• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Should police officers ram motor cyclist if their only offense was speeding?

Should police officers be allowed to ram motorcyclists at high speeds:

  • yes, but only if the offender is a known dangerous criminal

    Votes: 3 20.0%

  • yes, but only if the offender has just committed a serious crime

    Votes: 2 13.3%

  • yes, for any offense or crime, if you run you should expect to possibly die

    Votes: 1 6.7%

  • don't know, maybe, seriously I do not know, it depends on the situation

    Votes: 2 13.3%

  • no, not for minor traffic offenses

    Votes: 6 40.0%

  • no, even chasing a motorcyclist at high speeds for traffic offenses goes too far

    Votes: 4 26.7%

  • I have no opinion about this issue

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • it may not be a crime from the officer but I seriously disagree with his actions

    Votes: 1 6.7%

  • refreshing a thread/poll without Trump, darned, I celebrated too soon

    Votes: 2 13.3%

  • other, namely,.......

    Votes: 3 20.0%
  • Total voters
    15
Peter King

Peter King

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Feb 19, 2012
Messages
29,957
Reaction score
14,681
Location
Netherlands
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Dangerous chases are pretty common due to even possessing some pot can lead to serious jail times, so a lot of people choose to flee, knowing full well it will not end well.

But those people usually are in cars and if police cars ram those cars the suspect inside is usually not that seriously hurt. But if the police cruisers pursue a motor cycle, then those chases can become pretty much really dangerous from the get go. But even more than a dangerous chase due to high speeds, even motor cycles get rammed on occasion by police cruisers, with all the dire consequences of that.

Now I am not saying do not go all in when you are pursuing a killer who has just murdered someone and is trying to flee the scene, I am talking about people of whom we do not know anything other than having committed a traffic offense (let's say driving 66 in a 45 miles an hour zone). And after an already dangerous chase through intersections etc. get rammed and go crashing to the ground with sometimes deathly consequences for the driver and possible fatal consequences for the public at large.

For example the case of 30 year old Robert Clark, who as said was caught speeding by driving 66 in a 45 zone. An officer pursued him as we can see on this video:



at about 5.30 in the video you can see the end of this chase, with fatal results after Robert Clark died from his crash. The reason for his refusal to stop was having cannabis on his person.

Now again, I am not saying don't chase dangerous criminals or suspected dangerous criminals but maybe not chase them down and ram them so that they die. In the Netherlands officers err on the side of caution when chasing down a traffic offender, either by deciding the risk of death or serious injury to the offender is too great or because they will go the registered owners house and confront him/her there and arrest him/her.

In a perfect world a helicopter would be available but that is not always possible.

So what say you, should police officers who do not know about any other crime being committed other than a traffic offense, be allowed to ram motor cyclists at high speed? Or not?
 
Peter King said:
Dangerous chases are pretty common due to even possessing some pot can lead to serious jail times, so a lot of people choose to flee, knowing full well it will not end well.

But those people usually are in cars and if police cars ram those cars the suspect inside is usually not that seriously hurt. But if the police cruisers pursue a motor cycle, then those chases can become pretty much really dangerous from the get go. But even more than a dangerous chase due to high speeds, even motor cycles get rammed on occasion by police cruisers, with all the dire consequences of that.

Now I am not saying do not go all in when you are pursuing a killer who has just murdered someone and is trying to flee the scene, I am talking about people of whom we do not know anything other than having committed a traffic offense (let's say driving 66 in a 45 miles an hour zone). And after an already dangerous chase through intersections etc. get rammed and go crashing to the ground with sometimes deathly consequences for the driver and possible fatal consequences for the public at large.

For example the case of 30 year old Robert Clark, who as said was caught speeding by driving 66 in a 45 zone. An officer pursued him as we can see on this video:



at about 5.30 in the video you can see the end of this chase, with fatal results after Robert Clark died from his crash. The reason for his refusal to stop was having cannabis on his person.

Now again, I am not saying don't chase dangerous criminals or suspected dangerous criminals but maybe not chase them down and ram them so that they die. In the Netherlands officers err on the side of caution when chasing down a traffic offender, either by deciding the risk of death or serious injury to the offender is too great or because they will go the registered owners house and confront him/her there and arrest him/her.

In a perfect world a helicopter would be available but that is not always possible.

So what say you, should police officers who do not know about any other crime being committed other than a traffic offense, be allowed to ram motor cyclists at high speed? Or not?
Click to expand...


Police should be ramming more people that attempt to flee... I am getting sick and tired of seeing innocent people get hurt when cops don't ram the suspect and the the one running eventually runs a red and plows into an innocent person.

Flee = Rammed.

You run = **** you.
 
I am not convinced we can make a universal call on this, everything from conditions to location to who is being chased all would impact that decision. We run the risk of creating another problem trying to set some standard.
 
