DELETE

[lifeofduty]

PLEASE DELETE

[gym rat]

It would be ethical, legal and a great tactical move.

[CBR_rider]

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=71f_1345781050&comments=1

Watch it actually happen...

[OldShooter32]

Whatever it takes.

[K7addict]

If you were to arrive on scene of a crime where there had already been an officer down, and you were rolling up on an active shooter (I don't know any police lingo) and the shooter was in the street, could you run him over with your car? Or would that be unethical?

If lethal force can be used to stop a threat who is actively harming citizens, whether it be officers or people walking down the street, then yes. I don't see anything unethical about it and a department may or may not have policy for or against.

It may be unorthodox but I bet most officers are more accurate with a car than a gun, the car has brakes to stop once the suspect is down vs bullets that could potentially miss, the car provides some cover and there is a time factor involved as well. I'd rather hit an active shooter with an approximate 28,000,000 grain projectile instead of a 230 grain projectile. Just my 2 cents.

Tapatalkin Galaxy Note II

[DEPUTYBILL]

More knock down power the better!

[pitbuljake]

It would be ethical, legal and a great tactical move.

+1

And the best part, the officers went home that night!

[NuGunner]

Lethal force is lethal force

[BakoJ]

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=71f_1...050&comments=1

Watch it actually happen...

Bad ***!

[lifeofduty]

Ok, and to switch the question up just for sharts and giggles, what if a civilian encounters an active shooter while driving. Is it ok for a civilian to run over the active shooter or will they go down for murder?

[Just-in]

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=71f_1...050&comments=1

Watch it actually happen...

Ouch!

[RickD427]

If the use of deadly force is justified, it really doesn't matter what tool is used to deliver that force.

The U.S. Supreme Court gave a good treatment to the issue in Scott v Harris (2007). That case originated in a vehicle pursuit. He opted not to use the textbook PITT Maneuver because he was outside of the speed parameters. But using some original thought, and an understanding of vehicle movement dynamics, came up with an improvised "let's run him into a giant tree at 85mph maneuver."

It worked. The pursuit was ended and the suspect was rendered a quadriplegic. He sued on 42 USC 1983 grounds alleging that his right against unreasonable seizure was violated. The Supreme Court held that the deputy was shielded by qualified immunity.

It was a "slam dunk" decision. Eight of the justices considered the force as reasonable. The one dissenting justice didn't find the force unreasonable, he dissented because he felt a jury was entitled to decide the reasonableness.

[Ron-Solo]

Ok, and to switch the question up just for sharts and giggles, what if a civilian encounters an active shooter while driving. Is it ok for a civilian to run over the active shooter or will they go down for murder?

If deadly force is appropriate, it isn't murder, it is justifiable homicide. LE status isn't a requirement for justifiable homicide.

Don't expect your car insurance to cover the damage, since it is an intentional act.

[Rickrock1]

You probably never want to be In that position

[CBR_rider]

Bad ***!

IIRC, the buy driving in that video had a ride along too. Before I was hired, I never had ride alongs like that...