Contour Enthusiasts Group Archives Forums General Common Interests Don't drink and drive

No you and Red should go back to beating each other off and let this thread die!

I think we have plenty.

Wait... @ self.

Eh, I'm at work, but just had to check in and update myself on the 77 post circus since my absence.

Anway:

"It was a decision made in the interest of safety.

Members of the Georgia state patrol say its troopers were not able to use these devices, called stop Stix, to flatten the tires of the vehicle they were pursuing for 66 miles.

"This police pursuit we were not able to get in a position to use stop Stix. You have to be well in front of the violators to plan putting the stop Stix in front of the violator for them to advance."

Riner says at some points the driver's speed exceeded 100 miles an hour, often using the emergency lane and at one point, almost hitting a South Carolina d-o-t worker.

Once we saw that the violator was not going to stop she was causing major safety concerns with other motorists on i-95 it was chosen then to use the pit maneuver."

From http://64.233.179.104/search?q=cache:t1uENlnOQfsJ:www.wjcl.com/global/story.asp%3Fs%3D2194705%26ClientType%3DPrint+pit+maneuver&hl=en&ie=UTF-8

Seems to me that GSP is standing behind its officer. There will be a wrongful death suit (there always is, no matter how painfully obvious it is that deadly force was required), and the only way that GSP can sheild itself is if it were to claim that the officer acted outside departmental policy. Since they are not doing that, and are rather defending the actions of the officer, it would seem to me that the actions were justified by their departmental policy. Above, they clearly explain that letting her continue to drive in that manner was deemed a greater threat to the public than using the PIT maneuver against her.

And no, anyone who knows me on here will tell you that I will never defend a bad cop. Sorry, but I hold myself to a higher standard than that.

Good stuff, but I still wonder if it really was impossible to get a trooper in front of the vehicle. Were all the GSP in the area really behind the vehicle at the time?

Actually I don't wonder, I hope this thread dies. I suck.

more:

"The Georgia State Patrol is answering questions Wednesday about a high-speed chase that ended in the deaths of two young people near Savannah.

The chase started when the driver of a Nissan Pathfinder, 21-year-old Katie Sharp, was clocked at 86 mph on Interstate 95 in South Carolina by a Colleton County deputy. The driver refused to pull over.

â�?��?Erratic lane changes, cutting in and out of traffic, high speedâ�?�¦We had to get this vehicle stopped before someone got killed in the motoring public,â�?� said Georgia State Trooper Larry Schnall.

Thirteen miles inside Georgia, a Georgia trooper used a PIT maneuver to nudge the Pathfinder off the road. The vehicle slammed into a tree killing Sharp and her 17-year-old passenger, Garrett Gabe.

â�?��?The trooper did his job to disable the vehicle and unfortunately, we lost the life of two individuals,â�?� Schnall said. â�?��?We're very sad about that, but the trooper did his job. We took a dangerous driver off the roadway and we feel confident we saved the lives of motorists.â�?�

The PIT maneuver is dangerous and can have varying results. Just eight months ago, trooper Tony Lumley died after a crash in Spalding County. He had used the PIT maneuver on a fleeing robbery suspect and lost control.

A month after Lumley's death, a trooper used the same maneuver to knock Jerry Jones off the road in north Georgia. Jones was on the run after investigators say he killed four relatives and kidnapped his three children.

Georgia State Patrol officials said they remain confident in the maneuver.

Law enforcement officials said they did not know why Sharp decided to run. The only trouble they have found so far is a suspended driver���?�s license."

From: http://www.11alive.com/news/news_article.aspx?storyid=50743

Demonstrates how dangerous this is for officers as well, and why they do not undertake such actions lightly.

Cops were right no doubt when it comes to trial, but I still hope one day something is invented (who knows, I could be the one to do it) that would work better.

Hey Packrat and Sandman,

You guys always make for great debates. I came across a Georgia Document I wanted to show you and see what your thoughts are. Most of the document agrees with what the cops did, maybe all, I am a little fuzzy on some of the wording.

Plus I figure this will really give your brain a work out in stead of making it go num.

Link

General Procedures #8 - This makes me wonder when the pathfinder used the Hazzard lane did the cops also use the same move. I don't know but, I guess he would if he wanted to keep up.

Prohibited Pratices #1 - They can shoot at the car. Thats not an option anymore.

Termination of Pursuit #a - Not really sure what to make of this one. Maybe the Supervisor has the ability to tell the officer to continue pursuit.

Engaging in pursuit #2 - Not sure what to think here. I think the officer added as much risk as the person running. Can't tell me that a cop running 100mph is in no way shape or form causing danger in itself.

Let me remind you guys that I agree with what the cop did. I would be upset if that crazy driver had killed my mom. I just want to see your thoughts on this paper. So please don't bash.

Also note: I tried to find a date on this or to see if any of this has changed, but couldn't. If you find info saying it has changed let me know. Knowledge is power. Trying to learn.

If you are anyone who intends to use this post to laugh or make fun pleease do not reply. This is for an open minded debate, not some childish game.