Family of winners act like idiots. Cops respond by firing into van full of kids

[Stevensje]

I'm sure it will be turned into racial profiling. I can't believe the way some family values are changing in this new era. They need to be made examples of.

[davsel]

Update
From: http://abcnews.go.com/US/cops-heart-...ry?id=21567684

A former New Mexico state police officer who fired shots at a minivan during a chaotic traffic stop last year had no idea the vehicle was full of children and his "heart sank" when he finally realized it, he told ABC News in an exclusive interview.

Elias Montoya, 53, was terminated in December after he fired three shots at the vehicle carrying a mother and her five children ranging in ages from 6 and 16. Montoya fired the shots after a routine traffic stop evolved into an intense encounter that included a high-speed chase.

"My heart sank when they finally stopped and I was at the passenger side at that time seeing them get out at gunpoint again," he said. "I couldn't believe it that there were that many children in there."

...

"I'm not shooting at a human being. I'm shooting at a tire," Montoya said.

[sniper7]

Hopefully he gets his job back.

[Irving]

Hopefully he gets his job back.

I disagree.

[rbeau30]

Oh lord, waiting for the cop bashing and keyboard commandos now.

Soo... In before the lock .

I slapped my wrist. I had written a doosey. Here is a toned down version.

While NOT believing the family was in the right... I believe they were wrong... and this is ONLY based on what I saw in the video.

I do not believe a van that is speeding away constitutes self defense.
I do not believe running away from the cops is a capital crime.
Police are a part of the Executive Branch of government only and are not allowed to be judge jury and executioner.


Honestly, if disagreeing with a police officer carries a death sentence, then do you blame anyone for fleeing for their lives? Granted, disagreeing with a police officer should be done in court, and everyone knows talking to cops when accused of a crime (speeding) is inadvisable, but doesn't anyone see where this could get out of hand?

[RblDiver]

Honestly, if disagreeing with a police officer carries a death sentence, then do you blame anyone for fleeing for their lives? Granted, disagreeing with a police officer should be done in court, and everyone knows talking to cops when accused of a crime (speeding) is inadvisable, but doesn't anyone see where this could get out of hand?

Well, while I totally agree that things need to be investigated et al, I do feel that if the officer was indeed aiming to disable the vehicle, it may have been a wise choice (well, sort of). Otherwise, the van could have tried to flee, become erratic, then crashed into another car killing innocent civilians, etc. (My one cent)

[XC700116]

Well, while I totally agree that things need to be investigated et al, I do feel that if the officer was indeed aiming to disable the vehicle, it may have been a wise choice (well, sort of). Otherwise, the van could have tried to flee, become erratic, then crashed into another car killing innocent civilians, etc. (My one cent)

That's really a stretch based on the fact that the cop does not have a crystal ball. The woman in the van is obviously a completely irrational idiot, but shooting at a vehicle because of what might happen down the road is completely unacceptable when there is no imminent threat. The actions of THAT officer IMO are out of bounds and illustrate a lack of understanding on what justifies use of deadly force.

Also there's enough LEO's on this board to get a straight answer on this. When have you ever been trained to use your service weapon to "shoot out the tires" of a fleeing vehicle along the road? Seems like a pretty Hollywood notion to me considering the amount of different options and innovations they have that are actually effective for stopping high speed chases these days. Spike strips perhaps.

[Squeeze]

Well, while I totally agree that things need to be investigated et al, I do feel that if the officer was indeed aiming to disable the vehicle, it may have been a wise choice (well, sort of). Otherwise, the van could have tried to flee, become erratic, then crashed into another car killing innocent civilians, etc. (My one cent)

That is a HUGE no-no. You ONLY discharge your weapon if deadly force is authorized - period. Many years ago there was a Denver police officer (Spinharney) who fired on a car during a traffic stop that was simply pulling forward as he approached the car. The officer was approaching from behind the vehicle when the driver decided to pull forward to get further out of traffic. Officer Spinharney then drew his sidearm and opened fire. Subsequently the driver was not injured. Officer Spinharney was later found negligent for his actions and terminated. I personally knew the detective in IA who investigated the shooting. He said in all of his years of investigating officer involved shootings, this was the only one that when he asked the officer why he fired his weapon, he replied, "I don't know".

I'm not saying there isn't an appropriate time to fire on a fleeing vehicle, but again...deadly force must be authorized in order for it to be justified.

[rbeau30]

All I am saying is deadly force is what it is DEADLY force. It just seems as though news outlets have been reporting more stories about police getting "skiddish". Perhaps they need more training to deal with situations that are dangerous.



This Blue Tacoma with two hispanic females looks alot like grey Nissan Titan with a blank black male doesn't it?

[tmleadr03]

All I am saying is deadly force is what it is DEADLY force. It just seems as though news outlets have been reporting more stories about police getting "skiddish". Perhaps they need more training to deal with situations that are dangerous.



This Blue Tacoma with two hispanic females looks alot like grey Nissan Titan with a blank male doesn't it?

White?