If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(CBS DC)   Remember the crazy dental hygienist who led police in a car chase in front of the Capitol? Her family has reached out to the officers involved ... with a lawsuit for $75 million   (washington.cbslocal.com) divider line 133
    More: Asinine, U.S. Capitol  
•       •       •

6239 clicks; posted to Main » on 08 Feb 2014 at 5:30 AM (36 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



133 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-02-08 11:26:47 AM  
Lenny_da_Hog:... they could have shot the radiator and tires to permanently disable it.

Shooting the radiator will not immediately disable a car. Even with several holes it will take time for the system to drain enough to just cause engine damage, let alone seizure.  So that's several minutes of a potentially lethal weapon should the car become dislodged.

Shooting 1-4 tires will reduce the effectiveness of the car as a weapon but even then you still have ~2 tons of metal that is still more than powerful enough to crush a human. Add to that the possibility that the car may have run-flat tires (newish luxury marque car raises that probability) in which case shooting the tires would have had negligible effect in rendering the car harmless.

Those measures could work to turn a high speed chase into a low speed or foot chase; they would, however, be ineffective in a situation where the driver's main intent is to cause harm. Given the location and that she had already struck two officers in this event, the officers were not unreasonable in assuming she had harmful intent and may possibly have secondary weapons (gun, bomb, Rick Astley mix tape, etc.) to use once the car was disabled. It is only in the clarity of hindsight that we know that she was panicking and mentally unstable and that any harm she caused in this episode was because of that and not necessarily intent to cause harm.


PS: For everyone saying that the had to shoot her because she have had a ZOMG! BOMB!, this country has been swimming in Kool-Aid since 9/11 and I think you may have swallowed some.
PPS: I think Rush Limbaugh peed in the Kool-Aid pool and I'm pretty sure I saw a brown floater drifting away from Glenn Beck's corner.
 
2014-02-08 11:27:56 AM  
I see Subby takes the 'News' as a guaranteed Official purveyor of Facts. Nothing to see here. Move along, the 'News' told us she's guilty and crazy, so she got what was coming to her. Officers reacted with restaint when they killed her with lead poisoning.

What? There are discrepancies in the official story? Now, wait a minute ..
 
2014-02-08 11:35:52 AM  

MycroftHolmes: No where in here is a desire to see the truth.  Implicit in all this is that the police acted without cool headedness and patience, that a shoot first policy is incorrect (and that this was a case of shoot first), and that her only crime was eluding police.  Your very last statement was that you wish for the police to be punished financially


If it's not a hassle for them to kill people, they won't review the policies that lead them to kill people.
 
2014-02-08 11:50:26 AM  

Lenny_da_Hog: OhioUGrad: They also thought the car may be loaded with explosives, would you rather a bunch of police approach the car and say "hey sorry ma'am, are you okay" and boom? Plus how can you be certain a car is disabled? I've seen chases where cars have gotten out of being stopped and boxed in.

How many suicide bombers don't use a dead-man's switch? You're just going to shoot them before knowing anything?

And there's a difference between a high-centered vehicle and cars being stopped. When your frame is on the median and your wheels aren't, you're not going anywhere.


I think you watch too many movies to think some common disgruntled person who decided to put explosives in their car etc... use or know about a dead-man's switch.
 
2014-02-08 11:52:24 AM  

Loren: Yeah, it's amazing how many people don't get it about shoot to disable not working.


Wait, you're telling me all police aren't Clint Eastwood or from Westerns?
 
2014-02-08 12:05:19 PM  

OhioUGrad: I think you watch too many movies to think some common disgruntled person who decided to put explosives in their car etc... use or know about a dead-man's switch.


Well, gee, if the possibility of explosives in the car is a proper reason to kill, why wouldn't you take that into account? It's not like they're hard to make. While you're looking to see if the stuck motorist has a wire in her hand, you might also see there's a baby in the back seat.
 
2014-02-08 12:16:53 PM  

cskrat: So that's several minutes of a potentially lethal weapon should the car become dislodged.


to prevent that the police should fill the neighborhood with lethal projectiles.
 
2014-02-08 12:24:34 PM  

Lenny_da_Hog: Patience is a weapon the police use too infrequently these days. They said she was stuck. Stuck means stuck, to me, I don't know what it means to you. If she's stuck, they have a lot of options before killing someone.