Peter King said:
Dangerous chases are pretty common due to even possessing some pot can lead to serious jail times, so a lot of people choose to flee, knowing full well it will not end well.

But those people usually are in cars and if police cars ram those cars the suspect inside is usually not that seriously hurt. But if the police cruisers pursue a motor cycle, then those chases can become pretty much really dangerous from the get go. But even more than a dangerous chase due to high speeds, even motor cycles get rammed on occasion by police cruisers, with all the dire consequences of that.

Now I am not saying do not go all in when you are pursuing a killer who has just murdered someone and is trying to flee the scene, I am talking about people of whom we do not know anything other than having committed a traffic offense (let's say driving 66 in a 45 miles an hour zone). And after an already dangerous chase through intersections etc. get rammed and go crashing to the ground with sometimes deathly consequences for the driver and possible fatal consequences for the public at large.

For example the case of 30 year old Robert Clark, who as said was caught speeding by driving 66 in a 45 zone. An officer pursued him as we can see on this video:



at about 5.30 in the video you can see the end of this chase, with fatal results after Robert Clark died from his crash. The reason for his refusal to stop was having cannabis on his person.

Now again, I am not saying don't chase dangerous criminals or suspected dangerous criminals but maybe not chase them down and ram them so that they die. In the Netherlands officers err on the side of caution when chasing down a traffic offender, either by deciding the risk of death or serious injury to the offender is too great or because they will go the registered owners house and confront him/her there and arrest him/her.

In a perfect world a helicopter would be available but that is not always possible.

So what say you, should police officers who do not know about any other crime being committed other than a traffic offense, be allowed to ram motor cyclists at high speed? Or not?
Click to expand...


Police in Mississippi typically don't bother chasing motorcycles anymore, not sure if it is law or just a policy. I remember hearing about a big chase early in the 2000s that the person on the motorcycle had a really bad crash and killed himself and ever since they don't even bother flashing lights. When I had my CBR I never had an issue even when passing parked officers moving at 130+mph.
 
that organ donor was a road menace
good call by the cop
 
If you ram a motorcycle he is going down, at speed that can easily result in serious injury and/or death. It's not the same as doing a pit maneuver on an auto. If the person a dangerous criminal who and/or has committed serious crime, then I would say yes, otherwise no, it is too dangerous for anything other than the conditions I mentioned.
 
Bodhisattva said:
Police should be ramming more people that attempt to flee... I am getting sick and tired of seeing innocent people get hurt when cops don't ram the suspect and the the one running eventually runs a red and plows into an innocent person.

Flee = Rammed.

You run = **** you.
Click to expand...

Or not chase people for whom you have no real reason to chase. But I am not talking about cars who could really endanger people when fleeing, I am talking about traffic laws breaking motorcyclists who have no airbag, just death.

Now if there is pressing reason to chase down a motorcyclist that is one thing, in the Netherlands they just give you your ticket on your license plate and don't bother chasing them for a small traffic offense.
 
Peter King said:
Or not chase people for whom you have no real reason to chase. But I am not talking about cars who could really endanger people when fleeing, I am talking about traffic laws breaking motorcyclists who have no airbag, just death.

Now if there is pressing reason to chase down a motorcyclist that is one thing, in the Netherlands they just give you your ticket on your license plate and don't bother chasing them for a small traffic offense.
Click to expand...

Well... I think that cops should generally not chase people unless it is very serious. Most of the time the cops can get the owners information from the plate number and just go to their house later or even just mail them a ticket.

Another stupid thing is making it a law that the speeder must sign the ticket. Who cares if some angry driver doesn't sign it or even take it... just mail it to them with fines for not paying by a certain date. The stupidity of some laws is ridiculous.
 
A high speed chase over a speeding ticket is pretty stupid.
 
Hard to respond to a poll with clearly biased options.

I would have selected "yes, for any offense or crime if you run." This because when a car, truck, or even a motorcycle "flees," then they are posing a risk of harm to other citizens both in motor vehicles and common pedestrians.

It should be a last resort, saved for when the threat of harms I listed are imminent, but it should be an option in such cases.

But you HAD to color the option with "you should expect to possibly die." :roll:
 
Last edited:
Most departments have a pursuit policy which gives guidance for chasing a vehicle.
Some allow it and some won't allow any pursuit.

In general I would think there would need to be a threat of deadly force from the motorcycle rider to justify ramming the motor cycle.
 
When you think about there is not much difference between using a firearm or ramming a motorcycle.

You would have to be able to justify the use deadly force.
 
Peter King said:
Dangerous chases are pretty common due to even possessing some pot can lead to serious jail times, so a lot of people choose to flee, knowing full well it will not end well.

