Police Chase In America:

[HOON69]

Here is a Police chase from last month in Ohio.

Watch it to the end. The first 3/4 may be boring, but the end well makes up for it.

Blue Ash Police Chase


Officers Hurt; Suspect Shot, Killed After Blue Ash Police Pursuit - Cincinnati breaking news, weather radar, traffic from 9News | Channel 9 WCPO.com

Passenger Recounts Deadly High Speed Chase In Blue Ash - Cincinnati breaking news, weather radar, traffic from 9News | Channel 9 WCPO.com

Police Chase Passenger: 'I Thought I Was A Goner' - News Story - WLWT Cincinnati

Search Blue Ash + police or chase or pursuit

[trick_xd]

Damn ...
I see the cops cover them selfs by saying "Don't move.. Don't move"
I really don't think the guy will after being shot 7 times from 3 feet away.

Now there cop cars ... the patrol car sounded really crispy revving... I wounder if they have any work done to them.??

[my gt]

i dont know the score but looking at it thats not right

[XC GXL]

Judge, Jury, Executioner : I thought that only happened in Judge Dredd!!!!!!

[Ozfords]

He was directed to stop and he didn't, he had a weapon that could kill or seriously injure and the cop kneeling on the bonnet of the car was insane emptying his magazine into the driver.

[T-BOOST]

faaaaark thats a bit over the top isn't it? out:
At the start the cop says 'he tried to ram me'. No what i saw was you tying to block him and he went around you. At the end it was said they shot him because he tried to run them over. I dont think he was driving in circles trying to run over police, if you run in front of a moving car then thats your stupid fault. I cant see why they couldn't shoot out the tyres instead of killing him and nearly killing an inocent person. :
I would have chundied my undies if i was the passenger

[HOON69]

Originally Posted by Ozfords

He was directed to stop and he didn't, he had a weapon that could kill or seriously injure and the cop kneeling on the bonnet of the car was insane emptying his magazine into the driver.

listen to the incar where the cop says

if i get a chance im gunna take this guy out

then when they attempted to pit him,they rammed him instead FULL TILT into his drivers door(left hand side) the cop jumped onto the bonnet before the guy moved,meaning he placed himself into danger with a felon who wasnt stopped.

top it off with the cop emptying his gun into the driver for a traffic violation

might be justified in doing so,but dont make it right does it.

easier way would be to pit the car properly and surround it with police vehicles and shoot out tyres not shoot point blank a dozen or 4 times.

Originally Posted by T-BOOST

faaaaark thats a bit over the top isn't it? out:
At the start the cop says 'he tried to ram me'. No what i saw was you tying to block him and he went around you. At the end it was said they shot him because he tried to run them over. I dont think he was driving in circles trying to run over police, if you run in front of a moving car then thats your stupid fault. I cant see why they couldn't shoot out the tyres instead of killing him and nearly killing an inocent person. :
I would have chundied my undies if i was the passenger

exactly what i was thinking,he didnt ram anyone the cop was gunna try "pit" him on each u turn the guy attempted/did,they have flexxy laws on what the call assault or attempted murder etc i guess it gives them security in knowing all they have to say is stop police and stop resisting and if you dont they can shoot to kill.


thank god we dont have that system in austalia(yet)

[Pik0]

thats Heavy, Americans are always go a bit over the top. Look at American Cops vs the Force or what ever which is Austrlian.

Every 2nd person who gets pulled over for a random traffic stop gets tazered because there scared cause the policeman has a gun pointed at them so they take to long to get out of the car. While in Australia a guy gets pulled over and they pretty much have a chat and maybe get arrested if there have actually done something wrong.

[birdman941]

Actually,if things are kept in context, when the cop said
"I am going to take him out" he was referring to the PIT maneuver.
You have to know how hard the liberal media comes down on cops here.
The cop knew he was on video,
so there was no way he meant anything else.
Also, if you go at a cop with a car, it's considered a deadly weapon.
The cop was right to empty the clip into the a-hole.
The thing that bugs me, you just SAW the guy do all this stuff,
you have it on video, yet they refer to him as a "suspect".
Hey, I don't suspect him of anything.
He's freaking guilty, not "suspected".
I just SAW IT.
That cop just saved the taxpayers a lot of dough from a trial,
and feeding the scumbag for many years.
Go after a cop?
Hope he rots in hell.

[HOON69]

Originally Posted by birdman941

Actually,if things are kept in context, when the cop said
"I am going to take him out" he was referring to the PIT maneuver.
You have to know how hard the liberal media comes down on cops here.
The cop knew he was on video,
so there was no way he meant anything else.
Also, if you go at a cop with a car, it's considered a deadly weapon.
The cop was right to empty the clip into the a-hole.
The thing that bugs me, you just SAW the guy do all this stuff,
you have it on video, yet they refer to him as a "suspect".
Hey, I don't suspect him of anything.
He's freaking guilty, not "suspected".
I just SAW IT.
That cop just saved the taxpayers a lot of dough from a trial,
and feeding the scubag for many years.
Go after a cop?
Hope he rots in hell.

i guess i could see your point,but regardless

1) traffic offense doesnt require deadly force does it?

2)ramming or attempting to run over officers? where? all i saw was the guy U turn and the cop thinking about a PIT on him,as for the cop etc he jumped onto the car,the car was pitted for all of 3 seconds,then that cop yelled his demands and opened fire,does that require more then 1,2 bullets i dont think so,in america i can see your point as your bought up to believe that everyones a POS and that your god given rights are to shoot to kill if your in harms way,me personally believe that reasonable force could be used but not deadly.

cops right in doing his job,but doesnt mean his right for killing a bloke over a petty traffic offense(thats all it was till they found the rest)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gcDti...elated&search=
mate look at how this perth cop got hit (hit and dragged,unlike the cop whom jumped onto the bonnet of a car)and still managed to shoot to stop the driver yet didnt empty his gun to do so.

thats the difference between us and you.

[birdman941]

Originally Posted by HOON69

i guess i could see your point,but regardless

1) traffic offense doesnt require deadly force does it?

2)ramming or attempting to run over officers? where? all i saw was the guy U turn and the cop thinking about a PIT on him,as for the cop etc he jumped onto the car,the car was pitted for all of 3 seconds,then that cop yelled his demands and opened fire,does that require more then 1,2 bullets i dont think so,in america i can see your point as your bought up to believe that everyones a POS and that your god given rights are to shoot to kill if your in harms way,me personally believe that reasonable force could be used but not deadly.

cops right in doing his job,but doesnt mean his right for killing a bloke over a petty traffic offense(thats all it was till they found the rest)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gcDti...elated&search=
mate look at how this perth cop got hit and still managed to shoot to stop the driver yet didnt empty his gun to do so.

thats the difference between us and you.

He was running 100 MPH though town!
That is felony evasion, not just a "routine" traffic stop.
The driver made the choice to run.
The driver also made the choice to drive the car toward the officer
when he was on the hood.
That sort of thing simply cannot be tolerated.
When a cop tells you to stop, you stop.
What if the cop didn't shoot?
Then what?
The cop comes off the car and gets run over.
The the cop was stupid for not firing.
You might say the cop shouldn't have gone on the hood (bonnet),
but once again, he ran, drove through town putting many others in danger,
was old to stop, didn't stop, and paid the price.
You also notice that care WAS taken to NOT shoot the passenger.
The cop saw a passenger in there and positioned himself
so there was little chance of the passenger getting hit.
As far as how many shots he fired,, the guy kept moving.
He paid the price for his own stupidity and recklessness.

[XR Martin]

Since when is driving a stolen motor vehicle a minor traffic offense? Police generally know when theres more to a 'minor traffic offense'.
When he showed obvious disregard for the public's and police's safety he needed to be neutralised. And when he was quite willing to put police officer's lives at risk by trying to drive over them while being apprehended then further action need to be taken.
The police officer on the bonnet was more than likely going to be run over.
Police arnt trained to put 'one or two' bullets into someone as they know its not enough to stop them.

[birdman941]

Basically, the only people that are afraid of the police,
are the ones that should be.

[HOON69]

like i said,justified "maybe" right in doing so "no"
all comes back to reasonable force,text book case would of seen officer unhurt a correctfully pitted felon and no fatalities.

Originally Posted by birdman941

Basically, the only people that are afraid of the police,
are the ones that should be.

only in america :

[BA_Turbs]

Originally Posted by T-BOOST

I cant see why they couldn't shoot out the tyres instead of killing him and nearly killing an inocent person. :

Exactly.

What you have seen is too many movies. There are a couple of reasons shooting tyres only works in Hollywood. Firstly, a bullet may not even penetrate the rubber of a big tyre (4WD, truck etc) as there are layers of steel belting and lots of rubber there. Secondly, the hole made is tiny and the tyre closes over it, resulting in a pin hole that will take hours to let the air out of the tyre, and therefore not disabling the vehicle. Thirdly, do you want to be letting bullets go in the direction of the wheel? A steel/alloy rim spinning at hundreds of RPM is going to start flinging bullets all over the place, and you are suggesting you're concerned about other people nearby.

I'm wouldn't ever tell someone not to have an opinion, but I would ask politely they have an informed one.

[birdman941]

Originally Posted by HOON69

felony evasion or fleeing not exactly a reason for the "shoot to kill" mentallity the american police force seems to use/have.

so lets say i was a street racer doing 100MPH(btw we see this every weekend in oz) and the cop pulls me up,does that warrant deadly force or even a gun to my face,me being dragged from the car even though im not resisting?

see you's have flexible laws with that kind of stuff,and i dont think they took care with the passenger,he was never the risk,he didnt drive it at a officer,he was pitted,the cop jumped onto the felons car,big difference imho and where was the risk of harm to others traffic was minimum to zero
since when is a officer taught in training to empty a case on a felon?
use reasonable force to apprehend 2 bullets to the stomach would stop most men,you dont need a cartridge to stop the felon and btw the car stopped almost instantly after the first few shots.

did i say he wasnt justified NO,i said it doesnt make it right thats all.

you didnt read the part where they started off as a simple traffic stop then all the rest was found out during/after the pursuit,and btw so because he was in a stolen car driving fast makes it okay to be the hero jump on a bonnet and kill someone does it?

like i said,justified "maybe" right in doing so "no"
all comes back to reasonable force,text book case would of seen officer unhurt and no fatality.

You are missing the point entirely.
Stolen car: Felony #1
High speed evasion: Felony #2
Aiming a car at a police officer: felony #3
3 strikes you are out.
The driver would have gotten life in prison with no parole and he knew it.
The cops knew it was a stolen car, as we have radios in our cars,
along with computers, etc.
The cops are not stupid,
and YES, if a guy aims a car at a cop, he's as good as dead.
As he should be.
Watch it again will you?
Look at the position of the other squad cars.
Imagine the trajectory of a bullet if needed.
Remember there is passenger in the car.
The cops are trained for these things.
These guys did it right.

[birdman941]

Originally Posted by HOON69

like i said,justified "maybe" right in doing so "no"
all comes back to reasonable force,text book case would of seen officer unhurt a correctfully pitted felon and no fatalities.
only in america :

I don't think saying "pretty please" would have worked.
Maybe the cop should have offered him a flower or a cupcake?
Seeing as how you are an expert, and have had high speed pursuit training,
you must know better than experienced cops.
So you would rather cry a river for criminal?
Funny, how you never see Americans dissing Aussies, or their LEOs.

