Should criminals who flee by vehicle be shot?

[The Skrall]

If they are fleeing from police, they are obviously guilty. If they were not guilty, they could simply stop the car and the police might let them go or give them a fair trial. In my nation, attacking or fleeing from police is an admission of guilt, and if the person is caught, they will go directly to jail. This is because they do not need to go to court when they have already admitted that they are guilty.

I think that it is obvious that people who flee from police are guilty.

[Esternial]

Yes, shoot a person fleeing in a moving vehicle.

Getting shot at certainly doesn't scare the already agitated person behind the wheel even more.

[Gun Manufacturers]

Because cops have garbage accuracy and out of control vehicles aren't fun.

I'd rather the predictable path of an automobile with a dead criminal than the unpredictable path of an automobile with someone crazy enough to run from the cops.

If anyone's going to have accurate aim, it's a police officer. They're not known for shooting themselves in the hand at gun shows like civilians do.

No, they tend to shoot themselves in the foot.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_cont ... zHEOSyMqug

[Galloism]

If they are fleeing from police, they are obviously guilty. If they were not guilty, they could simply stop the car and the police might let them go or give them a fair trial. In my nation, attacking or fleeing from police is an admission of guilt, and if the person is caught, they will go directly to jail. This is because they do not need to go to court when they have already admitted that they are guilty.

I think that it is obvious that people who flee from police are guilty.

Well, they're guilty of fleeing, which is in itself a crime.

Doesn't mean they're guilty of whatever caused the fleeing in the first place.

[Internationalist Bastard]

The old adage of the two guilty convicts rings true. Guilty doesn't mean they commited a crime

[Southerly Gentleman]

Yes, shoot a person fleeing in a moving vehicle.

Getting shot at certainly doesn't scare the already agitated person behind the wheel even more.

You're right; the fleeing vehicle should be terminated with a rocket-propelled grenade. Less chance of missed shots.

[Lady Scylla]

If they were to give the cops TOWs I think neither would be a problem.

All chases should be stopped by a 120mm SABOT round.

Nothing says "Don't drink and drive" like a 65 ton war-machine shooting at you.

[Jochizyd Republic]

Yes

[Gisnegamesh]

No, that could probably frighten them, potentially causing them to crash the vehicle and cause more loss of life.

[Ostroeuropa]

Criminals should only be shot if their activities prove imminent risk of harm to other people and no other means can be used to stop them, or if they are a criminal deemed likely to kill or maim in the future should they escape and other means of stopping them have failed or are not available.

A criminal fleeing by vehicle should not be shot in every circumstance, but in some, it's acceptable.
The police should only shoot somebody if it's to save lives.

[Koninkrijk Zeeland]

Yes and if that fails just ram their vehicle.

[The Nihilistic view]

Because killing somebody when they are in control of a massive hunk of metal speeding along at up to and over 100 mph is a great idea.

[New Axiom]

This reminds me of that issue we've all had: the one where the tanks stops a robbery, and then rolls up to your window?

This is what happens when you give cops tanks.

[Frank Zipper]

Police tracking vehicles, rather than precipitating a chase, seems safer, especially for minor crimes that nobodies life should be put at risk for. In the UK police don't necessarily chase stolen cars for that reason, the chase is more dangerous to innocent people than the crime.

[Arkinesia]

Because cops have garbage accuracy and out of control vehicles aren't fun.

I'd rather the predictable path of an automobile with a dead criminal than the unpredictable path of an automobile with someone crazy enough to run from the cops.

If anyone's going to have accurate aim, it's a police officer. They're not known for shooting themselves in the hand at gun shows like civilians do.

They are, however, known for magdumping at people for no fucking reason.

Police tracking vehicles, rather than precipitating a chase, seems safer, especially for minor crimes that nobodies life should be put at risk for. In the UK police don't necessarily chase stolen cars for that reason, the chase is more dangerous to innocent people than the crime.

I was stunned once watching Gold Coast cops or some such show, where Aussie police wouldn't follow a stolen car down opposing lanes even though there was no traffic, and a police helicopter simply picked the vehicle back up when the sun came up and they arrested the perp the next day with no incident.

It's my personal belief that American police officers need to be more seriously restricted when it comes to chase protocols, since even the minimally invasive procedures that they have now, which are quite easy to follow, are so blatantly violated with horrific results. Maybe if they're told they have to stand down, they'll learn greater respect for the people they're supposed to serve.

[The Holy Therns]

Whatever the case, criminals who flee by parkour should be kung fu'd.

[Veceria]

Harpoon cannons with ropes connecting the harpoon to a rope winch. Fixes all problems.

Whatever the case, criminals who flee by parkour should be kung fu'd.

Use bolas.

[The Empire of Pretantia]

Harpoon cannons with ropes connecting the harpoon to a rope winch. Fixes all problems.

Do they work on war rigs?

[Ifreann]

All chases should be stopped by a 120mm SABOT round.

Nothing says "Don't drink and drive" like a 65 ton war-machine shooting at you.

On the contrary, if I saw a tank barrelling down the street with "Garda Cór Tráchta" painted on the side I would immediately start drinking, driving or not.

[FutureAmerica]

Only if they shoot back.

[The Intergalactic Universe Corporation]

Of course they should be shot.

[New Grestin]

No.

Police in the United States are getting an unfortunate reputation for being abusive, trigger happy authoritarian neanderthals. Rampantly shooting people out of vehicles like fucking Grand Theft Auto 5 is probably not going to help that reputation, however accurate it may or may not be.

[Pope Joan]

Two words: "friendly fire"

[Mushet]

I'd rather the predictable path of an automobile with a dead criminal than the unpredictable path of an automobile with someone crazy enough to run from the cops.

If anyone's going to have accurate aim, it's a police officer. They're not known for shooting themselves in the hand at gun shows like civilians do.

You don't have accurate aim shooting from a moving vehicle to another moving vehicle. You just don't. That's why gangbangers use five or six AKs during drive by shootings.

Five or six AKs shooting out one car? That'd be a sight.

[Ranko Kanzaki]

If they flee by vehicle in such a way that makes them a danger to the lives of the people around them, lethal force should be an option.

They should be able to be shot if that is deemed to be the best way to prevent them from endangering any other lives.

I don't think they "should be shot," but I don't think ruling it out is necessarily a good idea either.