Patience is a luxury afforded to stable situations.

To me, "stuck" means that a reporter wrote the word "stuck" and it was printed. They may have used that word to water down a specific type of "stuck" or they may have just relayed it verbatim from an eyewitness. "Stuck" can have a gradient of meanings ranging from "stuck", "good and stuck" and "boy, archaeologists are gonna find that truck there a thousand years from now", etc. Even a more specific term like* "high centered" can still mean that one or more wheels is on the ground and may gain traction with persistent effort.

- Home exercise: without using any outside references, does the Infiniti Q37 come in an AWD variant and will there be a badge indicating that configuration. You have 5 seconds to answer and now is not the time to collaborate with your partner since you are both shouting at someone to order them to turn off the vehicle and put their hands up.

* the term "high centered" has not been used in direct citation of any sources I recall reading on this topic. Even then there would need to be a citation of the original source and evaluation of the reliability of that source whether it be a bystander, officer at the scene or forensics officer. Assuming "stuck on a median" means "high centered" is natural considering that if someone were to *deliberately* get a vehicle stuck on a median they would most likely *choose* to high center it; in this case, getting stuck was **not deliberate**. Most of us here on Fark have seen youtube videos of people flipping cars upside down, driving up telephone poles or creating car shaped holes in buildings while trying to parallel park; even the term "high centered", as specific as it may seem in conversation, may not fully describe the exact disposition of the vehicle at that time..
 
2014-02-08 12:34:51 PM  

cskrat: * the term "high centered" has not been used in direct citation of any sources I recall reading on this topic. Even then there would need to be a citation of the original source and evaluation of the reliability of that source whether it be a bystander, officer at the scene or forensics officer. Assuming "stuck on a median" means "high centered" is natural considering that if someone were to *deliberately* get a vehicle stuck on a median they would most likely *choose* to high center it; in this case, getting stuck was **not deliberate**. Most of us here on Fark have seen youtube videos of people flipping cars upside down, driving up telephone poles or creating car shaped holes in buildings while trying to parallel park; even the term "high centered", as specific as it may seem in conversation, may not fully describe the exact disposition of the vehicle at that time..


If only there were a place where you could go to call expert testimony, physical evidence, and witnesses to sort all of these things out...
 
2014-02-08 12:48:37 PM  

flamingboard: HotWingAgenda: If you're gonna be violent and psychotic, it's probably best not to make a beeline towards the first black president in history. And where in the flying fark were all these concerned family when the woman grabbed her baby and dragged it on a road trip to Crazytown?

Probably hoping the cops would take her into custody so she could get help and then bring the baby home. Instead they shot her.


Her family could have taken her to any ER where she could be evaluated and get help. Instead, they allowed her to put herself, her child, and the public at risk.
 
2014-02-08 12:52:51 PM  

Headso: cskrat: So that's several minutes of a potentially lethal weapon should the car become dislodged.

to prevent that the police should fill the neighborhood with lethal projectiles.


No, the point of my comment was that shooting a car is not an effective way to disable it quickly and permanently. I may tend to vote on the liberal side of things but, to me, gun control means using both hands to aim, making sure you have a clear shot to the target and knowing what is in the line of fire beyond your target. Flinging bullets designed to take down a person at a large, self-propelled chunk of metal is dumb. But in the issue of deciding whether or not the officers involved caused the "wrongful death" of Ms. Carrey, the potential for accidental harm to a bystander would be just a courtroom theatrics side show.
 
2014-02-08 12:53:47 PM  

whitman00: ambercat: Mr. Fuzzypaws: Good luck with that. Biatch was crazy.

She was, but crazy doesn't need to be riddled with bullets unless it's trying to harm someone. Police need to spend more time doing things between the 'doing nothing' and 'shooting at whatever stopped me from doing nothing till it's dead' ends of the spectrum. Like...detaining and questioning people, arresting them if necessary. Without unneeded taserings would be great, too.

Why do I think if the police had not used deadly force after they clearly saw there was a baby in the car, and she rammed her car into a building at 100 mph killing the baby, the family would be suing for $100 million because the police didn't stop her and you would be here posting about how the police should have done more.

4000 lb car, crazy rambling woman driving erratically, baby trapped in the back, unknowns about car being rigged with explosives and 30 seconds to decide what to do.  Go....


