Police fire at stolen van during wild chase in wrong direction on Deerfoot Trail

[spikerS]

Originally posted by blitz


A lot of people seem to be ignoring that these people were driving THE WRONG WAY down Deerfoot. That in itself is incredibly dangerous. Even if they were doing the speed limit, it would be a 220 km relative speed to oncoming traffic.

Oh, just because I have this random bit of information in the back of my head...

No, 2 vehicles travelling at 110kph and have a head on collision with each other, does not mean they each experience a collision of 220kph relative speed.

Each vehicle would experience a 110kph collision similar to hitting a solid wall.

[Quiet10]

Originally posted by cancer man
I have to agree with modex discharging a weapon on a public road in my opinion a no no.
Helicopter and lay back and put up a spike belt.
I want them to account for all the lead that was fired and where they landed.
This is going to turn into a gong show.

Cops don't use spike strips in Calgary

[bjstare]

Originally posted by spikers


Oh, just because I have this random bit of information in the back of my head...

No, 2 vehicles travelling at 110kph and have a head on collision with each other, does not mean they each experience a collision of 220kph relative speed.

Each vehicle would experience a 110kph collision similar to hitting a solid wall.

You're correct, however it should be noted that there is significantly less time to react when the relative speed is 220 vs 110, thus increasing the chance of an accident occurring.

[dirtsniffer]

These retards were clearly putting the public in danger. What would you be saying if that cops backed off and they caused a head on collision in deerfoot. The police needed to end that situation as quickly as possible.

[phil98z24]

Originally posted by Modelexis


I don't know how it should have been handled, my point was just that it's careless to fire into a car when your target is inches away from an innocent person. This point is illustrated perfectly in the fact that the bullet missed it's target when it was discharged.

It's risky to fire a weapon at a moving vehicle with 2 occupants. If the cop was aiming to kill someone he would have been aiming for the driver since killing the passenger would not have stopped the car.

So if the cop was aiming at the driver he failed.
Not only did he fail but he showed perfectly how hard it is to hit a selective target.

I don't know the details of the story so I can't tell you what may or may not have led to this cop putting himself in a dangerous situation where he felt like drawing his sidearm.

If the cop is looking out for the public he should not be firing into a vehicle where you have an innocent person inches away from the driver.

But you said it was cowardly and ridiculous. So how did you arrive at that conclusion without offering any, or having any ideas about what the alternative (right way) approach is? You also don't have the whole picture or all the facts of this very dynamic situation. Without that, you can't reasonably come make an informed decision about that officers actions.

[Modelexis]

Originally posted by cjblair
And I don't think the police shot because the driver was going the wrong way. I recall seeing something about the driver of the van trying to get through a roadblock by using the vehicle?

I was responding to a quote context already laid out by Sugar where he framed it in terms of driving the wrong way, he didn't even mention the ramming of police cars:

Originally posted by Sugarphreak
This.... Should have riddled the car Imo, maybe a few double taps just to be sure after. Idiots were endangering the public by driving the wrong way, lethal force was totally justified.

[Disoblige]

Originally posted by spikers

No, 2 vehicles travelling at 110kph and have a head on collision with each other, does not mean they each experience a collision of 220kph relative speed.

That's not what he was really saying though. I think he meant that the relative speed to the oncoming driver would be much faster, so it'd be harder to react to the scenario.

to what cjblair said.

[spikerS]

Originally posted by phil98z24


But you said it was cowardly and ridiculous. So how did you arrive at that conclusion without offering any, or having any ideas about what the alternative (right way) approach is? You also don't have the whole picture or all the facts of this very dynamic situation. Without that, you can't reasonably come make an informed decision about that officers actions.

I learned a long time ago, you can't argue with stupid.

Originally posted by Disoblige

That's not what he was really saying though. I think he meant that the relative speed to the oncoming driver would be much faster, so it'd be harder to react to the scenario.

to what cjblair said.

Yeah, I think I read it wrong. Too early in the morning for me.

[Modelexis]

Originally posted by phil98z24
But you said it was cowardly and ridiculous. So how did you arrive at that conclusion without offering any, or having any ideas about what the alternative (right way) approach is? You also don't have the whole picture or all the facts of this very dynamic situation. Without that, you can't reasonably come make an informed decision about that officers actions.

That's just my initial thoughts about the situation with the limited details I have. I can't think of a single reason for firing rounds into the cabin of a vehicle with passengers present. Cancerman posted the same opinion in this thread but for some reason I'm the only one being challenged.

[gretz]

Originally posted by Modelexis


That's just my initial thoughts about the situation with the limited details I have. I can't think of a single reason for firing rounds into the cabin of a vehicle with passengers present. Cancerman posted the same opinion in this thread but for some reason I'm the only one being challenged.

If any member on here was with a friend that decided to "run" from the cops for whatever reason, is it fair game for the cops shoot at the vehicle?

Soooo many what-ifs lol...

[Sugarphreak]

...

[Modelexis]

That makes sense, and I guess when a mob is fired up and mind set and you pipe up and give an alternate position that goes against their emotional padlock they turn around and attack.

Some of the language in this thread is hilarious all things considered.
People can be so verbally abusive for really no reason sometimes.

[dirtsniffer]

As far as I know, as it has been stated in this thread that the vehicle was not shot at until after it rammed a cop car. It was not shot at for driving the wrong way down deerfoot or for speeding.

[dirtsniffer]

Modelexis. People get upset at your opinion because they can't understand how you twist your logic enough to force it up your ass and back out of your mouth.

So it's more a feeling of intense confusion rather than anger. But most people, thankfully, have been around long enough to know you're a troll who will argue any point for any imaginable reason and beat the argument down for so long that no one really knows what's going on anymore and the thread dies.

So I guess that makes you the winner right?

[fiveowed]

Originally posted by dirtsniffer
Modelexis. People get upset at your opinion because they can't understand how you twist your logic enough to force it up your ass and back out of your mouth.

So it's more a feeling of intense confusion rather than anger. But most people, thankfully, have been around long enough to know you're a troll who will argue any point for any imaginable reason and beat the argument down for so long that no one really knows what's going on anymore and the thread dies.

So I guess that makes you the winner right?

yes he is the winner because people keep replying to his attention starved rants, gets everyone worked up mission accomplished. Don't feed the troll and it will go away.

[sexualbanana]

Originally posted by Modelexis
You can paint this passenger in whatever light you want, but that doesn't mean it's true.

You sort of countered your own argument there.

Originally posted by Modelexis

The cops don't have the whole story, they don't know why this woman is getting in the stolen car.

I get the feeling you watch a lot of episodes of Flashpoint.

[sexualbanana]

I also have to disagree that you think that the decision of a suspect's culpability in the commission of a crime can only be determined by the courts. Sure, it would be nice to be able to conduct a full investigation into the matter before laying charges against the driver and the passenger, if warranted, but I think even you can agree that that was not possible in this case.

The fact of the matter is, had the driver been successful in ramming through the roadblock, the passenger would've benefitted from it just as much as the driver did. Thus, she is just as accountable for the actions of the driver, in this case.

You're making the case that the passenger may have been under some kind of duress, which is entirely possible, but this is a situation where it was impossible to have all the information available given how dangerous the pursuit was becoming, and the risk to the general public became too high.

Just my thought.

[Modelexis]

You might be entirely right, I was just giving a viewpoint that may be way incorrect.

I guess as details come out - if they come out - we'll have a more clear picture of what happened.

I'm not wedded to my position, it was just my first thought when I read the article.

-I can't say I've watched a show called flashpoint, I don't even own a TV.