the real problem here is our society highly desires large horsepower high speed automobiles and sets a reasonable speed limit for safety that everyone is able to exceed--if we stopped buying and driving race cars the problem of high speed chases would be eliminated and we would all be safer.
Nebor
Lifer
- Jun 24, 2003
- 29,582
- 12
- 76
That's a little too big brothery for my tastes.
I'd say the cops went too far, knowing that there was a passenger in the car. The police would KNOW for certain that that wreck would be unsurvivable in an SUV going 100mph+. The PIT maneuver was akin to driving up next to them and shooting them.
They could have set up a road block, used a helicopter, any number of things. That maneuver at those speeds is deadly...they might as well have shot at them.
That being said, they made a call, and it went bad but you can't fault the cops for wanting to get those kids off the road. Personally I would have kept the pursuit and waited for them to either run out of gas or simply stop once they realize there is no where for them to go, but I'm not a cop. High speed pursuits hardly ever seem worth the damage they do.
That being said, they made a call, and it went bad but you can't fault the cops for wanting to get those kids off the road. Personally I would have kept the pursuit and waited for them to either run out of gas or simply stop once they realize there is no where for them to go, but I'm not a cop. High speed pursuits hardly ever seem worth the damage they do.
Yes. If you run from the cops,especially at such high speeds, you are putting other people at risk. If another driver had pulled in front of her, all you naysayers would be singing another tune. The cops are usually damned if they do and damned if they don't.
If the cops shoot at the tire and miss, you risk a ricochet and injury to an innocent. While the PIT manuver is SAFER at lower speeds, a fatal injury is still a possibility.
What is a helicopter going to do, track them until they stop?? Given the amount of traffic on the road and the reckless driving exhibited in the video footage, they are lucky that SCHP didn't do it earlier.
As for gun(g)ho Georgia Police...... what would you expect? A note to your mommy???? Get real.
This girl was 17 and like most 17 yo, think they are immune from this sort of tragedy, because they DO NOT THINK through the consequences of their actions, and are still just a few years past believing that cartoons are how real life is.
Darwin Award nominee, fer sure.
The lesson here is When the cop lights you up, PULL THE FVCK OVER!!!! The ticket is never as high as the price she paid.
The passenger's parents need to sue the driver's parents. The Troopers were protecting the rest of us from those idiots. They deserve a raise, imo.
If the cops shoot at the tire and miss, you risk a ricochet and injury to an innocent. While the PIT manuver is SAFER at lower speeds, a fatal injury is still a possibility.
What is a helicopter going to do, track them until they stop?? Given the amount of traffic on the road and the reckless driving exhibited in the video footage, they are lucky that SCHP didn't do it earlier.
As for gun(g)ho Georgia Police...... what would you expect? A note to your mommy???? Get real.
This girl was 17 and like most 17 yo, think they are immune from this sort of tragedy, because they DO NOT THINK through the consequences of their actions, and are still just a few years past believing that cartoons are how real life is.
Darwin Award nominee, fer sure.
The lesson here is When the cop lights you up, PULL THE FVCK OVER!!!! The ticket is never as high as the price she paid.
The passenger's parents need to sue the driver's parents. The Troopers were protecting the rest of us from those idiots. They deserve a raise, imo.
The fact that there is arguement over this video shows that the cops didn't make the wisest decision.
People will argue over anything, it proves nothing exept maybe that we have far too many kids and/or bleeding hearts at ATOT.
I doubt it. 1) Kids can't drive for sh*t, as evidenced by insurance rates. They improve a bit by 25, but she was 17; she had just started. 2) This kid in particular made other kids look like exemplary drivers, as evidenced by her ticket history. 3) Anyone in that situation would be full of adrenaline and not thinking properly, likely to make mistakes in judgement even after the immediate threat was gone. Especially such an inexperienced driver. Especially one with such a history of recklessness.
I think the threat would have been just as great for probably a half hour afterward, and probably not far behind any time this nut got behind the wheel.
There's not an amicable solution to every problem. Much as most of you would like to think it, there's no way the police & this girl could have ended it safely and forgiven each other later over ice cream sundaes and walked off into the sunset to be happy ever after. Idealism has its place, but this situation isn't it. You can't blame the police for everything you don't like either.
