Cop hits guy with squad car

[KestrelBike]

what if there was someone else within about a 25-30' path that car just bashed through? A small child playing in the front yard or some other innocent person who was hiding in fear when they heard the gun shots, perhaps laying under a vehicle or behind the wall or something. Then what?

I'm glad you brought up the "stray bullet from a firearm" because I was going to, for you. How much risk did you want that cop to take? The media is calling it a rifle (I don't know what rifle it was, if it really was a rifle and not a shotgun/derringer/etc) so I'll assume that it has a typical rifle's penetration power. So at any point that the cop decides to stop his car, get out, draw down, aim, make the split-second decision to pull the trigger, all that perp had to do was take half a second to turn around, raise the rifle and get a lucky shot off (and we know that rifles are a hell of a lot easier to aim than handguns for newbs like this perp probably was). The cop took the opportunity he had when more peaceable methods were *not* working, he also took the opportunity when no one was around. Yes, he did hit the wall, but I don't think he did it intentionally going for bonus points. Hell, I bet he didn't even notice the wall, he was probably too concerned thinking "how are they going to judge me for neutralizing this threat" or "ok I better stop this threat before we get into an area where the streets are not so clear of people." That cop's entire LIFE is one of risks, decisions, luck, and consequences. What if the perp had turned around as the car was coming at him, brought the rifle up only halfway before letting off a shot, and the bullet went into a home and took the top half of a kid's head off? The cop recognized the threat from that unstable criminal. He neutralized the threat. Zero collateral human damage was sustained. Be happy.

[Jer]

I'm glad you brought up the "stray bullet from a firearm" because I was going to, for you. How much risk did you want that cop to take? The media is calling it a rifle (I don't know what rifle it was, if it really was a rifle and not a shotgun/derringer/etc) so I'll assume that it has a typical rifle's penetration power. So at any point that the cop decides to stop his car, get out, draw down, aim, make the split-second decision to pull the trigger, all that perp had to do was take half a second to turn around, raise the rifle and get a lucky shot off (and we know that rifles are a hell of a lot easier to aim than handguns for newbs like this perp probably was). The cop took the opportunity he had when more peaceable methods were *not* working, he also took the opportunity when no one was around. Yes, he did hit the wall, but I don't think he did it intentionally going for bonus points. Hell, I bet he didn't even notice the wall, he was probably too concerned thinking "how are they going to judge me for neutralizing this threat" or "ok I better stop this threat before we get into an area where the streets are not so clear of people." That cop's entire LIFE is one of risks, decisions, luck, and consequences. What if the perp had turned around as the car was coming at him, brought the rifle up only halfway before letting off a shot, and the bullet went into a home and took the top half of a kid's head off? The cop recognized the threat from that unstable criminal. He neutralized the threat. Zero collateral human damage was sustained. Be happy.

A couple of things to address here.

First of all, you talk about the amount of risk a cop should take.... how much personal risk would that cop have taken had that wall been placed properly w/rebar & concrete? There was no way he could know that. So he was lucky as hell to be alive or not horribly mangled due to a wall being improperly installed. Had the owner of said wall taken the time or spent the money to install it properly we would be having an entirely different conversation about the cop's safety.

Next up, the perps gun/rifle/rocket launcher. Does it matter? The threat is a threat and you use the most effective means available to you to neutralize the threat. A large portion of consideration of 'effective' has to be control especially when we're talking a residential area. If you plan to tell me that hurtling a cruiser off the road onto curbs/lawns/walls/driveways & homes at highway speeds provides more control over a firearm... I'm going to have to disagree. How many videos have we seen with cops shooting at bad guys who are returning fire? It's obviously not an ideal situation but comes with the territory. These aren't carnie workers we're talking about these are trained law enforcement officers. I'll take my chances with one of them and a firearm over one of them using their vehicle in this situation. That's not to say that it can't be used in a different situation like a highway or parking lot or something but, just like a firearm, you need to know your possibility of collateral damage before using chosen method to save lives when your very method could cost them. He had no way of knowing what was beyond that wall from his angle and therefore he chose to ignore his intended target's foreground and background. At least with a firearm he's trained to take that into account and would likely have been checking the background as part of his training. After all, you don't rise to the occasion you fall back to your training in high-stress situations. What if there was a couple little girls who were playing with chalk in that drive-way when the shots rang out and they took shelter behind that wall? We'd be having a different conversation.

Up next, you discuss that he didn't intentionally hit the wall for bonus points. You just made my point. Once you choose to accelerate your car off-road towards homes you are no longer in control. You can't be. If you've ever been in a vehicle that has left the roadway at a high rate of speed you know exactly what I'm talking about. You're quite literally at the mercy of momentum & physics. In this case it happened to work out but that's only due to luck. There's very limited amout of 'skill' involved with choosing this method as means of threat neutralization. This is why it's so rarely chosen as compared to something cleaner and easier to control like a firearm.

I am happy that zero collateral human damage was done but that's more a luck than training/decision making. I'd prefer that peace keepers exercise more prudent decision making ESPECIALLY in the current anti-cop climate. Can you imagine had the officer NOT been lucky and any one of the above scenarios I outlined actually happened? With the flack LEO's are getting right now for doing their job properly and prudently can you imagine the outrage if GTA officer here had actually struck an innocent or several innocent people? I'd hate to be in uniform and trying to explain his actions in that case and I think we need to examine ALL possible outcomes of decisions before we label someone a hero. I applaud the decision to take action. I applaud that nobody else was hurt. What I'm worried about is passing this video around like it is the new training video for how to deal with this situation. IMO this is dangerous and this outcome could have been horrific and the fact that it wasn't was put purely in the hands of fate/luck.

I see a lot of those who wear the badge passing this video around and I'm worried about the precedent that could be set especially given today's anti-LEO political climate. IMO the LE community can ill afford a gung ho decision like this that goes wrong and there's far too much room for something like this to go wrong.