By on December 29, 2013

The crash is around the 20:30 mark; the driver is shot to death in the minute that follows.

After brain surgery to remove a tumor, National Guard veteran Brian Newt Beaird became increasingly paranoid and erratic, according to his family. During an hour-long police chase, he called his father to ask why the police were chasing him. After hitting another car, Mr. Beaird was shot approximately twenty times trying to run from the LAPD, which had him surrounded. His 80-year-old father watched it happening live.

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

178 Comments on “Corvette Chase Ends With Multiple Fatal Shooting Of Driver...”


  • avatar

    I for one prefer the VIPER SRT…

  • avatar

    The guy gets out of the car with his back to the cops and they shot him to death??? He had no gun. Yes I understand he was still a threat to the public, but was shooting him down like that really necessary?

    Supposedly, one of the cops shot him with a non-lethal, but the shot caused the other cops to shoot him to death.

    I would have either tazed him or beat him brutally just to ensure he stands trial…

    …for buying a Corvette instead of an SRT.

    • 0 avatar
      jz78817

      “The guy gets out of the car with his back to the cops and they shot him to death??? He had no gun. Yes I understand he was still a threat to the public, but was shooting him down like that really necessary?”

      It’s the LAPD, what do you expect? They’ll shoot anyone with the same number of legs as the person they’re looking for.

      He’d have been safer in NYC, the cops there would have fired 200 rounds and missed with every one.

      It’s pathetic what we’ve been conditioned into allowing the police to do. I blame Richard Donner and Jerry Bruckheimer. Michael Bay too.

      • 0 avatar

        These are just the cases of police brutality caught on tape. Imagine how many people have died not-on-tape.

        Apparently, a 3 Musketeers bar, cellphone, wallet, remote control, scissors, flashlight or bottle of whiskey LOOKS LIKE A GUN after you’ve been told to put your hands above your head.

        I don’t play games with cops. I’ll take the ticket. I’ve got a lawyer. These pigs are psychotic and they are brutalizing white people and black people alike at this point. ESPECIALLY the ones who want to try and “quote the constitution” during an arrest.

        A Militarized police force with access to the Patriot Act is no different than a violation of the 3rd and 4th amendment.

        The shooting of Ernesto Duenez Jr. looked more like a “HIT” by the police than a justified shooting.

        • 0 avatar
          highdesertcat

          Naw, man. No brutality involved.

          I was in San Diego, CA, the year that some nitwit stole a battle tank, drove it through a neighborhood destroying everything in his path, entered the freeway and subsequently got hung up on the concrete median divider.

          One cop crawled onto the tank, opened the turret hatch and executed the dimwit with a few well-placed shots to the head.

          No brutality involved. In such times, you execute the perp first and ask questions later.

          • 0 avatar
            challenger2012

            This scares me to write this. I agree with you about the guy getting blown away, and most of the time you are as crazy as a S*it House Rat. This guy was Death on Wheels. The only reason he didn’t kill anyone was not by choice, but rather luck. The world will not miss this clown at all and it is safer because he is gone. Does anyone dispute this point?

          • 0 avatar
            jz78817

            yeah, well, if Beaird was tooling around in a stolen tank and deliberately destroying everything he could, you might have a point.

    • 0 avatar
      Atum

      This is serious stuff. Don’t say he deserved to die because he drove a Corvette. That’s just what the last thing you said sounds like to me.

    • 0 avatar
      thanh_n

      Here’s what I saw: Corvette driver puts a countless number of innocent civilians’ lives on the line. At 21:05, as soon as the car went into reverse, it instantly became a deadly weapon and a danger for the safety of the officers behind him.

      • 0 avatar

        The problem is that AFTER the car was crashed, the guy was UNARMED- thus no longer providing an immediate threat to any of the lives of the firing squad… I mean “the officers”…

      • 0 avatar
        DenverMike

        Stop right there… the cops were never in any kind of danger. That’s the biggest cop-out. And guess where that term comes from?

        There needs to be a real reason to chase. Especially once the perp is running red lights thru blind intersections at high speed. There was no escape with the helicopter right on top of him and the spot light was unnecessary too.

        It the cops that put “countless number of innocent civilians’ lives on the line.”

        Cops are so extremely full of their own $h!T, they don’t even realize it.

        • 0 avatar
          challenger2012

          This guy was a danger to everyone around him. Now, the world is better off without him. Who disputes this statement?

          • 0 avatar
            bball40dtw

            Maybe his family, friends, loved ones, etc. I also think that this country needs more people that answer the call to serve. I don’t know what he did in the national guard, or in his civilian life, but he may have left some parts of this world a better place.

      • 0 avatar
        axon890

        @thanh_n

        I can’t speak for the LAPD’s Use of Force policy but most agencies’ Use of Force is not a black and white digital thing that cannot be de-escalated.

        What I mean by this is that if you’re engaging someone at a deadly force level and they suddenly lose the means to inflict this deadly force the officer/agent is supposed to recognize this and move to a lower and more appropriate Use of Force level.

        The moment he got out of the vehicle and started running away he went from deadly force (a moving vehicle) to actively resisting the officers (running).

        Again, I can’t speak for the LAPD’s policy since I haven’t reviewed it, but that would not have flown for any of the agencies in my area. At that point the officers should have used whatever intermediate force options they have at the lower level(s), whether it be OC, baton, taser, etc.

        Unless the LAPD’s model lets their officers use deadly force options at any level below deadly force this was a very iffy shoot.

  • avatar
    jz78817

    y’know, 20 shots at an unarmed fleeing man… I thought the LAPD couldn’t sink any lower than their reprehensible conduct during the Dorner search. Which makes The Onion’s post “Los Angeles On High Alert As LAPD Back On Regular Duty” more sad than satire.

    When I see crap like this I have to really wonder why the hell anyone would live in places like southern California or Bloombergistan… er, I mean NYC.

    • 0 avatar
      carrya1911

      “unarmed fleeing man”

      Use of force decisions are complex and rarely look the same to the officer on the scene dealing with the shit as they do to the person watching on a screen with no sense of danger whatsoever.

      To know whether or not they made the right decision in this circumstance we’d need a hell of a lot more information than the video presented…like perhaps what information the officers were operating with.

      But why let reason get in the way, right?

  • avatar
    Mikein08

    And some people still think the cops are our friends! This is the sort
    of thing that cops just live for. Meanwhile, I’m hoping that the guy’s
    relatives have lawyered up, and I hope the taxpayers of LA are prepared
    to pay out lots of money in the inevitable lawsuits.

    • 0 avatar
      MBella

      And that’s the problem. The taxpayers will pay while the cops will likely get medals for their bravery.

    • 0 avatar

      As a registered republican and gun owner, I recognize that the police are nothing more than after-the-fact-evidence-gatherers and I must take responsibility for my own protection.

      In fact, I feel that ARMING WOMEN will have a dramatic impact on the number of rapes and robberies each year.

      A BULLET turns “rape” into “attempted rape” instantly!

      I will never give up my 2nd amendment rights because I don’t trust these “police” – many of whom are up late at night crying about their finances – usually with their gun pointed at themselves – just like Mel Gibson in Lethal Weapon 1.

