Of course I dont know what you actually think. But it is a double edged sword. If you pursue and an incident occurs that the person being pursued or an innocent party is hurt or killed. If you dont and similar still happens what then? If the option is available to stop the vehicle quickly using whatever means available including lethal force against the driver, is that not a safer result? We are not talking about a hostage situation, that is a completely different scenario. I am only responding should they pursue?
Never going to be a simple answer.
Both scenarios could be played out depending on the scenario and police officer involved. Either decision does not make the action wrong. There are consequences for both. Not pursuing is definitely not the answer either. More onus needs to be put back on the person fleeing as often if they dont pursue the offender gets away as often the vehicle being used is stolen.
I for one would like to see serious criminals detained asap.
Of course when I say shoot at I certainly mean at the driver if no one else is in the car and certainly not using a standard side arm at the tyres, a shotgun or similar would need to be used or other options to stop the vehicle quickly as current methods just dont work.
2011 Discovery 4 TDV6
2009 DRZ400E Suzuki
1956 & 1961 P4 Rover (project)
1976 SS Torana (project - all cash donations or parts accepted)
2003 WK Holden Statesman
Departed
2000 Defender Extreme: Shrek (but only to son)
84 RR (Gone) 97 Tdi Disco (Gone)
98 Ducati 900SS Gone & Missed
Facta Non Verba
Sorry, but a shotgun from behind is as useless as a slingshot (for tyres).
I'm gonna go out on a non-Hollywood limb and suggest on an increasing scale of effectiveness - at least an AR15, .50cal full auto, then for the tough jobs RPG.
This one will stop that pesky 180B with less collateral damage than the RPG
[ame]http://youtu.be/kN6uvd1GeSs[/ame]
Seriously about 30 years ago my Aunties boyfriend at the time had his EH stolen. He did get it back and the police did indicate they had to take extreme action. Was a very modified vehicle with a lot of $ and man hours. He was that glad to get it back he did not question the damage to the tyre and rim, let alone the pellets we pulled out of the tyre carcass.
There is no quick solution, but a solution that can stop people running like they do needs some work.
2011 Discovery 4 TDV6
2009 DRZ400E Suzuki
1956 & 1961 P4 Rover (project)
1976 SS Torana (project - all cash donations or parts accepted)
2003 WK Holden Statesman
Departed
2000 Defender Extreme: Shrek (but only to son)
84 RR (Gone) 97 Tdi Disco (Gone)
98 Ducati 900SS Gone & Missed
Facta Non Verba
I did say from behind...and I still believe so.
the rim damage you mentioned indicates it was shot from alongside, and does not prove it happened 'during' a pursuit. So in context, I believe - from behind, it is still useless. But no doubt the right pellet size, perhaps 00, buck, or solids, will work from 'alongside' hence the rim damage...all easy if the thief stops for traffic lights and theres room to get alongside![]()
They actually got it on the Murray Bridge/Mannum road at speed, but yes you are correct they must have been bloody close. The car did leave the road and was covered in dust and crap but very little other damage and was also back in the day when the police would get away with this. One of the police officers involved knew my Dad and explained a bit more than the owner was actually told in confidence, but as was 34 odd years ago, probably can talk about now.
2011 Discovery 4 TDV6
2009 DRZ400E Suzuki
1956 & 1961 P4 Rover (project)
1976 SS Torana (project - all cash donations or parts accepted)
2003 WK Holden Statesman
Departed
2000 Defender Extreme: Shrek (but only to son)
84 RR (Gone) 97 Tdi Disco (Gone)
98 Ducati 900SS Gone & Missed
Facta Non Verba
| Search AULRO.com ONLY! |
Search All the Web! |
|---|
|
|
|
Bookmarks