But those people usually are in cars and if police cars ram those cars the suspect inside is usually not that seriously hurt. But if the police cruisers pursue a motor cycle, then those chases can become pretty much really dangerous from the get go. But even more than a dangerous chase due to high speeds, even motor cycles get rammed on occasion by police cruisers, with all the dire consequences of that.

Now I am not saying do not go all in when you are pursuing a killer who has just murdered someone and is trying to flee the scene, I am talking about people of whom we do not know anything other than having committed a traffic offense (let's say driving 66 in a 45 miles an hour zone). And after an already dangerous chase through intersections etc. get rammed and go crashing to the ground with sometimes deathly consequences for the driver and possible fatal consequences for the public at large.

For example the case of 30 year old Robert Clark, who as said was caught speeding by driving 66 in a 45 zone. An officer pursued him as we can see on this video:



at about 5.30 in the video you can see the end of this chase, with fatal results after Robert Clark died from his crash. The reason for his refusal to stop was having cannabis on his person.

Now again, I am not saying don't chase dangerous criminals or suspected dangerous criminals but maybe not chase them down and ram them so that they die. In the Netherlands officers err on the side of caution when chasing down a traffic offender, either by deciding the risk of death or serious injury to the offender is too great or because they will go the registered owners house and confront him/her there and arrest him/her.

In a perfect world a helicopter would be available but that is not always possible.

So what say you, should police officers who do not know about any other crime being committed other than a traffic offense, be allowed to ram motor cyclists at high speed? Or not?
Click to expand...


Why didn’t the guy just stop?
 
Peter King said:
Dangerous chases are pretty common due to even possessing some pot can lead to serious jail times, so a lot of people choose to flee, knowing full well it will not end well.

But those people usually are in cars and if police cars ram those cars the suspect inside is usually not that seriously hurt. But if the police cruisers pursue a motor cycle, then those chases can become pretty much really dangerous from the get go. But even more than a dangerous chase due to high speeds, even motor cycles get rammed on occasion by police cruisers, with all the dire consequences of that.

Now I am not saying do not go all in when you are pursuing a killer who has just murdered someone and is trying to flee the scene, I am talking about people of whom we do not know anything other than having committed a traffic offense (let's say driving 66 in a 45 miles an hour zone). And after an already dangerous chase through intersections etc. get rammed and go crashing to the ground with sometimes deathly consequences for the driver and possible fatal consequences for the public at large.

For example the case of 30 year old Robert Clark, who as said was caught speeding by driving 66 in a 45 zone. An officer pursued him as we can see on this video:



at about 5.30 in the video you can see the end of this chase, with fatal results after Robert Clark died from his crash. The reason for his refusal to stop was having cannabis on his person.

Now again, I am not saying don't chase dangerous criminals or suspected dangerous criminals but maybe not chase them down and ram them so that they die. In the Netherlands officers err on the side of caution when chasing down a traffic offender, either by deciding the risk of death or serious injury to the offender is too great or because they will go the registered owners house and confront him/her there and arrest him/her.

In a perfect world a helicopter would be available but that is not always possible.

So what say you, should police officers who do not know about any other crime being committed other than a traffic offense, be allowed to ram motor cyclists at high speed? Or not?
Click to expand...


possessing personal use pot does not lead to excessive jail sentences, and under no circumstances is it less then fleeing police. Even if it did, the decision to possess cannabis in violation of the criminal code is the sole responsibility of the possessor. There's a lot of gun laws I don't agree with, but if you're arrested for an unregistered handgun in NYC well that's what happens.

police should be allowed to use any force necessary to terminate a pursuit.

Most police departments will break off a pursuit if continuing it is too dangerous to the public, but in many cases you don't know who's actually driving the car, if it is the registered owner or not, if the vehicle is stolen, if it's being used to transport drugs/guns/contraband etc. if they did in fact just leave the scene of a felony or an accident or committed some yet unreported crime or a crime where they're not yet a suspect and think they're being pulled over for that, you won't know why they run until they stop.

The motorcyclist chose to run, if bumping him was necessary to end the pursuit then that's what was necessary.
 
Bodhisattva said:
Well... I think that cops should generally not chase people unless it is very serious. Most of the time the cops can get the owners information from the plate number and just go to their house later or even just mail them a ticket.

Another stupid thing is making it a law that the speeder must sign the ticket. Who cares if some angry driver doesn't sign it or even take it... just mail it to them with fines for not paying by a certain date. The stupidity of some laws is ridiculous.
Click to expand...

There is a myth here, you don't have to sign the ticket for it to be valid. I've recieved traffic tickets in WA and I did not have to sign them, the state patrol just handed them over.

in other jurisdictions a signature merely means the person understands they've been cited in lieu of arrest and if they don't sign they can be arrested and held until their court hearing. it has nothing to do with validity of tickets.
 