      • 0 avatar
        Elena

        I think exactly the same way but when cops pull me over I hand them my license and in every instance officer goes back to his cruiser and only returns after a second unit arrives (once 5 units gathered around me). No ticket ever issued since I was breaking no law (and I have a recorder onboard: making up a reason to pull me over won’t work). If my intention was to hurt them I would pull the gun instead of the license. I’m a hispanic female, almost 50. What would it be like if I were a male… let’s not even think young and black, with no recorder and no signs warning video evidence is being recorded at all times? I’m in Miami and always felt curious if they’re afraid of CCW permit holders elsewhere. Have you ever been pulled over while carrying? I tried turning on interior lights, showing both hands through the window… Have yet to find a way to make the officer feel safe.

        • 0 avatar
          highdesertcat

          Cops call that f’n with the motorists.

          One of my sons was a state cop for many years and was severely chastised by judges for not writing enough citations.

          The counties and the states supplement their annual budgets by the citation fines levied.

        • 0 avatar
          MBella

          I also have a camera with audio recording and views front and rear in my car. The court always takes the cops word because it’s your word against their’s, so you need proof. The cameras are also so cheap now that it is a worthwhile investment.

          • 0 avatar

            Step #1 Upload the video of the police abusing their powers to Youtube.

            Step #2 hope the public outcry saves you when you get to court.

          • 0 avatar
            golden2husky

            BigTruck – I agree with that statement. Use dashcams, preferably front and rear. But remember if the dirtbag a-hole pigs know you have a camera, they are likely to take it and destroy it. If you are in a more rural area you can count on it. I wonder if there can be a one-touch method of uploading to the internet, or at least to hidden memory inside the car. The trashholes will not hesitate to violate your rights and take your property. America is going to $hit right in front of our eyes and nobody seems to care. I will add that a lot of cops are not bad, but the ranks that are are growing by leaps and bounds. This is a classic example. How anybody can even remotely support this activity as ok is beyond me and can’t be much of a human being.

          • 0 avatar
            skor

            golden2husky is correct, if you have a camera mounted in the car, and the police find it, they will likely take or destroy it. If you have a recording device, have it set to upload to the cloud, or have a remote hidden memory device somewhere in the vehicle.

          • 0 avatar
            Elena

            golden2husky the compact and cheaper models are easy to destroy but there are mobile DVRs: most often 4-channel video recorders (with audio inputs but recording it is illegal without explicit consent from all parties in some states) but those can take a GSM module which will upload footage in real time using mobile networks. GSM modules are not cheap and you must pay for data transfers. Still if your cameras have an SD card inserted anyone trying to supress evidence would take them but few to none would search for the DVR if properly installed (no exposed wiring). They’re small enough to be tucked away inside the dash. None of the cops I dealt with even entered my truck or attempted to do so.

        • 0 avatar
          snakebit

          Elena, we had an instance in our state when a state trooper pulled over a car on a major state highway for what the trooper thought would be just a traffic infraction, but the driver was an armed and wanted felon, and killed the trooper point blank. I’m not nessasarily defending police in general, but many times, an officer or policeman doesn’t know anything about someone being pulled over until he’s gotten ID from the driver and can check more than just a license plate. I won’t compare the dangers of being a firefighter versus a policeman except to ask what other profession puts you at potential risk the moment you step away from your company vehicle, routinely.

          • 0 avatar
            Elena

            Snakebit, I understand your point. Heard that from cops when I approach them after witnessing a gross and dangerous traffic violation and the officer fails to react. I think if you want to play safe at the price of not doing your job, there are other careers you should explore. In my particular instance I think it is non-sense. The scenario you described is possible, unfortunately it happens, but it is not likely. As soon as I hand them my gun license they can tell I have no criminal record plus… I took the license from my purse, the gun can be there too (more often closer). By the time I show them the license it is too late if I have the intent to harm them. Regarding professional risks I’m an electrical contractor and 800 occupational electrocutions happen every year. Statistically, I have 4 times higher chances of not returning home at the end of my shift… (this is the phrase I get from cops time after time). The day I experience hesitation to walk a ceiling, open an electrical box, etc. because someone might have left a loose wire nut and I risk getting in contact with a live source I’ll know it is time to retire or try my hand at accounting. There are dangers associated to every profession and cops do not have the most dangerous one. Convenience store clerks do not know who walks in at night, they’re all by themselves and still they let me in… From my interactions with cops it is my belief they do not understand not everyone of us is willing to kill the first officer we see. To preserve them alive someone hammered into their heads “they’re out to get you” and they react as if such assumption was true. Still, they fail in obvious things like pulling me over in the middle of nowhere and park their cruiser inches from my truck’s rear bumper… At least the ones I’ve seen got the wrong training, I’m afraid. Common sense can save your life (and lots of aggravation to those who interact with you). Often I find snakes when I lift a gate operator’s cover. I know nothing about snakes, heard some are poisonous… still I don’t kill them all. I just place cover on top of snake, work without worrying about the thing, once done make the poor thing run away, put cover back on. Guess if I were a cop it would go like remove cover, see snake, call for backup, shoot snake… bill the customer for 10 hours to reset the operator? And I’m not a cop hater, just trying to show what they do won’t protect them and is not effective, much less efficient.

  • avatar
    Big Al from Oz

    It appears there are deficiencies in the training and recruitment of police officers.

    If they fear rather than respect you will have this approach. Criminal gangs, terrorist, bullys, etc try to instill fear, because they fear themselves and have little respect.

    I quite poor when a branch of the government is in a state of fear and can’t respect.

    This is a very sad story. It happens all to often and not always in the US.

  • avatar
    snakebit

    Sadly, thanks to hindsight, we now have a little more information about the Corvette driver than the police did during the chase. I, for one, will wait for the official investigation and any freedom of information releases obtained by news organizations before I will make up my mind. Don’t slam life in Los Angeles or New York City, and think something like this won’t happen in your hometown. If you only get your information from TTAC, you still know it could happen anywhere. Remember the TTAC account of the treatment of the suspected drug user in New Mexico recently? So much for ‘that won’t happen here’ thinking.

    • 0 avatar
      Toad

      It would make sense to withhold judgement until we find out what actually happened when the driver got out of the car; dash cams and lawyers will give everybody who cares a pretty good idea.

      When you run from the cops and endanger the public running red lights and t-boning innocent motorists in the process I have a hard time conjuring up a lot of sympathy. It does not mean you inherently deserve to be shot, but when you are (finally) stopped you should expect guns to be drawn an a very limited margin for (additional) error on your part.

      I feel sorry for the family of the deceased, but when you endanger the public the consequences can be bad. Life is not like Grand Theft Auto.

  • avatar
    vangogh

    Thank god he was not black. LA would still be burning…….

  • avatar
    dartman

    …and if your getting your news from TTAC, you’re going to be waiting for a while; this incident occurred on December 13th. So much for “breaking news”! I don’t really believe the ETIC Pro-Temp is that clueless; just a little lazy–He needed (and found) some “read meat” to gin up some outrage from the erudite hoopleheads of TTAC.

  • avatar
    WhiskeyRiver

    Did someone call for an “erudite hooplehead?”

  • avatar
    OneAlpha

    What did you expect from the premier police force of Soviet Kalifornistan?

    All totalitarian governments either militarize their police, or make their soldiers into police. The idea is to scare the population into obedience. It’s Number 12 from my list of things I hate about the Golden State.

    1 – Poorly-aimed gunfights viewed as urban recreation.
    2 – Halfwits who try to outrun the Bacon in their 200,000-mile bone-stock Corolla.
    3 – Glass-egoed gangbangers.
    4 – A tsunami of Capital-T Trespassers.
    5 – Sexual predators who ply their trade as if God Himself gave them permission.
    6 – Auto theft and narcotics trafficking openly viewed as legitimate sectors of the economy.
    7 – Homosexuality viewed as a benign alternative lifestyle while Christianity is treated like a hate group.
    8 – Easily the most totalitarian car inspection regime in America.
    9 – Rice Boys.
    10 – Environmental and labor regulations that’re chasing all the businesses out of the state.
    11 – Public employee unions powerful enough to bankrupt whatever legitimate government they have left out there.
    12 – Militarized police with itchy trigger fingers and a Judge Dredd mentality.
    13 – This is the place that popularized the drive-by shooting and gangster rap.

    And the ones who aren’t stealing BMWs, murdering each other over facial expressions, manufacturing entire libraries of pornography or writing all manner of noxious laws are stoned out of their minds on pretty much anything they can get their hands on.

    Wall the place off and let it consume itself.

    • 0 avatar
      Caboose

      Thank you, Snake Pliskin.

    • 0 avatar
      thelaine

      Solid take, one alpha. Nation is going in the same direction. You cannot have government take care of all your needs without also destroying your liberty.

      • 0 avatar
        highdesertcat

        YO! This is what the majority voted for. Not just once. But twice!!!

        • 0 avatar
          Zykotec

          Very true, but after those two horrible elections they elected Obama…who is still a corporately sponsored politician (because someone once figured out the best way to get rid of cooruption is to make corruption the political system), so it didn’t help all that much…

          • 0 avatar
            highdesertcat

            You’re right. It didn’t help many of us at all.

            But for those who did get helped via the past two elections, the current state of America is their oyster.

            So once we each come to the realization that America’s wealth and value system is being redistributed and reshaped, we can adjust our own lifestyle to mitigate the effect.

            Maybe that’s why we see a population shift, by people who believe like OneAlpha, to the states with greater freedoms, away from the Golden State and the Eastern Seaboard.

            Many of them are moving to my state. And I don’t like it!

            It’s getting too damned crowded where there once were only the wide open spaces.

          • 0 avatar
            golden2husky

            What about the fat cats that were well fed in the one stolen election and one won election in 2000 and 2004. I’m not very happy with the O man, but I’d take 20 years of Obama than one term of Bush the Zero.

      • 0 avatar
        challenger2012

        Where are facts to backup your statement?

    • 0 avatar
      tonycd

      Soooo… This tragedy epitomizes a place that tolerates gay people (#7), has Honda Civic customizers (#9), passes laws to limit pollution (#10), and has effective unions for government employees (#11).

      Makes perfect sense to me.

    • 0 avatar
      RHD

      #8 – I call baloney. California requires your car to pass smog. If it has the stock equipment and it works properly, you will pass. That’s nothing to get twisty knickers about.
      Other states (particularly snow states) have biannual inspections where if your car is no longer sound it will be taken off the road.
      That’s MUCH more draconian.

  • avatar
    seabrjim

    Where are all the TTAC police groupies who wet their panties when the latest “police state” vehicle tests are published? This is what happens when you give preferential hiring treatment to foaming at the mouth ex military. Its only gonna get worse. Those APV’s departments are getting from the military are not for fighting terrorism.

    • 0 avatar
      Zykotec

      If they had cooler cars they wouldn’t need to fire their guns to feel manly all the time :P (not saying they did in this case, just stating a fairly childish humoristic’ish point)

  • avatar
    chris724

    Bet he wasn’t expecting THAT kinda response. LOL! Good riddance.

  • avatar
    bikephil

    Cool stuff! Glad he’s dead.

  • avatar
    ihatetrees

    Until more facts come out, I’ll hold my tears for the the Corvette driving POS. He demonstrated absolute disregard for others’ lives – ergo the cops should get some slack regarding whether deadly force was justified.

    It’s surprising how many supposed pro-self defense / 2nd Amendment supporters (bigtruckseriesreview) assume the worst when cops shootbut will give average citizen shooters the benefit of doubt (with similar media ‘information’).

    That said, given the makeup of the typical LA jury, the Corvette driver’s family members can probably look forward to early retirement or year+ coke / meth binge.

    • 0 avatar
      Z71_Silvy

      You nailed it.

      Nobody should be commenting on this astoundingly one sided “report” from TTACs resident cop hater.

      There was a reason why he was running. The claim he was unarmed plays NO ROLE in the actions of the police. Nor does the fact he’s in the guard (why is someone who’s “increasingly paranoid and erratic” in the guard anyway?)

      And for anyone else, including the ignorant author, who thinks they can dobetter, be my guest… but I doubt you could do the job for an hour. It take a strong person, not a coward.

      • 0 avatar
        racer-esq.

        Actually to anyone that is a coward, and not intelligent enough to work in the private sector, where there are not government unions ensuring jobs for life, I highly recommend cop work. It pays much better than anything else they can do, and comes with the kind of bloated, inflation adjusted pensions that private sector workers have to be very brave to do without.

        “The claim he was unarmed plays NO ROLE in the actions of the police.” Actually it does:

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tennessee_v._Garner

        I guarantee the defense will be that the cops somehow thought this guy had a gun, not that they had a right to shoot him because he was stumbling away.

        “why is someone who’s “increasingly paranoid and erratic” in the guard anyway?”

        The LAPD obviously has very lax standards, why should the National Guard be any better.

        • 0 avatar
          tonycd

          Where are all these “government unions ensuring jobs for life”?

          Answer: Nowhere. People believe it because of a coordinated publicity blitz and accompanying ALEC legislative drive to gut public unions, because they’re among the few forces left in the country that can marshal real campaigning resources against the corporate Far Right.

          We the Sheeple…

      • 0 avatar
        28-Cars-Later

        21:12 – Out of the car

        21:14 – Holding the light pole

        21:15 – Right of the car

        21:15-16 – Goes down, almost looks like he was kicked the stomach

        21:16 – 21:19 – Rolls around

        21:20 – Turns to his left exposing his chest with what appears to be multiple red dots in the mid-torso.

        21:25 – Appears to stop moving

        The end result is no matter the emotions, the misunderstood facts, or the mistakes, this man was summarily executed on live TV. What has happened to this world?

      • 0 avatar
        ihatetrees

        I don’t think the report is that one-sided. It’s incomplete. The video and article tell a small (emotionally charged) part of the story. And it’s a stretch to extrapolate from this that JB is a “cop-hater”. I’d call him a “cop-critic”.

      • 0 avatar
        Jack Baruth

        Oh Silvy, you do love your drama.

        The reason the guy was running was because he was mentally ill. He literally had a brain surgery go wrong. He wasn’t a criminal by natural disposition; he was a hard-working man in his fifties with a Corvette, not Nino Brown. He needed medical attention, not a roadside execution.

        Accusations of cowardice from anonymous Internet wannabes are not taken seriously, I’m sorry to say. Feel free to re-register with your real name and contact info to express these sentiments.

    • 0 avatar
      old5.0

      “It’s surprising how many supposed pro-self defense / 2nd Amendment supporters (bigtruckseriesreview) assume the worst when cops shootbut will give average citizen shooters the benefit of doubt (with similar media ‘information’).”

      No surprising at all, actually. As a strong 2nd supporter, I think my right to defend myself should include all threats, even the police. Cops like to talk about “Whatever it takes, as long as I make it home at the end of the shift.” I agree completely, which means I should be able to fight back in real time, regardless of the badge on your chest. Screw up the warrant, break down the wrong door, get shot in the face, don’t come crying to me. As long as the innocent homeowner goes home alive at the end of your shift, right?

      It isn’t even exactly the fault of individual officers; the problem is that the role of our civilian peace-keeping force has never been clearly defined. In a society that was born in open revolution against authority and where law enforcement was handled on a personal level for a long, long time, maybe that’s no surprise; the two aren’t necessarily compatible, and “law enforcement” has always seemed to lead an awkward co-existence with the Constitution. Whatever the case, a reckoning is inevitable, sooner or later.

      • 0 avatar
        racer-esq.

        “Screw up the warrant, break down the wrong door, get shot in the face, don’t come crying to me. As long as the innocent homeowner goes home alive at the end of your shift, right?”

        If only.

        This is the absolute best case scenario a civilian faces defending his home against unannounced cops breaking and entering:

        http://hamptonroads.com/2009/02/guilty-manslaughter-ryan-frederick-faces-10-years

        And there was finally (some) justice in this case (there should have been no jail time):

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cory_Maye

        However, in most no-knock/no-announce cases where the homeowner shoots a cop in self defense another cop will shoot him.

        Of course cops break into innocent peoples’ homes and kill them frequently with no consequences:

        http://www.cato.org/raidmap

        I don’t find it at all surprising that the 2nd amendment supporters that do not want the government to have a monopoly on violence also want the government held accountable for reckless violence.

        • 0 avatar
          JimC2

          The Ryan Frederick case is a pretty good example of overly militant police gone bad.

          The Chesapeake, VA P.D. really screwed the pooch on this one. Here’s the summary: guy has a grow operation in his garage, cops get a tip about it, cops do surveillance and learn guy’s routine (has a regular day job, etc.), cops wait for guy to get home from his job and go inside his house, cops execute no-knock warrant after it gets dark, one cop gets killed.

          They could have picked the guy up in broad daylight but instead they wanted to play SWAT. Over some MJ plants. In suburbia. The result is that somebody got killed and many lives were ruined.

          Guy wasn’t too wise to have all those plants, but the people responsible for authorizing the raid were suffering from an acute case of headupinass syndrome.

          Stupid, stupid, stupid all around.

      • 0 avatar
        Pch101

        “I think my right to defend myself should include all threats, even the police.”

        I don’t have much trust in the police. But I have even less trust in you.

        “the problem is that the role of our civilian peace-keeping force has never been clearly defined.”

        Sure it has. We have a Bill of Rights that provides the foundation, courts to interpret it, and elected legislatures that have passed laws that provide the details. You may not like it, but it’s all there.

        • 0 avatar
          old5.0

          Who you trust is irrelevant and carries no weight in a discussion of rights. And the court serves no purpose in real time. If I’m killed, wrongly, by an officer because I have no right to defend myself, what good did the court do me? Or my elected representatives? You’ll forgive me if I reserve the right to keep myself alive.

          “Sure it has. We have a Bill of Rights that provides the foundation, courts to interpret it, and elected legislatures that have passed laws that provide the details. You may not like it, but it’s all there.”

          No, it hasn’t. Which is why it is being constantly rehashed in multiple and concurrent court cases. Are police simple evidence-gatherers, like their union continually claims they are? If so, then they clearly overstep the boundaries of their authority on a daily basis.

          • 0 avatar
            Pch101

            You don’t have a right to shoot at the cops. Sorry, but that attitude will get your head blown off, and deservedly so.

            Your recourse against injustice is described in the Constitution. You have rights to a fair trial, to due process and to avoid self-incrimination, and the burden of proof is on the prosecutor. The cops have the right to defend themselves against you.

          • 0 avatar
            old5.0

            And as I already pointed out, the citizenry should have the right to defend themselves against the police.

            Since an organized police force was unheard of in this country until at least half a century after the Constitution was ratified, I have trouble equating the “rights” of the police as an organization with the rights of the individual citizens of the United States.

            Now, for many years, none of the above really mattered. Most folks were of the “law-abiding” variety, the government was much less intrusive on the federal and state level, most police agencies weren’t so heavily armed, and most cops weren’t so gung-ho. That, as the saying goes, was then. And you’re kidding yourself if you don’t think there’s going to be a major paradigm shift relating to the extent and role of police authority in our society.

          • 0 avatar
            Pch101

            I understood you the first time — you want to claim that the Constitution is on your side, but you are eager to ignore or rewrite it whenever it doesn’t suit you. And it doesn’t suit you quite frequently, since what you want is an extreme fringe position that bear no resemblance whatsoever to our system of laws.

          • 0 avatar
            old5.0

            No, you apparently don’t understand me as well as you think you do. You have done a magnificent job of cherrypicking minutia to argue about while ignoring the overarching point (if you’ve even grasped it, which, based on your posts, I doubt), so it would seem this discussion has run it’s course.

            I realize you fancy yourself a Constitutional scholar, so feel free to have the last word. And try not to hurt your shoulder when patting yourself on the back.

          • 0 avatar
            Pch101

            Let’s summarize:

            -Contrary to your assertions, you don’t have a right to shoot at the cops.

            -Contrary to your assertions, we have a federal constitution, numerous state constitutions, state and federal courts, and laws at the federal, state and local level that determine what the police can and can’t do.

            So you’re zero for two. See, that was easy.

    • 0 avatar
      Atum

      You and Z71 are correct. I’m a strong Republican (my profile picture is just a hint), but the police had to do what they had to do.

      Besides, the guy who wrote this is named Jack Baruth, right? I thought for a second his name was Alex Jones.

      • 0 avatar
        jz78817

        “You and Z71 are correct. I’m a strong Republican (my profile picture is just a hint), but the police had to do what they had to do.”

        that’s a load of horsecrap. The police DO NOT get to do whatever the hell they feel like, and just saying “well they got the bad guy” is a disgusting and morally bankrupt point of view. It’s why I railed against Hollywood in another comment; films like Lethal Weapon, Bad Boys, and what-have-you have conditioned the public to accept that the police should be given free reign to break whatever laws and destroy whatever’s necessary to catch the bad guy. I find it amusing that Richard Donner is vehemently anti-gun-rights yet he’s most noted for a series of films where the police shoot anything they feel like.

        you have a repugnant, reprehensible point of view which is utterly incompatible with the notion of a free society.

        • 0 avatar
          Z71_Silvy

          How do you know those officers ‘felt’ like shooting him?

          Do you honestly think that police officers WANT to shoot people?

          I think you’re the one with the “repugnant, reprehensible point of view”.

    • 0 avatar
      MBella

      Deadly force is only justified if the lives of the cops was directly threatened. I was not aware that we have adopted “Judge Dread” rules where the cop get’s to decide who to execute.

      • 0 avatar
        Zykotec

        I’m quite sure endangering the public (by, lets say t-boning a car in an intersection)justifies deadly force as much as , or more than, threatening the police…

        • 0 avatar
          DenverMike

          @Zykotec – T-boning a car is what stopped the chase. Thank God no one was seriously injured, not even the perp. But the previous chase had nothing to do with the shooting/execution.

          So just how did he threaten the police? By running away from them? Are you kidding? Or a cop yourself? I’m sure there’s cops that lurk these pages, perhaps ashamed to admit it. Other admitted cops have been regulars here, but it never lasts too long.

      • 0 avatar
        ihatetrees

        You’re correct, although your “Judge Dread” smack makes a lot of (biased) assumptions based on incomplete information.

        Given driver’s very recent disregard for life, the bar for what is “reasonably threatening” would have been lowered accordingly when he exited the vehicle. In other words, he wasn’t stopped for driving 45 in a 35 zone.

        Off Topic (somewhat):
        Personally, on a suitably empty stretch of road, I’d support a police sniper putting a couple .308 rounds into the Corvette driver. The driver was the moral equivalent of a man with a rifle taking random shots at an apartment building. I don’t understand the coddling of menacing idiots, regardless of the implement they chose.

        • 0 avatar
          MBella

          Watching a 20 plus minutes of the video gives you a pretty good idea of what was going on. A high speed chase. Regardless of why they were pursuing the guy in the first place the cops had no right to execute the guy. I find it unbelievably scary that so many people could crawl out of the woodwork and basically agree with the basic disregard for the fundamental rights and principles of the United States. You’re talking about about the blatant disregard of the lives of the surrounding people. What about the cops? The same argument can be made about them. It takes both parties to have a chase. At the end of the day everything else is irrelevant. The cops executed this guy basically for reckless driving. Whatever he may have done prior has nothing to do with it. If they would have arrested him according to the law, he would have been prosecuted for the original crime, evading the police and reckless endangerment.

      • 0 avatar
        Z71_Silvy

        Mbella you’re wrong again.

        By that statement, a women smashing a child with a hammer (which is considered deadly force) could not be subjected to a deadly force response from an officer.

        Look 609.066 for the use of deadly force statute in Minnesota. You’ll find that you don’t have to HARM anyone to be shot.

        • 0 avatar
          DC Bruce

          Having a police sniper shoot the guy while he’s driving the car (if it appears that he is deliberately crashing into others)is analytically different from having the police shoot the guy after he exits the car, unarmed, and tries to flee.

          In the former instance, arguably the driver is threatening people with deadly force (same as if he were pointing a gun at someone) and the shooting would be justified.

          As others have pointed out, once the guy exits the car and is unarmed, he is not threatening anyone with deadly force, so there is no justification for using lethal force.

          Unless, of course, you believe that he should be shot for what he just did while driving the car . . . and believe it is the function of the police, not the courts and juries, to convict and punish the perpetrator.

          • 0 avatar
            MBella

            Sure, it’s the same thing as if he had a gun, they asked him to drop it and he did. They don’t get to shoot. Any crime he has committed before is irrelevant. That’s what the courts are for.

    • 0 avatar
      challenger2012

      Big T is a D-bag.

  • avatar
    vvk

    Second degree murder charges against whoever fired the lethal shot.

  • avatar
    racer-esq.

    “Friendly-fire” incidents are my favorite kind of reckless cop shootings, especially since they put the cop unions in such a bind.

    E.g.: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/29/nyregion/in-killing-of-officer-geoffrey-j-breitkopf-no-charges.html

    But unfortunately most of the reckless cop shootings involve unarmed civilians.

    It is easily to be a cowardly thug killer/rapist/thief when you have an incredibly well funded union paying for your defense attorney and intimidating prosecutors and judges.

    To anyone that barely graduated college (or didn’t) and would like to make six figures and retire at 50, while raping women and shooting innocent people’s dogs, with a public sector union ensuring you are never fired no matter how incompetent you are, I highly recommend police work.

    • 0 avatar
      tonycd

      Again, I shouldn’t have to make a point this elementary, but evidently someone must:

      The problem of runaway militarized police forces in this country is NOT CAUSED BY UNIONISM.

      In fact, much the opposite — most of the people who favor militarization are also anti-union.

      Rhetorical question, though: If the declining freedom and prosperity of ordinary Americans is caused by the power of labor unions, why did the heyday of unionism in the 1950s, 60s and 70s coincide with the peak of prosperity for American workers, and why since then has its steady decline coincided with the gutting of union rights at the federal and state levels since 1981?

  • avatar
    28-Cars-Later

    So… we execute wreckless drivers now? The drunk lady in Columbus should feel lucky to be alive.

    • 0 avatar
      old5.0

      Shooting. It’s the new “writing a ticket”.

    • 0 avatar
      Pch101

      “So… we execute wreckless drivers now?”

      He was reckless. As was shown in the video, he definitely had a wreck.

      And no, I would hope that fleeing from the cops isn’t a capital crime.

      • 0 avatar
        28-Cars-Later

        Other drivers have had similar wrecks, and not ended up dead. Some wreckless or drunk drivers have even attempted to flee the scene and not ended up dead, Youtube is littered with them. The police were led on a chase, probably suspected weapons, and ONE of those two dozen or so decided to fire after the suspect left the vehicle prompting their brother officers to join in. I’m not as anti police as I may sound but something has to balance the actions of adrenalin pumped police officers and their suspect’s lives.

        • 0 avatar
          Pch101

          I’m not a fan of police shootings, but I’d prefer to wait for the investigation to be completed before having an opinion.

          That being said, the news footage isn’t doing the police any favors. It’s hard to see from that angle how the shooting was justified, but perhaps it looked different from the ground.

    • 0 avatar
      carrya1911

      They didn’t execute a wreckless driver…although I’m sure if *you* were the guy in the car he t-boned while running from the cops you might have a less charitable view towards the poor dear from your ambulance ride…

      The guy hopped out of the car and came at the officers…in and of itself a serious sign of concern, as there are lots of lethal force incidents that start the fireworks with exactly those moves. I don’t know what specific intelligence the LAPD officers on the ground were operating with when these events took place, but if they had information that he may be armed and he makes those sorts of moves after leading a high-speed chase and smashing some poor citizen…well…I can understand pulling the trigger.

      The reasonableness of a police UOF depends entirely on what the officer was dealing with at the moment he/she pulled the trigger. A drunk driver who smashed somebody 5 minutes before the cops showed up and who is now passive is not the same thing as a guy who wrecks out because he’s running, and who then hops out of the car and comes right at you.

      Being in these sorts of situations a few times in life helps you understand some things about them.

      • 0 avatar
        DenverMike

        @carrya1911 – Maybe we’re looking at a completely different video, or you have your cop goggles on, but as a reasonable peace officer, did you see any reasonable justification to kill this man on the spot? Not only was he stepping/running directly away from any kind confrontation, he didn’t even look like he had a loaded candy bar in his hand.

        • 0 avatar
          ihatetrees

          You (and many others here) obviously have telepathic skillz in cop-mind reading (via video) that are completely foreign to many me and carrya1911.

          You’ll just have to pardon us unskilled non-mind-readers while we wait for appropriate investigative information before making a judgement.

          • 0 avatar
            DenverMike

            We all watched the same video and comments are limited just to that. And thank gawd there is a video, or this matter would’ve been swept under a rug by now.

            This is an informal forum and by no means a court of law. The judgement would be heavily biased towards the cops anyways. You cop huggers throw out comments and hide behind an “appropriate investigation” skirt when called out on all your nonsense. Otherwise, why are you even commenting? And who’s gonna do this “appropriate investigation”?

  • avatar
    GeneralMalaise

    Such is life in the ObamaNation…

  • avatar
    krhodes1

    I am not feeling the righteous indignation here. The guy ran from the cops at high speed for an hour, and only stopped when he took out some other car. He then had a choice, lay down and let them put the cuffs on, or keep on acting like a menace to society in front of a bunch of cops with guns drawn. He chose the latter and paid the price. I am perfectly happy the good citizens of California have been saved the expense of a trial and incarceration. His relatives are unlikely to get a cent.

    And what any of this has to do with 2nd amendment rights completely baffles me. I’m glad most of you heavily armed nutjobs live nowhere near me. Amazing amounts of tinfoil fluttering around the forum today.

    • 0 avatar
      Dave M.

      Agreed. I’m sorry he endangered the public for over an hour. I’m glad no one was killed in the crash. I’m sorry he didn’t lay down as instructed when surrounded by the police. I’m sorry he chose to run. I’m sorry he is dead.

    • 0 avatar
      JimC2

      Thank you for using the phrase “high speed” (which is correct) rather than “high rate of speed” (which is incorrect, unless one speaks nitwitese).

    • 0 avatar
      ihatetrees

      +1. Excellent post. And I suppose I’m a heavily armed (with 1000+ rounds of .22 LR) nutjob.

      I don’t get reflexive cop hate, especially in quickly unfolding deadly force situations when the victim has been acting in a dangerous and irrational manner.

      Don’t get me wrong:
      Are there cops who are dic*heads? Few.
      Are cops pay and union benefits fiscally irrational? Probably 1/2 the departments in the nation are in this boat (especially in Blue States).

      • 0 avatar
        Pch101

        If the guy didn’t pose a lethal threat at the time of the traffic stop, then lethal force was inappropriate.

        It’s not acceptable to shoot the guy for the sake of revenge for the high speed chase. Fleeing the police is grounds for arrest, not for termination.

        • 0 avatar
          krhodes1

          A judgement call that you do not get to make, since you were not there. If you don’t want to get shot in a highly charged situation such as this, do EXACTLY what the guys with the guns tell you to do, to the letter.

          • 0 avatar
            DenverMike

            @krhodes1 – That’s EXACTLY the mentality of cops like these. Make them mad, defy their absolute authority and they’ll kill you dead. Shoot you in the back, if they want. It’s their call. That’s more than cowardly, it’s criminal. They’re just there to provide a good faith effort of stopping/preventing crimes, collecting evidence and rounding up the perps. This particular perp wasn’t going to get far on foot, but you gotta wonder if he needed to die for a guaranty of no escape.

            Yeah, none of us were there, but that includes you. It’s true, we are just going off of what was shown, for the purposes of this informal discussion and nothing else. But a justification for ending this man’s life is more than a little far fetched, based on what we saw.

            But the problem is cops (and soldiers) can easily think irrationally with no one stepping up and telling them how wrong, insulated and separated from reality and humanity they are.

          • 0 avatar
            Pch101

            “A judgement call that you do not get to make”

            You seem to forget that this is a nation of laws. The ultimate judgment calls will be made by an investigator, and possibly the courts and juries.

            The police do not reside in a bubble beyond the reach of jurisprudence. The police do not have absolutely authority to shoot people just because, regardless of what their fans on the internet may believe. If they have bad judgment, then they need to suffer the consequences.

          • 0 avatar
            DC Bruce

            Unlike the commenters in this forum, the police made a judgment call with final, irreversible consequences.

            So, your argument is that such finality is what gives the cops the right to administer lethal punishment to this guy?

            And, please, don’t start on a rant about the hazards of police work as some sort of justification for being trigger-happy. There are a lot of jobs more hazardous than police work — including being a firefighter.

            What’s happened is that, with the help of Hollywood, the police have managed to transform themselves into soldiers on active duty in a war zone . . . which they are not.

          • 0 avatar
            GeneralMalaise

            Yep… do NOT run from the police and endanger the lives of others. It’s unfortunate this fellow lost his life, a high price to pay for stupidity.

        • 0 avatar
          carrya1911

          PCH, that’s not how UOF works. A situation can go from a consensual conversation with someone to a lethal force event in seconds, and can go from a lethal force event down to calm language in seconds.

          You don’t get to kill someone because of what the original offense was. Most violent encounters police are involved in start off as ordinary traffic stops. The person who is pulled over often escalates the situation from suspicion of drunk driving to a gunfight:

          http://youtu.be/9tBFXLNR2kI

          Nobody gets shot by the cops because they are suspected of committing X crime. UOF policy doesn’t give a rip what they are guilty of. UOF is judged by whether or not the officer had the reasonable belief that his/her life was in danger at the moment they pulled the trigger. Lots of things factor into that judgment and the officer is going to have to articulate them to a shooting review board and a grand jury.

          • 0 avatar
            DenverMike

            @carry1911 – comment: “UOF is judged by whether or not the officer had the reasonable belief that his/her life was in danger at the moment they pulled the trigger.”

            Exactly. But how does that relate to this case? How can any reasonable cop feel their life is in danger when the clearly unarmed perp is stepping/running away from the group of officers, all pointing a gun at him?

  • avatar
    Zykotec

    I have no comment on the shooting itself, but some of the comments here…
    1. the 2nd amendment is one reason the cops can statistically ecpect 8/10 people to carry a gun…
    2. I’m quite sure there is no ‘government police’ involved here, aren’t most of the police in the US either state police or even City/town police? (sorry for my ignorance, Norwegian here), and even if it was, the Patriot Act was in action before Obama was president…
    No wonder your country is…well, what it is today… I’ll stop here.

    • 0 avatar
      Pch101

      You are correct, most law enforcement occurs at the county and municipal level, and by state highway patrols. Federal cops are a rarity.

      And yes, the cops have to assume that people are armed, and that surely doesn’t help matters. Having large numbers of unarmed police as do the English would be unthinkable here.

      • 0 avatar
        carrya1911

        No, the police do not “assume” people are armed with bad intent. I’ve interacted with armed people in quite a few traffic stops without incident.

        Someone who floors it when you try to pull them over and runs in a reckless manner, including smashing innocent members of the public…you assume a heightened level of threat from that guy than the guy who has a concealed weapons permit who was going 6 over the limit.

        You guys are missing great big pieces of the puzzle.

  • avatar
    MBella

    Not the second, but the fifth and sixth, krohdes1.

  • avatar
    SCE to AUX

    I can’t decide whether the residents of Los Angeles are safer today, or not.

    • 0 avatar
      Zykotec

      Because this chase and subsequent (justified or not)shooting was broadcast live, and the video has since been shared on the internet a lot, I can guarantee you they are less safe than before the chase was broadcast.
      1. A bunch of people are now more afraid of cops and/or reckless drivers, and will be anxious when driving.
      2. There is bound to be some wackos out there who thinks police chases are ‘awesome’ and will try to get into one themselves, believeing they can outrun the cops.
      3. A bunch of cops are going to be frightened because of all the ‘hate’ the cops get for the shooting on live TV, and will be even more anxious while performing their duties on the streets of LA…

      • 0 avatar
        jz78817

        “1. A bunch of people are now more afraid of cops and/or reckless drivers, and will be anxious when driving.”

        Uh, this should have already happened, after the Chris Dorner manhunt. I mean, the LAPD was looking for a black man driving a particular vehicle, and only shot up a completely different vehicle with two women occupying it. But hey, they were just doing their jobs.

        • 0 avatar
          Zykotec

          You are right, and for each new case it will get worse. Maybe not for a long time, but at least as long as most peoples short time memory. Which is recently longer than the time in between episodes like this, sadly…

  • avatar
    oldowl

    Why was this video posted? There is plenty of auto mayhem available elsewhere on the net. If this continues, I’m gone.

    • 0 avatar
      SCE to AUX

      Good question.

      It’s not even car-related; it’s really just a sad mix of bad circumstances and questionable judgment by all involved, the same as you hear about every day in domestic disputes and convenience store holdups.

      I’ll repeat for JB: This is not a car-related story.

  • avatar
    AlternateReality

    My criteria ultimately is, “will society miss this clown?” Not so much, I’m guessing, so I’m fine with LAPD here.

    It’s as true here as it was during that traffic stop near Taos, NM a few weeks back: don’t run from the po-po unless you want to give them a reason to shoot you.

    • 0 avatar
      jz78817

      dude…

      seriously?

      That’s utterly disgusting. I mean, “society” won’t miss me when I’m gone so it’s OK for the police to take me out?

      you despicable, repulsive, abhorrent ass.

      • 0 avatar
        AlternateReality

        Oh my. Well, I’ll try to find a way to survive in spite of your low opinion of me.

        I’m not going to dumb this down for you, so try to keep up: this jackass performed an incredibly stupid act that also jeopardized innocent lives. I don’t much care what drove him to do it, either.

        Generally, I’m very much in favor of ridding such people from the planet.

        I also believe that if more Americans would get comfortable with the idea that there IS such a thing as worthless people that we simply don’t need – and that there are worse things that thinning that herd – our country would be better for it.

        • 0 avatar
          ajla

          “I also believe that if more Americans would get comfortable with the idea that there IS such a thing as worthless people that we simply don’t need – and that there are worse things that thinning that herd – our country would be better for it.”

          But who gets to make that call and what criteria gets to be used?

          • 0 avatar
            AlternateReality

            How about we start with a pretty low bar – “don’t get a criminal record, and don’t run from the cops” – and go from there?

          • 0 avatar
            28-Cars-Later

            +1

            Such ideas about “worthless people” and who makes the determination have been the genesis of pogroms and genocide for centuries.

          • 0 avatar
            ajla

            What makes you so sure that you would never get caught up in the “go from there” part of your scenario?

            If the wolves are in charge then I wouldn’t want to be a sheep, but if the sheep take over then a wolf might be in trouble.

          • 0 avatar
            AlternateReality

            Is stupidity now a race? A religion? Because if not, then “genocide” and “pogrom” don’t apply.

          • 0 avatar
            28-Cars-Later

            Your original comment invoked “worthless people”, not those who are “stupid”. The same rules apply though, who is “stupid” and who is not? Who decides the criteria? One size does not always fit all as intelligent people can also be guilty of occasional stupid behavior or decisions.

          • 0 avatar
            AlternateReality

            The terms are largely interchangeable in my book, 28. As for the criteria – like I said, how about “don’t run from police?” Is that simple enough?

          • 0 avatar
            28-Cars-Later

            I do understand your basic point and common sense dictates it might be unwise to run from armed people who have you surrounded and just surrender, I’d like to think most people would come to this conclusion. But at the same time I don’t laud the death of one who is intoxicated, mentally ill, or simply brazen and decides to roll the dice and comes up short. People shouldn’t run from the authorities but on the same token the authorities should not be so eager to fire.

          • 0 avatar
            AlternateReality

            “But at the same time I don’t laud the death of one who is intoxicated, mentally ill, or simply brazen and decides to roll the dice and comes up short.”

            In just one of those examples would the subject be, arguably, not responsible for their actions. Drunks and “brazen” morons who gamble with their lives should be prepared to suffer the consequences… and I’m fine with that. If you aren’t, so be it.

        • 0 avatar
          Pch101

          I’ve got an oven fired up specially reserved for “AlternateReality.” Please step forward, it’s time for your shower.

          • 0 avatar
            AlternateReality

            You’re so clever, Mr. Godwin. Have a cookie… or better yet, a bar of soap.

            Nowhere in my suggestion do I ascribe a racial or theological aspect to this. Intelligence is my criteria; better yet, the ability to follow the simplest of rules, “don’t run from the police” (or, even more basic, “don’t give them a reason to chase you.”)

            If you can’t figure that out, then…

          • 0 avatar
            Pch101

            The last thing that the interwebs needs is another halfwitted beta male such as yourself who is working too hard to compensate for his (much deserved) inferiority complex.

            You may be a legend in your mother’s basement, but no one else is impressed. I’d laugh at you, but you aren’t worth the effort.

          • 0 avatar
            AlternateReality

            Did I just succeed in shutting down your normal tendency to recite your ill-informed drivel ad nauseam?

            Gee, I might be able to market this service to other TTACers…

          • 0 avatar
            mike978

            No, you just succeeded in showing yourself to be an arrogant and uncaring person.
            I hope you never suffer mental illness or any substance addition, but by your reckoning that would be your fault.

          • 0 avatar
            AlternateReality

            Whose fault is substance “addition,” then, if not the abuser’s?

            Society?

            Obama?

            C’mon mike, seriously.

          • 0 avatar
            mike978

            Well at least you are not blaming mental illness on the person. If that is the case why do you want those people executed?
            Substance abuse, is more complicated, depending on circumstances, people etc, so legitimate discussion can be made on that point.

    • 0 avatar
      tresmonos

      @AR:
      Using your mindset: Do us all a favor and put a gun in your mouth and pull the trigger. No one will miss you and your kids are probably better off without you.

      You just lost the internet. You had all this time to recant your idiotic view yet you still perpetuate your stupidity.

      The cops could have approached this situation differently. And by differently, with more intellect than you are displaying in this post on the internet.

      • 0 avatar
        AlternateReality

        What you call “stupidity,” I call Darwinism. It truly saddens me how many bleeding hearts are out there who have weakened the species, and our country.

        • 0 avatar
          tresmonos

          you’re just like every other assh*le who blabs about something until it personally affects your situation.

          I’ve had many conversations with the Ed in Chief and he can vouch that I’m not a bleeding heart.

          Educate yourself. You are literally supporting the fact that these cops have more rights than you. You are the idiotic far right.

          Then live with mental illness or STFU until you know what the hell you are talking about. Your comments are pollution.

          • 0 avatar
            AlternateReality

            Oh get over yourself. These cops don’t necessarily have more rights than me, or even you. But they definitely had more ‘rights’ than a moron speeding through a congested downtown area in a 400-hp supercar.

            It’s debatable whether the outcome was ideal; I’m personally fine with it, because I tend to look at the bigger picture and not so much at “individuals.” Not even you can argue that the entire situation would have been avoided if this clown had stopped the moment he saw cherry lights in his rearview mirror. In the end, he is entirely to blame for his own death.

          • 0 avatar
            bball40dtw

            AR-

            You are right that Mr Beaird is responsible for his actions, but is the proper punishment for those actions getting shot more than 20 times by the LAPD after his car stopped/crashed?