I totally agree!

I've never been to the capital, but I hear its a bit of a tourist area. What would have happened if the crazy lady plowed down a group of kids on a field trip? Or a young couple with their new baby? That would have been a more significant tragedy. I believe the police did the right thing.
 
2014-02-08 12:55:06 PM  

Lenny_da_Hog: OhioUGrad: I think you watch too many movies to think some common disgruntled person who decided to put explosives in their car etc... use or know about a dead-man's switch.

Well, gee, if the possibility of explosives in the car is a proper reason to kill, why wouldn't you take that into account? It's not like they're hard to make. While you're looking to see if the stuck motorist has a wire in her hand, you might also see there's a baby in the back seat.


I do not know how they missed the baby, especially since babies are not known for being quiet during a loud event.
 
2014-02-08 12:56:47 PM  

Mr. Right: So the same family that knew she had been diagnosed with post-partum depression and psychosis but let her out unsupervised anyway wants to sue the police department, who knew nothing of those diagnoses, for killing her as a result of aggressive actions using her car as a weapon.  Whether or not the police were completely justified in her killing, the family is going to have a difficult time escaping a good share of the responsibility.


Yup. Sounds like it. The city should counter-sue the family for not supervising someone they new was clearly unstable. They should have at least made sure she was taking her meds!
 
2014-02-08 01:01:56 PM  

Lenny_da_Hog: cskrat: * the term "high centered" has not been used in direct citation of any sources I recall reading on this topic. Even then there would need to be a citation of the original source and evaluation of the reliability of that source whether it be a bystander, officer at the scene or forensics officer. Assuming "stuck on a median" means "high centered" is natural considering that if someone were to *deliberately* get a vehicle stuck on a median they would most likely *choose* to high center it; in this case, getting stuck was **not deliberate**. Most of us here on Fark have seen youtube videos of people flipping cars upside down, driving up telephone poles or creating car shaped holes in buildings while trying to parallel park; even the term "high centered", as specific as it may seem in conversation, may not fully describe the exact disposition of the vehicle at that time..

If only there were a place where you could go to call expert testimony, physical evidence, and witnesses to sort all of these things out...


Wow, I have never seen someone miss the point as completely as this.
 
2014-02-08 01:04:07 PM  
Woman does batshiat crazy things in one of the most security sensitive areas in the country, which also happens to be a country whose government is petrified of terrorists.

This sounds like a natural consequence of her actions.

Don't like this outcome?  Start voting in less crazy people who help the world instead of trying to conquer it.  The cops are just doing their jobs as directed by people in the buildings she was trying to ram.
 
2014-02-08 01:08:44 PM  

rebelyell2006: RottenEggs: GungFu: Thanks, electronically-controlling Obama!

I wonder why they are not suing the messiah ?

Because Jesus isn't real, and is unrelated to this case?


So we have no president ? That's just crazeeee !
 
2014-02-08 01:30:48 PM  

Lenny_da_Hog: cskrat: * the term "high centered" has not been used in direct citation of any sources I recall reading on this topic. Even then there would need to be a citation of the original source and evaluation of the reliability of that source whether it be a bystander, officer at the scene or forensics officer. Assuming "stuck on a median" means "high centered" is natural considering that if someone were to *deliberately* get a vehicle stuck on a median they would most likely *choose* to high center it; in this case, getting stuck was **not deliberate**. Most of us here on Fark have seen youtube videos of people flipping cars upside down, driving up telephone poles or creating car shaped holes in buildings while trying to parallel park; even the term "high centered", as specific as it may seem in conversation, may not fully describe the exact disposition of the vehicle at that time..

If only there were a place where you could go to call expert testimony, physical evidence, and witnesses to sort all of these things out...


Or, from your Boobies on this thread...
Let them fight it out in court with an ambulance-chaser, and make it cost them money and hassle to do it.

If they want to have their day in court then by all means, that is their right. You, I and everyone else in this thread are just here to speculate and share opinion.

That said, within direct view of The Whitehouse she rammed a barricade (even if it wasn't *THE* barricade) and two officers then she proceeded to give chase. Her family is now making noise about postpartum depression and asserting that she never meant to hurt anyone (inconveniently for both sides, her real intent was locked away inside her head and cannot be recovered now that she's dead). Her family is going to try to make a cash grab case on hindsight and you seem to have pre-judged the police as guilty along with them. My opinion is that the police involved were almost certainly justified in the use of deadly force; going up to the home of the leader of this or any other country (whether said leader is home at the time or not) and wielding a weapon or improvised weapon is and always has been a sure way to shorten life expectancy. Whether it was her intent or not, what she did was "suicide by cop" on a much grander level.
 
2014-02-08 01:32:56 PM  
cskrat:

Or, from your Boobies on this thread...

Crap, I forgot about that filter.
 
2014-02-08 01:37:49 PM  

whitman00: ambercat: whitman00: ambercat: Mr. Fuzzypaws: Good luck with that. Biatch was crazy.

She was, but crazy doesn't need to be riddled with bullets unless it's trying to harm someone. Police need to spend more time doing things between the 'doing nothing' and 'shooting at whatever stopped me from doing nothing till it's dead' ends of the spectrum. Like...detaining and questioning people, arresting them if necessary. Without unneeded taserings would be great, too.

Why do I think if the police had not used deadly force after they clearly saw there was a baby in the car, and she rammed her car into a building at 100 mph killing the baby, the family would be suing for $100 million because the police didn't stop her and you would be here posting about how the police should have done more.

4000 lb car, crazy rambling woman driving erratically, baby trapped in the back, unknowns about car being rigged with explosives and 30 seconds to decide what to do.  Go....

Was there any reason to believe the car was rigged with explosives? Car chases aren't exactly uncommon, police departments normally have protocols in place to deal with them, and ways to stop the car before it rams into anything, like deploying those spiked strips. If they were so afraid for the baby, escalating the situation might not have been the best way to make sure the baby was safe.

Did you read about or watch any footage of this event?

- Rammed a barrier near the White House.   Surrounded by police with guns drawn.
- Police do not fire at her as she backs away from barrier and speeds down the street.
- She got by a barrier the police set up on Constitution ave.
- During car chase, she rams a police car who tried to stop her.


Didn't she also hit an agent or officer?
 
2014-02-08 01:41:14 PM  
Unless there was something missing from the article, I don't see that happening.
 
2014-02-08 01:42:19 PM  

cskrat: Headso: cskrat: So that's several minutes of a potentially lethal weapon should the car become dislodged.

to prevent that the police should fill the neighborhood with lethal projectiles.

No, the point of my comment was that shooting a car is not an effective way to disable it quickly and permanently. I may tend to vote on the liberal side of things but, to me, gun control means using both hands to aim, making sure you have a clear shot to the target and knowing what is in the line of fire beyond your target. Flinging bullets designed to take down a person at a large, self-propelled chunk of metal is dumb. But in the issue of deciding whether or not the officers involved caused the "wrongful death" of Ms. Carrey, the potential for accidental harm to a bystander would be just a courtroom theatrics side show.


Your comment is a failure because you think they were shooting to disable the car and not the driver, when in fact they did shoot the driver which disabled the car in the process.

Going crazy doesn't give you a free pass for actions such as this when you are actively and deliberately endangering lives.
 
2014-02-08 01:48:47 PM  

Lenny_da_Hog: If it was temporary, the option of shooting out the tires was still valid.


THIS IS NOT THE MOVIES.

Shooting out the tires of a car does not somehow cause the car to cease opearting, or indeed make it unable to farking move.

Furthemore this is grossly neglegent and reckless, because bullets can miss and ricochet. If you are firing a gun, you'd better farking be firing to kill, OR YOU DIDN'T NEED TO BE SHOOTING.
 
2014-02-08 01:57:51 PM  
Yep, the cops in this one need to be charged with first degree murder, because that's what it was.

They'll get away with it.

I hope the family gets every penny of this, then maybe at least the department will learn a lesson.
 
2014-02-08 02:05:57 PM  
I also remember that one CNN article said she came to a complete stop too.
 
2014-02-08 02:20:14 PM  
if you roll the dice, you take your chances...
 
