User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 11/7/2001 5:30:46 PM EDT
[#1]
It all depends on WHY they were chasing him.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/7/2001 5:34:04 PM EDT
[#2]
Quoted: It all depends on WHY they were chasing him. He stole the semi and ran from the cops. No firearms involved that I know of. I have seen police chases before where the guy was shooting at the cops and no SWAT were called in. The most drastic I've seen done is the ole bump deal to make him spin out. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/7/2001 5:36:45 PM EDT
[#3]
LT (can I call you LT?). I will dignify your statement with a response when you start posting without posting again. BTW, wouldn't you, given the opportunity, LOVE to have the opportunity to engage such a P?!(K with an MP5? Maybe the SWAT team was called in because they said PLEASE?!?!?!?!?!?!?!
[50][rolleyes][shotgun][sniper] |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/7/2001 5:37:02 PM EDT
[#4]
I think anything that keeps the SWAT team from doing something that most people would consider "productive" is what they need to be out doing. Hell, I think we should have the SWAT out pulling traffic duty, and school cross guard! That would keep them from going out shooting innocent people and themselves.
And I think the guy in California stole a tank, not a Bradley. Michael Not a believer in SWAT teams |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/7/2001 5:41:53 PM EDT
[#5]
Quoted: And I think the guy in California stole a tank, not a Bradley. Michael Bradley....Abrams.... flucking amelican names all same, same, [;D] |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/7/2001 5:48:01 PM EDT
[#6]
teehee, it wasn't an Abrams either.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/7/2001 5:53:18 PM EDT
[#7]
Quoted: teehee, it wasn't an Abrams either. OK I give up. It was a tank that for sure. What do you expect, I was in the Navy. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/7/2001 5:57:54 PM EDT
[#8]
I believe the tank was a M60.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/7/2001 6:11:13 PM EDT
[#9]
It was an M-60A5 and the goofball served as a crew member (loader I think) during the 80's.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/7/2001 6:35:24 PM EDT
[#10]
They should have fragged his ass. [grenade] |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/7/2001 6:40:49 PM EDT
[#11]
Not enough information to vote for either option.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/7/2001 6:46:04 PM EDT
[#12]
Hmm, maybe to justify their existance. If they weren't called up for small matters like this, they would be doing nothing at all.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/7/2001 6:59:14 PM EDT
[#13]
The suspect was wanted for robbery and stole the truck to facilitate his escape.
He ran a road block, almost hitting officers. He drove on the wrong side of the road. SWAT was an appropriate response. If DPD needed to stop that truck because he started to directly threaten motorists, do you think the Patrol guys could have done it with shotguns and 9mm pistols? I question why the truck had any tires left, though. Haven't they heard of spike strips? |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/7/2001 7:20:43 PM EDT
[#14]
Quoted: The suspect was wanted for robbery and stole the truck to facilitate his escape. He ran a road block, almost hitting officers. He drove on the wrong side of the road. SWAT was an appropriate response. If DPD needed to stop that truck because he started to directly threaten motorists, do you think the Patrol guys could have done it with shotguns and 9mm pistols? I question why the truck had any tires left, though. Haven't they heard of spike strips? So what happened with the guy in San Diego in the tank. He destroyed property, both private and public. Lethal force was authorized, but no SWAT. There was another in FL(I could be wrong on the state, again) Where two men rob the bank and shot at the cops during the get away. No SWAT. There was also another chase in CA with a semi from San Diego and lasted till he got to Pomona about 80miles north. No shots fired. The cops laid way back so he would drop his speed and not cause damage. They let the choppers handle the chase. DPD SWAT also shot at the semi in crowded streets(per FoxNews). Seem to me they were putting the public at risk by doing so. NO firearms were found from the driver. In viewing the video it looks like the cops were right on his ass. Probably why he was driving the way he was. If they just laid back a bit and let the choppers follow him around I don't think he would've cause the damage he did. It just seem an overkill for me. BTW just saw an interview with the local Fox News with 3 LE agencies here in the DFW area and the spokesperson in each department said they would not have handled it the same way. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/7/2001 7:33:03 PM EDT
[#15]
Based on the limited (pathetic) amount of information I would say that the call out of swat was a typical Damned if you do and Damned if you don't situation.
When dealing with the unknown it is best to ere on the side of caution. [img]http://w1.511.telia.com/~u51102888/anims/cartoon6/dad_anm.gif[/img] |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/7/2001 7:36:16 PM EDT
[#16]
I'm no expert by any means, but I do think calling in the SWAT team was warranted given the fact that they were told to take him out with any means necessary. But I do have to admit that in my eyes they could have handled it differently. Maybe setting up an ambush or something on the route he was taking. Even better yet setting up a sniper to take him out in a spot where the general public would not be hurt and the truck could be safely stopped, whether that be on a chopper, car, or roadblock. Again just my .02.
Lethal[heavy] "Hope for the best, Prepare for the worst" |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/7/2001 7:46:01 PM EDT
[#17]
LT, they've had some of the radio traffic from the tank chase on World's Wildest Police Videos, they were asking about SWAT, more to see if they had any AT weapons. So I think SWAT was being considered. Tough to get SWAT to a "moving" incident tho'. They had 50 or so officer involved so SWAT wouldn't have really been anymore "firepower".
The idea behind SWAT a lot of times is to put officers on the scene with effective medium range weapons and make it clear to the suspect that there is NO chance that they will be able to get away. They also do things like set up CCTV cameras and observation post that are out of the effective range of the suspect. So the suspects know that he doesn't have targets he can hit, but he is being watched. No targets means no shooting, most of the time. No way to effectivley escape usually means that the person surrenders, w/o a shoot out, foot chase, physical fight etc. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/7/2001 10:20:34 PM EDT
[#18]
Oh I thought you all were gonna talk about something else, like the three news helicoptor pilots finding Federal Agents waiting for them when they landed their planes- because they violated DFW's no fly zone while following the chase and ignored orders from the tower and the police helicopters to land.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/7/2001 10:47:05 PM EDT
[#19]
Oh.. Hmmm...