EMNofSeattle said:
in other jurisdictions a signature merely means the person understands they've been cited in lieu of arrest and if they don't sign they can be arrested and held until their court hearing. it has nothing to do with validity of tickets.
Click to expand...

I never said anything about the validity of the ticket...
 
No one here is questioning the issue about cannabis possession being the cause of the problem?
Unbelievable.

It's being said that cannabis possession is the reason the biker refused to pull over!
Yeah, can't say I blame him. Not saying that he was right to flee, I'm saying I understand WHY he made that decision.
Your life RUINED in South Carolina because cannabis possession in that state amounts to:

Possession

Misdemeanor: up to 6 mos. and/or $1000
Subsequent offense: misdemeanor, 1 yr. and/or $2000

Under 1 oz.: 30 days and/or $100 to $200**
Over 1 oz.: Prima facie guilty of sale

**Thirty days and $200 bucks for A JOINT, or even a pipe with residue.
That is MANDATORY.
The over/under is as low as 30 days/100-200 fine or up to 6 months and a thousand bucks.

A one ounce bag of weed is automatic evidence of TRAFFICKING.
You're not going to jail, you're going TO PRISON.
 
Peter King said:
Dangerous chases are pretty common due to even possessing some pot can lead to serious jail times, so a lot of people choose to flee, knowing full well it will not end well.

But those people usually are in cars and if police cars ram those cars the suspect inside is usually not that seriously hurt. But if the police cruisers pursue a motor cycle, then those chases can become pretty much really dangerous from the get go. But even more than a dangerous chase due to high speeds, even motor cycles get rammed on occasion by police cruisers, with all the dire consequences of that.

Now I am not saying do not go all in when you are pursuing a killer who has just murdered someone and is trying to flee the scene, I am talking about people of whom we do not know anything other than having committed a traffic offense (let's say driving 66 in a 45 miles an hour zone). And after an already dangerous chase through intersections etc. get rammed and go crashing to the ground with sometimes deathly consequences for the driver and possible fatal consequences for the public at large.

For example the case of 30 year old Robert Clark, who as said was caught speeding by driving 66 in a 45 zone. An officer pursued him as we can see on this video:



at about 5.30 in the video you can see the end of this chase, with fatal results after Robert Clark died from his crash. The reason for his refusal to stop was having cannabis on his person.

Now again, I am not saying don't chase dangerous criminals or suspected dangerous criminals but maybe not chase them down and ram them so that they die. In the Netherlands officers err on the side of caution when chasing down a traffic offender, either by deciding the risk of death or serious injury to the offender is too great or because they will go the registered owners house and confront him/her there and arrest him/her.

In a perfect world a helicopter would be available but that is not always possible.

So what say you, should police officers who do not know about any other crime being committed other than a traffic offense, be allowed to ram motor cyclists at high speed? Or not?
Click to expand...


Sorry, but if it's a high speed chase, the only offence isn't speeding.
 
Mycroft said:
Sorry, but if it's a high speed chase, the only offence isn't speeding.
Click to expand...

Of COURSE, now the person fleeing is racking up one after another after another, speed, red lights, felony evading, etc etc etc.
So yeah, now it HAS become incredibly dangerous.
I am not saying that the biker was acting rationally when he decided to flee.

But laws that promise a month or up to six months in jail for as little as a joint, or even a ROACH, are absurd.
Even IF SC wants to keep it illegal, at most it should be the equivalent of a moving violation.

Now what the story DOES NOT say is if the biker was UNDER the INFLUENCE.
If so, that's DUI, and that changes everything.
 
Mycroft said:
Sorry, but if it's a high speed chase, the only offence isn't speeding.
Click to expand...

At this point no, but he chased the guy down for a traffic violation only, too much risk and they could have gone to his residence and booked him there for his excessive speed and dangerous driving, that would have been a much better solution IMO.
 
I really don't have much of an opinion on pot being legal or not

But..

Guy with pot going 66 in a 45 zone. Why not just have a neon sign that says "Here I am stop me " Really stupid mistake #1 I mean it's almost like the guy wanted to get caught..

Riding without helmet.. Mistake # 2 ( IMHO)

Going excessive speeds of 100+ he ( the cyclist ) endangered ever single car/person he passed. That was a big hog, probably around 800 to 1000 pounds, had he hit a car at 100 + MPH it would have done ALOT of damage to car and occupants. Mistake #3

Refusing to stop after the attention getting tap.. BIG BIG Mistake.

The only thing the cop did wrong was to knock him down with traffic ahead. I don't know if the motorcycle made contact with the car or not.

The simplest solution to these scenarios is " all you have to do is stop"

This didn't start out as a chase, It was a simple traffic violation, The guy on the motorcycle turned it into a chase, not the cop.

djl
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom