[wordsmythe]

Originally Posted by Flying Dutchman

Actually, it doesn't piss me off at all. If you look at what this case is actually about instead of what is "spinned" as, it is a good case. Wether the officer should have been chasing him is not the question, what is the question is wether the action of the officer causing him to lose control was unreasonable
force. In a nutshell, yes it was. Was it wrong, no it wasn't. It was a crap shoot, either the car would spin out and stop or it would lose control and wreck. You cannot argue that the crash happened because of the manuever, it did and the guy got hurt because of it. Should the city pay, yes it should and it should have a budget set up to pay for these things. Was the officer wrong and should they quit using the practice, no on both counts.

So you're saying that if I'm a terrible driver and I keep causing accidents that kill or harm people that it's OK for me to keep driving as long as I can keep insurnace to pay for the damages?

See I don't think the city should have to pay ANYTHING to this person. It's the same as if you are breaking into my house and you get hurt on something and sue me - in that instance you should NOT be able to collect damages against me eve if I'm grossly negligent. If you are breaking the law you give up those rights.

This guy was running from the cops and so he made that choice.

If he would have taken out someone who had nothing to do with it then the cops and he should pay the damages.

Cops pursuing, at high speeds, someone for a traffic violation are showing off how badass they think they are.