We have US fighter jets ready to shoot down a civilian plane full of US citizens if one gets hijacked and endangers anyone on the ground. A stolen truck carrying a load of wood that is ON FIRE flees from the police, endangering many civilians, school children in school buses, etc.. and it's not appropriate to terminate the chase with force? I'd LOVE to see some of the Essex County, NJ carjackers and car thieves try their antics in a Southern State ! The People's Republic of NJ has a ridiculous pursuit policy. Almost NO ONE is pursued, regardless of the crime committed or the danger posed to the public. This prompts the "misguided youth of the housing projects" to simply run from the police on a regular basis ! IMHO: If you have a "Chase to the Death" policy in place, very few people would flee. Well. at least the TX case WAS interesting to watch on TV. [:P] Good thing we have Fox News ! |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/7/2001 11:00:55 PM EDT
[#20]
Well, in the Great San Diego Tank Caper, they *did* try to call in SWAT -- and SWAT told the regular cops that they didn't have anything that could take on a tank. .308 just doesn't cut it against armor.
The cops started to call in the military, but the psycho driving the tank got it stuck on a concrete lane divider on the highway (sheer stupidity on his part -- good thing), and the officers who'd been chasing it managed to get on top of the tank, open a hatch, and shoot him. In today's environment, the feds would have just called in an A-10 strike. . . . |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/7/2001 11:08:24 PM EDT
[#21]
Quoted: Well, in the Great San Diego Tank Caper, they *did* try to call in SWAT -- and SWAT told the regular cops that they didn't have anything that could take on a tank. .308 just doesn't cut it against armor. The cops started to call in the military, but the psycho driving the tank got it stuck on a concrete lane divider on the highway (sheer stupidity on his part -- good thing), and the officers who'd been chasing it managed to get on top of the tank, open a hatch, and shoot him. In today's environment, the feds would have just called in an A-10 strike. . . . For some reason I wanted to say that the cops tried to get help from the military in this incident cause they knew they had nothing that could stop it but the military or national guard or whomever would not help. But I might be wrong about that. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/8/2001 3:27:06 AM EDT
[#22]
Dallas Police Dept. looked woefully incapable and unprepared yesterday.
DPD had a "Code 100" issued which means stop at any cost and the guy basically endangered the community for TWO HOURS at his discretion. After narrowly missing a loaded school bus (part of the load struck the bus injuring a little girl) the driver continued for another half hour until he stopped of his own accord and simply got out and lay down on the pavement. If he hadn't surrendered he might STILL be driving. DPD showed a remarkable lack of tactics, training, equipment and skill. My major concern was the event was staged as diversion for something else. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/8/2001 8:56:47 AM EDT
[#23]
Stinger probably could not have handled the tires of that 18 wheeler. The spikes on the spikestrip would have been crushed by the tires, instead of penetrating them.
This is just another example of lack of forward thinking. That is caused by the idea of "It can't happen here", because it has never happened before. Everybody could go a long way towards combating these really off the wall threats by thinking in a worst case scenario frame of mind. The counter to this is that the worst case scenario almost never happens. I have more, but I am going to change my brake pads on my truck. I don't want to turn into a female, so I am going to do something manly. I am going to eat live snakes while I change my brake pads. [;)] |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/8/2001 9:06:50 AM EDT
[#24]
i say do whatever is necessary to stop the crime. .50 bmg right through the engine comes to mind. would have stopped the truck in a jif.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/8/2001 10:20:18 AM EDT
[#25]
Did you notice the officer running after the truck after it made the last left turn????
Shotgun to shoulder, he was "Duck Running" (not duck walking) up to the cab to try to have a stable shooting platform before capping the driver. Funny, but obviously effective. lol. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/8/2001 10:47:58 AM EDT
[#26]
Quoted: i say do whatever is necessary to stop the crime. .50 bmg right through the engine comes to mind. would have stopped the truck in a jif. Good plan. Would you make a list of possible future crimes that have not happened yet? You will have to sell this idea to the city council and the citizens, so you need to make a convincing argument to those who have not studied the issue. I can sure use the tips, because I have to sell some uneducated people about the reality of some threats that have not come to cause a problem yet. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/8/2001 5:37:43 PM EDT
[#27]
Semi's running amok? Tanks rampaging through your streets? This looks like a job for...
ta TA [b]TA[/b] the [size=6][blue]THE TANK POLICE[/blue][/size=6] [left][img]http://medlem.tripodnet.nu/Brenten/pictures/VAP-domc3.jpg[/img][/left] [right][img]http://medlem.tripodnet.nu/Brenten/pictures/VAP-bonapart.jpg[/img][/right] [left][img]http://medlem.tripodnet.nu/Brenten/pictures/VAP-scan9.gif[/img][/left] [right][img]http://medlem.tripodnet.nu/Brenten/pictures/VAP-scan12.jpg[/img][/right] he he he [:D] |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/8/2001 6:16:44 PM EDT
[#28]
I mean all that's necessary is shooting out the radiator. In an older diesel truck it would take about 10 minutes to overheat and sieze. Any newer diesel truck will automatically shut off the fuel pump after about two gallons of coolant is lost. The radiator is about 4 feet by 5 feet. Either way the truck stops in maybe 10 minutes NOT TWO HOURS!
I don't think the cops had a CLUE how to stop the truck. Stupid and sad. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