[HOON69]

over this,find someone else to entertain your one sided views :

[fordomatic]

I'm with birdman here, their rules of engagement is, if they think there life is in danger or a fellow officers they are to "SHOOT TO KILL". And this is not "only in america".

[T-BOOST]

Originally Posted by fordomatic

I'm with birdman here, their rules of engagement is, if they think there life is in danger or a fellow officers they are to "SHOOT TO KILL". And this is not "only in america".

The cops life wasn't in danger untill he put it in danger himself.

So why is it that there are hundreds of police chase video's on the net that dont end in a cop shooting the crap out of someone, and there still able to stop the crim?

[Walt Kowalski]

Originally Posted by fordomatic

I'm with birdman here, their rules of engagement is, if they think there life is in danger or a fellow officers they are to "SHOOT TO KILL". And this is not "only in america".

It also happened in Brisbane this morning.

[birdman941]

Originally Posted by Munroman

It also happened in Brisbane this morning.

Good to know that Aussie cops are no-nonense tough also.

[HOON69]

Originally Posted by Munroman

It also happened in Brisbane this morning.

yeah different circumstances though.

A POLICE officer has shot dead the driver of a van who was allegedly acting suspiciously in a Brisbane suburb last night.

When they got out of their vehicle to speak to the driver, he drove at them," Superintendent O'Regan said.

He said one of the officers drew his firearm and fired twice, apparently striking the driver as he attempted to leave the scene.

2 shots one fire arm and a vehicle directly aimed at a officer.

big difference to a officer on top of a car that was pitted and firing off a full clip of ammo.

Originally Posted by birdman941

Good to know that Aussie cops are no-nonense tough also.

you should read the facts before making such nonsense

[csv8]

Should happen more often here..The Police Service should change their name back to Police FORCE. Too many scumbags are getting away. Few get a dose of lead they might behave themselves...

[birdman941]

Originally Posted by T-BOOST

The cops life wasn't in danger untill he put it in danger himself.

So why is it that there are hundreds of police chase video's on the net that dont end in a cop shooting the crap out of someone, and there still able to stop the crim?

The cop's job is to protect the public.
I suppose he should have screamed like a little girl,
or lit some candles and chanted for the guy to stop.
As soon as he decided to be a cop,
he put his life in danger from idiots like the driver in this case.
That is his job.

[|||]

Originally Posted by birdman941

The cop's job is to protect the public.
I suppose he should have screamed like a little girl,
or lit some candles and chanted for the guy to stop.
As soon as he decided to be a cop,
he put his life in danger from idiots like the driver in this case.
That is his job.

that's the best poem i have ever read.

[XR Martin]

Originally Posted by HOON69

yeah different circumstances though.








2 shots one fire arm and a vehicle directly aimed at a officer.

big difference to a officer on top of a car that was pitted and firing off a full clip of ammo.

you should read the facts before making such nonsense

Its exactly the same situation :
The only reason the police in the Brisbane case didnt fire more becuase he didnt have the chance, the vehicle took off (and ended up crashing into a building because the driver received fatal wounds) Police are not trained to just fire 'one or two' rounds, they keep firing until the threat is neutralised. One or two rounds is known not to be enough to effectively take down a threat, especially a moving one.

A POLICE officer has shot dead the driver of a van who was allegedly acting suspiciously in a Brisbane suburb last night.

Chief Superintendant Clem O'Regan said that police on patrol drove to the Brisbane suburb of Yeerongpilly around 10pm, saw a van parked at a strange angle to the kerb and went to investigate.

"When they got out of their vehicle to speak to the driver, he drove at them," Superintendent O'Regan said.

He said one of the officers drew his firearm and fired twice, apparently striking the driver as he attempted to leave the scene.

He said the officers called for backup and paramedics shortly afterwards when the van crashed through a fence and into a house in a nearby street.

