawsuits and the resulting civil damages that woman is sure to get and for what, because the police couldn't think past being foolish and shooting at people?
The police had this in the bag. They could have come out of this smelling like roses, a good clean arrest. Instead look at this mess.
You never shoot into or at a moving vehicle with innocent people inside. What did the 3 other kids do wrong? They are the ones who were on the receiving end of inappropriate use of deadly force. Did you see the baton strikes? Lucky one of the kids head wasn't on the other side. Some glass in the eyes? Come on.
People run from the police every day, rarely are they shot at just because they ran. Running from the police is not a justification in any way for shooting at them. That is because shooting means killing and you need a lot more than just someone running before you fire that gun.
Is running the thing to do? Of course not but some people are stupid.
Is shooting at someone just because they ran the thing to do? Of course not, but some people are stupid and sometimes they are the police.
Ticket and small fine? I thought she's already been charged with multiple counts of felony evasion and child endangerment. Also, the 14 year old who got out of the vehicle was arrested as well for assaulting the officer. Sure, there will be legal wrangling, and there may be a good size settlement, but the charges should still stick and they should include jail time. You make it sound like she got caught jaywalking.
Have any idea what the penalty is for shooting at someone without justification? If you shoot at someone without justification, it doesn't matter if you are the common citizen or the police.
Child endangerment: the police that shot at them. Without justification, it becomes the police who put the other children in danger of being killed.
Some perspective of levels of danger is lacking here. Speeding or shooting at someone.
You can say the woman caused the situation. Not so. She caused everything until the officer pulled out his gun and shot at the minivan without being able to see who might be shot when he pulled the trigger. Once the officer pulled the trigger, he bought the whole ugly lot.
The police can't deprive you of life because you run. This is the United State of American, not Cuba, Colombia or some banana republic where anything goes if you are the police.
As my previous post indicates, I think there is no justification for what was done in this instance.
Now, to this. Let me say, spending 10 years in the field, you could not be more wrong. First off, most traffic stops are not due to John and Jane doe speeding a bit above the limit and a cop being bored. That's how drunks are caught, it's how most warrants are found, it's how most drug possession and sales are busted. The general public does not realize this, but traffic stops of 'normal' people are a good 10-20% chunk of what REAL traffic enforcement targets - "real" criminals. Criminals are crappy drivers.
And if you think speeders don't deserve attention, I'd like to know how many more people die in robberies per year than in traffic accidents, caused by speed and/or speed with impairment. I'm listening!
I could care less about any of that when I'm driving. I don't want to be harassed under that pretense when all I'm doing is trying to get to work or whatever and to do so at a pace slightly above that of a turtle pulling a refrigerator uphill. To justify harassing drivers based on that pretense is no different than to harass all people with bluejeans because most drug dealers wear blue jeans, or shutting down the ability for payphones to take incoming calls for honest people (if we still were doing payphones, you understand) because drug dealers page people & use payphones to do their deal. Same goes for banning dark window tinting because you can't see inside my car--I don't have any interest in letting more hot sunshine cook the inside of my car during the summer because the cops want to see inside there.
It's not that I'm hiding anything, I'm not, nor am I trying to disrespect the burden of a police officer trying to fight REAL criminal activities, but rather I KNOW I'm not a drug dealer or hiding a .45 gun to shoot anyone and want my car designed for what *I* like, not the cops who aren't making the payments on it, just because they don't know. By the same token I know I can drive 70 on most roads that have 55 as the limit (frankly, so are many other people, that's why everyone speeds, not because they have disdain for law & order) and don't want to be harassed when all I'm trying to do is drive at a speed that's a bit more up-to-date than the Model T era.
I could care less about any of that when I'm driving. I don't want to be harassed under that pretense when all I'm doing is trying to get to work or whatever and to do so at a pace slightly above that of a turtle pulling a refrigerator uphill. To justify harassing drivers based on that pretense is no different than to harass all people with bluejeans because most drug dealers wear blue jeans, or shutting down the ability for payphones to take incoming calls for honest people (if we still were doing payphones, you understand) because drug dealers page people & use payphones to do their deal. Same goes for banning dark window tinting because you can't see inside my car--I don't have any interest in letting more hot sunshine cook the inside of my car during the summer because the cops want to see inside there.
It's not that I'm hiding anything, I'm not, nor am I trying to disrespect the burden of a police officer trying to fight REAL criminal activities, but rather I KNOW I'm not a drug dealer or hiding a .45 gun to shoot anyone and want my car designed for what *I* like, not the cops who aren't making the payments on it, just because they don't know. By the same token I know I can drive 70 on most roads that have 55 as the limit (frankly, so are many other people, that's why everyone speeds, not because they have disdain for law & order) and don't want to be harassed when all I'm trying to do is drive at a speed that's a bit more up-to-date than the Model T era.
So, being stopped for speeding is now "harassment"?
Are you saying that she was profiled due to race?
I see an awful lot of white people being pulled over in my travels.
So, being stopped for speeding is now "harassment"?
Yes, it sure is. I've ALWAYS thought that, though. To me the whole speed limit thing as is is is nothing but a money-making racket & an excuse for a cop to go on a power trip. Calling speed limit enforcement a "safety measure" is like calling being raped up the rectum a colon cleansing operation.
Yes, it sure is. I've ALWAYS thought that, though. To me the whole speed limit thing as is is is nothing but a money-making racket & an excuse for a cop to go on a power trip. Calling speed limit enforcement a "safety measure" is like calling being raped up the rectum a colon cleansing operation.
Is your caretaker aware that you're on their computer?
I was a cop for several years. These officers totally overreacted and handled the situation very unprofessionally. As the officer had made initial contact with the woman, she could be identified as the driver and could have been arrested at her home for taking off from the traffic violation. One would think too the officer would have seen or heard the children in the van on initial contact, engaging in pursuits when children are in the car are handled with much more care and restraint. Usually officers will back off and just follow the person.
The officer breaking the window in the van was just uncalled for, what about glass fragments in the childrens eyes? People have been blinded like that. And shooting at the van when there was no imminent threat to the officers lives was absolutely wrong. They do not aim for tires, they use stop sticks for that. They certainly did not follow proper procedure. These two idiots should be fired and in jail themselves. Luckily no one was killed. This is why people distrust and label all cops as bullies, because of a few bad apples. It makes me sick.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
