So, steal a car, have the police chase you and then sue them for the resulting crash?

[caninepawprints]

Something else that's messed up is if someone breaks into your house, you're allowed to shoot them, but you're not allowed to warn them you're about to shoot them. The criminal could sue you for threatening him.

[Deleted]

I haven't read the entire thread but....

Are some people in this thread actually defending the criminals?....

Also there is always a user who says this as a joke: Mmmurica!

Did I miss that person too?

[Jokerfiend]

So the cops should've just let them go? Would the kids learn anything from that? Do YOU think that they would NEVER do any sort of crime again just because they got away? How can YOU know that the kids wouldnt even go deeper into the criminal path, I mean they already stole a car and got away, why stop there? It's not worth straight out killing them, but the cops couldnt have known how it would end, it could in fact end even worse if they didn't do what they did.

And about your last sentence, if they can't chase them, how can they know where they are and when they run out of gas? A helicopter following them? Isnt that a chase too then?

In my opinion the cops did what they had to do to stop the car, sucks that some of them got killed, but again, it could've ended faaaaaaar worse than it did.

Again, you don't value human life. Yes, the cops should let them go. It isn't worth it. You are telling me the situation couldn't have been handled differently? I highly doubt that.

[Slanderize]

Exactly, who knows why the fled? No one does. So, let's pretend you have to make the decision to give chase or allow them to escape. Which decision do you make? Would you simply institute a no chase policy, a policy which will surely be known to criminal with a car who wants to get away with something? You don't live in the real world, you make harsh judgments from a place far removed from any real responsibility.

Also, I was commenting on your view that the police department will likely settle. If you agree with me on the outcome of the case depending on details we don't have access to, how can you hold such an opinion?

Most police departments in this day and age do have a no chase policy, and those policies are different depending on the state and department you're dealing with. The chances of this department having a no chase policy are high. The likeliness of these officers violating the no chase policy is unknown. I'd wager the lawyer who took the case knows the chances, and they feel confident with those chances, enough to go through the process of filing a lawsuit.
If you're asking if I myself would institute a no chase policy, I feel I would as I support them in the real world now. Outside of a capital crime I don't see much purpose in chasing down criminals if it means endangering the lives of the officers involved, the criminals being pursued, and the innocent bystanders that are there because of simple chance.
Also, my "view" on the police department settling is only likely if those officers involved in the chase violated any such no chase policy these officers' department may or may not have.
Which is why I said, the chances of them settling are likely if the officers did not follow their department's no chase policy.

[KingHorse]

Also, never at any point did I make it sound like you were wrong, beyond taking ME OUT OF CONTEXT. You were wrong to do so.

I quoted the entirety of your post and responded to it as a cohesive discussion. You quoted my post and responded as if it was the first and only post. And I took you out of context? I'm not sure you're clear on that concept.

I feel you are somehow confusing "burst into flames" with "consumed by fire" or "raging inferno" or "the car burst into a fireball."

When your car overheats and catches fire, it has burst into flames, if you don't put that fire out, in under two minutes that same fire will nine times out of ten start burning the plastics down, and your car will be a fireball in under two minutes.

Bolded the funny part.

Let me ask you a couple questions. Does a balloon burst over a period of two minutes? Does it take you two minutes to burst through a door? Burst implies suddenness. Two minutes of burning is not "burst in to flames" it is "consumed by fire."

[ishootblanks]

The law is blind and impartial, it has to operate under very exact circumstances to work. It's either this or massive corruption and totalitarianism.

it's the twisting and bastardising of the law that allows for lawsuits like this..

[Dahij]

Again, you don't value human life. Yes, the cops should let them go. It isn't worth it. You are telling me the situation couldn't have been handled differently? I highly doubt that.

Again, I do value human life, but how do you know everything would've been completely fine if the cops didnt stop them? Can you be 100% sure that they wouldnt have accidently crashed into another car, causeing twice the deaths or maybe crashing into a house destroying some of the house, kills everyone in the car and maybe some people in the house?

And all my points from my other post still stands, you cant know that even if they did get away and nobody was injured, they might go deeper into the criminal path and start doing worse stuff. So still, correctly done by the cops, sucks that some died from it.

[Slanderize]

I quoted the entirety of your post and responded to it as a cohesive discussion. You quoted my post and responded as if it was the first and only post. And I took you out of context. I'm not sure you're clear on that concept.



Bolded the funny part.

Let me ask you a couple questions. Does a balloon burst over a period of two minutes? Does it take you two minutes to burst through a door. Burst implies suddenness. Two minutes of burning is not "burst in to flames" it is "consumed by fire."

...Do you not know what flames are? Flames are fire. At any point fire occurs, flames have burst out, in order for the fire to become a fire. To build a fire, you light kindling. The kindling smolders, until it catches the smaller twigs, at which point in time, flames have burst out. The remaining fuel is there to keep the fire going. It is consumed by fire, when the materials feeding the fire have burned out. Ergo, they have been consumed... BY FIRE!!!