Superintendent O'Regan said the officers involved had been very traumatised by the incident.

"One officer has sustained injuries and has been taken to hospital and the other is helping with the investigation."

"Having to use your firearm on duty is every officer's nightmare," he said.

"I am upset at the tragic death and feel sorry for the officer who had to take this action."

Early this morning a number of detectives were door-knocking neighbours.

Superintendent O'Regan said that officers from the Police Ethical Standards Command, the Crime and Misconduct Commission and the Coroner would be investigating the fatal shooting.

According to one neighbour, a man in his 30s who declined to be named, there were two gunshots before a loud crash about 10.10pm last night.

"I could hear people yelling," the neighbour said.

"You could hear the desperation in one of the voices calling for an ambulance. It was horrible.

"I've never seen police attend a scene so fast. They just swarmed in. You could hear them coming from miles away. There were just detectives and unmarked cars everywhere."

Queensland Police Union's Dennis Fitzpatrick said no officer would want something like this to happen.

"It's the fear of every officer," he said.

Mr Fitzpatrick said one officer had sustained "substantial injuries as a result of being struck by this vehicle".

"This is the second shooting-related incident out here involving police in three days," he said, referring to an earlier shooting at the Oxley Golf Club

[HOON69]

Originally Posted by XR6 Martin

Its exactly the same situation :
The only reason the police in the Brisbane case didnt fire more becuase he didnt have the chance, the vehicle took off (and ended up crashing into a building because the driver received fatal wounds) Police are not trained to just fire 'one or two' rounds, they keep firing until the threat is neutralised. One or two rounds is known not to be enough to effectively take down a threat, especially a moving one.

okay if you say so mr expert
1) man jumps onto a car then shoots

2)man drives at police on the ground and from a distance and gets shot

yep they are 100% the same

empty gun Vs 2 shots and i bet the police in perth shot well before getting hit,and mate police are trained to use deadly force,it doesnt say you have to kill them to neutrilise them does it?

nuff said,keep qouting me,out of various threads 95% of ppl here and in american forums agree that the amount of force used wasnt needed or warranted.

your the minority of the 5% who see it differently.
:

[XR Martin]

Originally Posted by HOON69

okay if you say so mr expert
1) man jumps onto a car then shoots

2)man drives at police on the ground and from a distance and gets shot

yep they are 100% the same

empty gun Vs 2 shots and i bet the police in perth shot well before getting hit,and mate police are trained to use deadly force,it doesnt say you have to kill them to neutrilise them does it?

nuff said,keep qouting me,out of various threads 95% of ppl here and in american forums agree that the amount of force used wasnt needed or warranted.

your the minority of the 5% who see it differently.
:

You obviously dont understand the training behind police firearm use. When they have to use their firearm its shoot to kill, not shoot to injure, or shoot to deter. Hence why they aim for the centre body mass, not the legs or arms. Deadly force is exactly that, DEADly

[HOON69]

Originally Posted by XR6 Martin

You obviously dont understand the training behind police firearm use. When they have to use their firearm its shoot to kill, not shoot to injure, or shoot to deter. Hence why they aim for the centre body mass, not the legs or arms.

matey i use to work at the police academy with my dad,i know they are trained to shoot to kill and to make that 1 shot as accurate as possible,they how ever dont train you to empty your gun
and in most cases extreme force by a officer can land them in court as shown many times in the U.S

ever seen what a point blank shot does to a person?

its alot different then shooting them from 100 yards away

this cop emptied a gun at point blank range,to a unarmed man and why?

cause the cop decided to be rambo and jump on the hood of a moving car(apparently) trigger happy obviously and as stated,i didnt say he wasnt justified in protecting himself, i said killing him wasnt the right option,why they didnt box the car in like the do 99% of the time,or shoot out tyres,either way i know the laws and know how they are trained,still doesnt mean they should shoot to kill over a traffic matter(again thats all it was at the time)