          • 0 avatar
            tresmonos

            I don’t need to be over myself, I’m over your horse shit commentary. Next time, before you point your fat fingered mouse to ‘submit comment,’ make sure it’s value added, and not utter bull shit. Ends do not justify the means, naco.

          • 0 avatar
            AlternateReality

            Yep, the Mexican pejorative really added value to your comment there, monkey man.

          • 0 avatar
            AlternateReality

            bball – Proper? Perhaps not. But definitely understandable, and frankly not worth getting anyone’s panties in a wad over. The guy was a moron; he isn’t anymore. That’s a decent outcome in the grand scheme of things.

          • 0 avatar
            bball40dtw

            I’ll rephrase it. Is the outcome of this incident one that we as Americans feel is justified? Does the punishment fit the crime?

          • 0 avatar
            AlternateReality

            I, as an American, think so. More accurately, I’m not losing sleep over it.

  • avatar
    caljn

    Maybe, just maybe there are too many guns out there and cops are a little jittery.

    • 0 avatar
      carrya1911

      I Interact with armed people all the time, living in a state where carrying a handgun is perfectly legal. I don’t get jittery because of the guns out there. I only get jittery when I can identify specific behaviors that indicate someone may intend to do me harm.

      Who I shoot is entirely on MY head. I’m the one holding the gun. The final resting place of the bullets is all on me. I don’t zap people randomly because the concept of firearms ownership scares me. That’s a ridiculous rationalization.

  • avatar
    Ron B.

    I have seen that old police show on TV, “cops” and the LAPD depict on there exactly the same mindset as shown by the shoot ‘em dead cops in the vid. Does anyone seriously expect former soldiers,many suffering from non diagnosed PTSD to be in a sane frame of mind in a situation like this?
    How many saw a muslem fighter climbing out of a suspected IED and let fear takeover as they clutched their shaking glocks in their sweaty palms?
    All of them I think,Just check out the wannabe marine corp toilet brush hair do’s.

    • 0 avatar
      carrya1911

      You win the prize, Ron B. That’s the most ridiculous thing I’ve read on the internet all day. You can’t see this, but I’m slow clapping for you.

      Well done.

  • avatar
    Halftruth

    JB, these cop pieces are getting to be Bertel-esque..

    C’mon man.

    • 0 avatar
      Jack Baruth

      I assure you that no Aventador vs. F12 twin track tests were delayed to put this one up.

      Do you feel that I described the situation in a way that was meant to express approval or disapproval of the police action, or is this just a case of a story you’d rather skip? With 92 comments halfway through a lazy Sunday, this is clearly the kind of thing about which TTAC readers care.

      • 0 avatar
        ajla

        “With 92 comments halfway through a lazy Sunday, this is clearly the kind of thing about which TTAC readers care.”

        You’re obviously free to post whatever you like, and you’ve got to make money, but I don’t know that posting a controversial article and then justifying it with “look at all the weekend comments!” when readers bite on it is the best way to do things.

        That’s getting too close to the Holy Gawker Empire for me.

      • 0 avatar
        dartman

        …See…I told you so! Lazy EIC Pro Temp looking to gin up outrage/posts from the hoopleheads.
        What does this have to do with the “truth” about cars Herr Baruth? Nothing…but it did generate posts, as you so noted. Jalopnik beat you the punch by two weeks though….

        Der Kommisar

      • 0 avatar
        Halftruth

        @ JB-

        I don’t feel these articles were presented with any slant BUT, they seem to be click bait to me. Guy runs from the cops, threatens cops and gets killed. Welcome to America. Another day in the life here.
        People will get into the argument about police brutality and America-is-a-police-state-now yadda yadda yadda. Hardly a topic that is about “cars”. The fact it was a Vette makes it ttac-worthy? It would have been much cooler had he done as much in a Geo Metro or say, a 77 Honda CB550 ;). That’s entertainment! A Vette is so overkill. HAHA.

      • 0 avatar
        snakebit

        Full disclosure- I’ve previously posted two comments about this subject.

        That being said, I would not have missed any real information about this incident if the Corvette driver versus 20 policemen posting had been left unsaid on TTAC. I did learn that a handful of posters seem far more dangerous to public safety than either the 20 pursuing policemen or the mentally incapacitated Corvette driver and National Guard veteran.

        Sometimes, a slow news day is just that, and tardy and filler news is not necessarily a desired substitute.

        The salient thing to remember is that, just like similar seemingly outrageous police vs citizen encounters, this one will be investigated by LAPD internal affairs, the local district attorney, as well as many local news outlets from the largest media outlet area in the U.S. A handful of you won’t like the ultimate verdict, but we will all learn a great deal more of what happened and why.

  • avatar
    CelticPete

    I am pretty pro cop in general. But that sure looks to me like a straight up execution.

    Those cops should be prosecuted.. You have to be an actual danger when you shoot someone. Once he got out of the car with his hands up and no weapon he wasn’t a danger anymore. So you can’t shoot thim.

    • 0 avatar
      jz78817

      no. “execution” means they intended to kill him.

      this, to me (taken at face value) is a reprehensible lack of discipline.

      • 0 avatar
        CelticPete

        I dunno. I think they got ticked off that he led them on a chase – and so they took him out. Thats an execution by your definition, right?

      • 0 avatar
        MBella

        What is your intention when shooting someone then? I feel that police should be well trained enough to realize that shooting someone in the chest usually results in death. I would like to see someone using that defense in court. “Yes I shot him in the chest, but I only wanted to slow him down, not kill him” Does not seem to work very well does it.

  • avatar
    SunnyvaleCA

    This should probably be cross posted on farrago’s other site.

  • avatar
    namesakeone

    Two questions:

    Why was this posted now? The competition had this two weeks ago:

    http://jalopnik.com/man-killed-in-la-corvette-chase-was-mentally-ill-frien-1485674147

    Also, did anyone here notice that, in the final crash, the Corvette had the green? The red Nissan Altima that he hit ran a red light.

  • avatar
    korvetkeith

    Did they attempt to have onstar disable the car?

  • avatar
    DenverMike

    If any one of these cops felt threatened by this unarmed perp, running away from him and 20 of his coworkers, all pointing a gun at the perp, he should shoot HIMSELF.

  • avatar
    ReSa

    Help me out here… How is this Automotive News exactly…?

    Ironically, not the car but the poor guy driving fits TTAC’s mission statement perfectly:

    “The Truth About Cars provides (…) TAKE-NO-PRISONERS automotive news (…)”

  • avatar
    mor2bz

    What would have happened had they called off the chase? He would have stopped running. Why is someone so mentally disturbed allowed to drive?
    Since when has putting your hands up in the air become the universal signal for “please shoot me twenty times”?

    Isn’t there some way to screen out the adrenalin junkies when hiring cops?


Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Subscribe without commenting

Recent Comments

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Staff

  • Contributing Writers

  • Jack Baruth, United States
  • Brendan McAleer, Canada
  • Marcelo De Vasconcellos, Brazil
  • Vojta Dobes, Czech Republic
  • Matthias Gasnier, Australia
  • W. Christian 'Mental' Ward, Abu Dhabi
  • Mark Stevenson, Canada
  • Cameron Aubernon, United States
  • J Emerson, United States