Edit: For a simpler analogy. When you light a candle's wick, the wick bursts into a flame. A fire is multiple flames. When a car overheats, and a fire comes out, that is multiple bursts of flame. I.E. a fire. Flames, always burst. That is the nature of flames. Flames do not "slowly form" You do not see a half flame, or a quarter flame, and then a full flame. You see smoldering, and then you see a flame/fire burst out.

[Jokerfiend]

Again, I do value human life, but how do you know everything would've been completely fine if the cops didnt stop them? Can you be 100% sure that they wouldnt have accidently crashed into another car, causeing twice the deaths or maybe crashing into a house destroying some of the house, kills everyone in the car and maybe some people in the house?

And all my points from my other post still stands, you cant know that even if they did get away and nobody was injured, they might go deeper into the criminal path and start doing worse stuff. So still, correctly done by the cops, sucks that some died from it.

We aren't going to agree. Just drop it. I'm a no chase policy sort of person. You obviously agree with the cops. We aren't going to see eye to eye on this one.

[KingHorse]

...Do you not know what flames are? Flames are fire. At any point fire occurs, flames have burst out, in order for the fire to become a fire. To build a fire, you light kindling. The kindling smolders, until it catches the smaller twigs, at which point in time, flames have burst out. The remaining fuel is there to keep the fire going. It is consumed by fire, when the materials feeding the fire have burned out. Ergo, they have been consumed... BY FIRE!!!

Are we still arguing over this? Here, I'll find the definition for you:

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/burst

1. to break, break open, or fly apart with sudden violence
2. to issue forth suddenly and forcibly, as from confinement or through an obstacle

Did I miss smolder in there somewhere? Did I miss consumed? Or are you still unclear on what burst means?

[wonkeykong]

The law is blind and impartial, it has to operate under very exact circumstances to work. It's either this or massive corruption and totalitarianism.

aka usa...


Infracted

[Dahij]

We aren't going to agree. Just drop it. I'm a no chase policy sort of person. You obviously agree with the cops. We aren't going to see eye to eye on this one.

Well look at it like this, the cops stops the chase and lets them go, the driver is nervous and keeps looking around for other cops while still going pretty fast, for a split second he looks behind him and accidently steers the car into wrong lane and crashes with another car, in that car is a whole family, mom, dad and 3 children, all of them dies + some from the car that was being chased.

Would that be a better end?

[Twotonsteak]

Nice legal system. 10 million dollars for being part of a crime.

http://www.nbcwashington.com/news/lo...149369525.html

This sort of thing has been going on for years. I've seen stories of people who broke bones trying to break into a store/home, then sue and win.

[Deleted]

Also this confirms it. You can get rich by screwing people over...

[Aschark]

Are the people in this thread seriously that retarded? The car was stolen, and they fled from the police.

If you let them go, they could easily just abandon the car and get away. Hell, most murders are unsolved for a reason here. If you have the criminals in your sights, you chase them down, you stop them, and you take them to jail. And if they kill themselves because they are too stupid to realize the level of shit they are in (or would rather die than face the consequences of their actions) then they deserve to die.

This suit won't hold water, and I for one am glad the gene pool is free of these pieces of trash. End of discussion.

[Deleted]

Are the people in this thread seriously that retarded? The car was stolen, and they fled from the police.

If you let them go, they could easily just abandon the car and get away. Hell, most murders are unsolved for a reason here. If you have the criminals in your sights, you chase them down, you stop them, and you take them to jail. And if they kill themselves because they are too stupid to realize the level of shit they are in (or would rather die than face the consequences of their actions) then they deserve to die.

This suit won't hold water, and I for one am glad the gene pool is free of these pieces of trash. End of discussion.

Actually, I agree with you and couldn't have said it better myself.

[Slanderize]

Are we still arguing over this? Here, I'll find the definition for you:

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/burst



Did I miss smolder in there somewhere? Did I miss consumed? Or are you still unclear on what burst means?

Yes, and flames ALWAYS ISSUE FORTH SUDDENLY, AND FORCIBLY. That is the nature of flames. That is the nature of fire.
Until a fire, is a fire, it is merely smoldering. In order for flames to exist, they BURST into existence.

A fire is multiple flames bursting into existence. In order for it to BE a fire, flames must burst forth. Until flames have burst, and there is only overheating/smoking going on, it is smoldering, or overheating, or smoking. It is NOT on fire. The moment flames have BURST, it is on fire. Fire is violent. Fire is forcible. A single flame falls under both those definitions as well.

You're missing plenty, chum.

[Flaks]

Also this confirms it. You can get rich by screwing people over...

Isn't that the only tried and tested way to get rich in the first place?

[Deleted]

Isn't that the only tried and tested way to get rich in the first place?

Well, you can get rich by doing fair business I guess (not sure if that even is possible though).

[Aphrel]

if he steals a car and try to flee from police.. he kinda had it coming to him if he crashes and ppl dies..