So many Americans are using cars instead of guns to kill people. We need to start treating cars like the deadly weapons they are. By that I mean, we need to stop registering cars, stop requiring people show proficiency in using cars, stop requiring insurance to use a car. It’s what the founding fathers wanted when they wrote the 2nd amendment.
That is one of the most brilliant pieces of sarcasm I’ve ever seen. I wish there were a way to make sure everyone sees it.
Large malls or outdoor pedestrian areas need to protected from cars and their drivers. Something as simple and cheap as bollards at every entrance could have prevented the truck from entering the mall.
They need protection from trucks, specifically. Small cars are much less able to do this. Small cars is still dangerous, but far less dangerous than large trucks.
Drunk driving is bad and under punished in the US. Good thing we have our Judge Dredds out there making sure he’ll never do it again.
People who intentionally DUI (i.e. not “Oh shit, I started this new medication and didn’t realize it would make me drowsy”) genuinely don’t deserve to drive a single inch for the rest of their lives. We punish it way too lightly in the US thanks to rampant car/hyper-individualist culture.
I hate it, because so many people don’t see the problem. “Oh it’s a short drive.”
Yeah it sure is a DRIVE which is why I’m not doing it.
Yes it sucks that I have to plan harder if I want to drink while I’m out but… I don’t have to drink.
Can’t disagree. Partner and I just went to a work party last night and knew we’d be drinking, so what did we do? Didn’t drive, simple as.
A guy evaded a DUI stop, drove into a mall, and after the crash ran on foot and police unloaded on him making everyone think it was a mass shooting.
Since when did evading arrest come with the punishment of death row?
Always has, in fact there’s a ton of controversy in places like where I live that made laws that high-speed chases for most crimes were not allowed as well as shootouts in public for most crimes if the criminal doesn’t have a gun, since they kill bystanders more often than catch criminals with both of those. But the police unions and NRA have stirred up the conservatives against nonviolent capture.
This guy probably wouldn’t have hurt anyone if he hadn’t been fleeing. Sounds like he was just trying to avoid a DUI and they could have just took his license plate number and gone to his house/workplace to pick him up.
I don’t know, perhaps when you drive over people while doing so? Let alone right after someone did it in Germany and killed people.
None of the articles I’ve read, including this one, indicate that the driver got out of the vehicle. This one says he was actively driving through the mall when he was shot.
Yeah. And this website looks very right wing so they don’t include that perspective.
What was the point of shooting him when he was running away on foot?
Newsnation is doing that thing where they try to be “unbiased” but still hired Chris Cuomo.
They’re doing that Semafor thing where they walk the line the first few years, but still selectively report/omit things so they don’t get dinged on things like MBFC.
They used to be WGN, and own a shit ton of local stations in the rust belt as well, so I’m predicting they pull some Sinclair shenanigans eventually too.
It’s not the biggest problem in America right now, but I’ve been keeping an eye on them with how often they’re being posted now.
Their landing page modal on my phone literally said “ONE NATION UNDER GOD” 😅
And if you look at MBFC they lean left.
Because they’re going right up to the line but not crossing it. It’s meant to be a source that can’t be immediately dismissed
Because Tennessee v Garner allows for this to happen. If the police believe that the fleeing suspect poses immediate harm to them or others then they’re allowed to use lethal force. He drive a car through a shopping mall and injured people. Cars are 4,000+ pound missiles.
I also want to point out that legal justification does not always make right. But at least understand the situation.
But he was out of the car already. Did they think he was concealed carrying another car on him or what?
I’m not familiar with the situation, however many of these car attacks are followed by knife attacks once the vehicle is disabled. They get out and run around stabbing people. Not trying to justify actions or anything, as I don’t know the full situation, however that has potential to be a reason for the police actions.
Tough one.
You’re absolutely correct in as much that most European terrorist attacks start with a blunt force mass-casualty attack, and move on to a low-sophistication phase such as knives or swords, with some sort of improvised improvised explosive endgame.
In North America though, it’s not really an attack pattern that is commonplace - likely due to the high availability of conventional firearms making it easier to start and continue a massive casualty attack.
I suppose the line is drawn wherever it would become reasonable to assume that the driver was going to present a lethal threat to others in the vicinity after leaving the vehicle. I’m not familiar with this case in particular, but it’s going to be a tough one to justify if there’s no ongoing threat to the people in the area being presented.
because cops are incapable of de-escalation in the united states. they are trained to be cowards. its literally in the book to aim for the head and body and unload the clip.
I was surprised when I learned that the military has deescalation training. It makes sense, you don’t want to be the reason why things suddenly erupt into a fire fight in an unknown situation.
You’re safer being stopped and confronted by the National Guard or other division than by police.
Also incapable of winning a foot race.
Half the cops in the US are fat fucks
Bad cop, no donut is a thing for a reason.
Against a drunk guy
Who just crashed his car
What was the point of shooting him when he was running away on foot?
First time?