2014-02-08 02:29:58 PM  

Mr. Breeze: cskrat: Headso: cskrat: So that's several minutes of a potentially lethal weapon should the car become dislodged.
--
to prevent that the police should fill the neighborhood with lethal projectiles.
--
No, the point of my comment was that shooting a car is not an effective way to disable it quickly and permanently. I may tend to vote on the liberal side of things but, to me, gun control means using both hands to aim, making sure you have a clear shot to the target and knowing what is in the line of fire beyond your target. Flinging bullets designed to take down a person at a large, self-propelled chunk of metal is dumb. But in the issue of deciding whether or not the officers involved caused the "wrongful death" of Ms. Carrey, the potential for accidental harm to a bystander would be just a courtroom theatrics side show.
--
Your comment is a failure because you think they were shooting to disable the car and not the driver, when in fact they did shoot the driver which disabled the car in the process.

Going crazy doesn't give you a free pass for actions such as this when you are actively and deliberately endangering lives.


Headso was responding to my comment about how shooting the radiator and tires would not be enough to stop a car, as Lenny_Da_Hog was suggesting. He pulled that to a side track by suggesting that I endorsed wildly spraying bullets around a populated area in the hopes of stopping a car. If you were to read Lenny_Da_Hog's repeated assertion that they should shoot the radiator and tires to make sure the stuck car stays stuck you would have more of the necessary context for why I was talking about disabling a car with a gun in the first place.

In the comment you quoted, "the target" that I reference is the driver. If they were trying to use handguns to shoot a person in a moving vehicle in a populated area then they were negligent in even following the basic rules of gun safety you learn in the first 5 minutes of the first day of hunter's education, let alone specific training to use a weapon as a police officer.

And this is all still a distraction from the main point of the issue of whether or not the officers involved were just in using lethal force.

So, to recap.
I don't think that shooting at a moving car will stop it.
I don't think that any officers involved were trying to stop a car by shooting it in it's radiator bits.
I don't think that shooting a gun wildly in a populated area is a good idea.
I don't know what range each shot was fired at and whether the car was moving at the time so I can't even say that this line of speculation even applies.
I do think that using lethal force on someone who already used potentially lethal force on an officer (in plain view of The Whitehouse, no less) is justified.
 
2014-02-08 03:08:29 PM  

Felgraf: Lenny_da_Hog: If it was temporary, the option of shooting out the tires was still valid.

THIS IS NOT THE MOVIES.

Shooting out the tires of a car does not somehow cause the car to cease opearting, or indeed make it unable to farking move.

Furthemore this is grossly neglegent and reckless, because bullets can miss and ricochet. If you are firing a gun, you'd better farking be firing to kill, OR YOU DIDN'T NEED TO BE SHOOTING.


Careful.  If you talk about the irresponsibility of warning shots, disabling shots, or brandishing to scare, you'll be labeled a gun nut.
 
2014-02-08 03:24:32 PM  

Mr. Right: So the same family that knew she had been diagnosed with post-partum depression and psychosis but let her out unsupervised anyway wants to sue the police department, who knew nothing of those diagnoses, for killing her as a result of aggressive actions using her car as a weapon.  Whether or not the police were justified in her killing, the family is going to have a difficult time escaping a good share of the responsibility.



THIS ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
 
2014-02-08 04:47:27 PM  
Hooray! Mom is dead - time to cash-in!
 
2014-02-08 06:03:55 PM  
almost forgotten...now they bring it up and we realize how crazy the rest of the family is.

/best to keep quiet and thought a fool....
 
2014-02-08 11:50:19 PM  

whitman00: ambercat: Mr. Fuzzypaws: Good luck with that. Biatch was crazy.

She was, but crazy doesn't need to be riddled with bullets unless it's trying to harm someone. Police need to spend more time doing things between the 'doing nothing' and 'shooting at whatever stopped me from doing nothing till it's dead' ends of the spectrum. Like...detaining and questioning people, arresting them if necessary. Without unneeded taserings would be great, too.

Why do I think if the police had not used deadly force after they clearly saw there was a baby in the car, and she rammed her car into a building at 100 mph killing the baby, the family would be suing for $100 million because the police didn't stop her and you would be here posting about how the police should have done more.

4000 lb car, crazy rambling woman driving erratically, baby trapped in the back, unknowns about car being rigged with explosives and 30 seconds to decide what to do.  Go....


Shoot the hostage?
 
2014-02-09 12:21:22 AM  
That's what you get, crazy lady. If you're gonna ram your car into the White House and try to run over some of the most highly trained cops in the nation, that are protecting the president, you best be ready to get fitted with a wood suit.
 
Displayed 33 of 133 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report