Nebor
Lifer
- Jun 24, 2003
- 29,582
- 12
- 76
My problem is, the police knew that those people would die. That cop made a decision to kill them in order to get them off the road. In my opinion, that is the worst decision he could have made. Letting them go would have been safer. Did they try contacting the girls parents so they could call her and talk to her during the 60 minute chase?
I don't agree and can't unless I see solid numbers backing that up (SUV accidents at 100mph). And even if you can provide that, I'd question their training more than their motives; I very seriously doubt they did what they did with the intention of killing the occupants of the SUV. They were, however, trying to stop the vehicle's movement before it hurt others. We all know what happens when SUVs hit cars, cars being what the majority of vehicles on the road are, hence what they'd have been most likely to hit. If the best & fastest way to do that put the occupants at risk, so be it. It's unfortunate but not every situation can turn up peaches. The driver is the one who insisted on there being a dangerous situation.
There are too many fingers here looking for someone to point at and, in the absence of a live 17 year-old girl who probably wouldn't care anyway, too many have settled on pointing at the police imo. I find myself questioning ATOT's "12-18 y/o virgins" rep here, wondering if most people in this thread would feel the same if a pic showed the girl to be "fugly" (ie 9.5/10 or lower) or if she'd been male instead.
There are too many fingers here looking for someone to point at and, in the absence of a live 17 year-old girl who probably wouldn't care anyway, too many have settled on pointing at the police imo. I find myself questioning ATOT's "12-18 y/o virgins" rep here, wondering if most people in this thread would feel the same if a pic showed the girl to be "fugly" (ie 9.5/10 or lower) or if she'd been male instead.
So if it's between them and someone whose biggest mistake was picking the wrong day to go grocery shopping, who should it be?
Nebor
Lifer
- Jun 24, 2003
- 29,582
- 12
- 76
He's saying that it's better for the police to have killed the subjects rather than allow them to crash into an innocent person going grocery shopping.
My argument is that while there was a small chance that they might have hit someone else (they went an hour at high speed without incident, what's another few minutes?) they were CERTAIN that PITing them would be fatal. They chose between a chance for injury or death and certain death. I feel they made the wrong decision.
His argument is based on fallacious reasoning that they WOULD have hurt someone. Thus I am forced to conclude that it is illogical.
Yours is based on the assumption that they definitely wouldn't have, and that the PIT maneuver had a 100% chance of death for the occupants. Also, I seem to remember reading that they were coming up on an area with much more traffic than where they were for the hour or so of the chase.
I'd still like to see numbers. We also don't know what kind of traffic situation they may have been coming up on; they may very well have had a probable chance at hitting & killing innocent people.
No, my argument is based on the fact that the PITT killed them, whereas I'm a CJ major who has had instruction on numerous methods used to stop a HSP. Because of this I find what happened to be wrong, and the best method wasn't used. The facts are the PITT isn't made to be used at that speed, that they did NOT hurt anyone, and that they did die due to the PITT. It was hard choice, but the GSP needs to re-evaluate their procedures involving such speeds. Argue all you want, but the car did not cause an accident, nor was anyone hurt other than those in the SUVs. You argument is based on what could've happened instead of what did happen.
As I said, you are debating things outside the realm of what was factually reported. Therefore what you are saying is soley opinion and not fact.
What a horrible situation... I believe that the officer did not take the right course of action as there was plenty of time (~ one hour) to implement other methods that officers are trained in to safely end high speed pursuits. I do believe that the officer did not intend to kill the 17 yo girl and that he feels terrible for the way the PIT maneuver ended. Although I dont agree with the PIT method, I do acknowledge the officer's intent to keep this girl from harming innocent drivers.
Also, for those people who said the girl deserved to die... she was 17 for god sake, we all know people that young make irrational decisions. Hell yeah I'd beat the crap out of her if I was her father and I would insist on throwing her in jail and letting her reflect on her idiotic actions, but she didnt deserve to die. Just my opinion..
Side note: What does IMO mean?
Also, for those people who said the girl deserved to die... she was 17 for god sake, we all know people that young make irrational decisions. Hell yeah I'd beat the crap out of her if I was her father and I would insist on throwing her in jail and letting her reflect on her idiotic actions, but she didnt deserve to die. Just my opinion..
Side note: What does IMO mean?
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 21K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter