Raymond Bunch said:
I think he was neglient due to the fact no one can out run the police radio. Things could have been diffrent with a little more corridnation and communication with other law enforcement personnel on the ground. Furthur more, he probably should'nt have been going the rate of speed he was going which also contributed to the accident. From the picture of the officer he is older, thus his reflexes are allot slower and his own action could have contributed to his death by element of surprise. Who know's for sure....
I really feel for his family, they are the real victims. But giving an individual 30 years for something he didn't cause is just plain nuts. Individual who kill people drinking and driving serve far less time, people who shoot and kill people with gun serve less time, we can go on and on with this.
Are you an actor? The reason I ask is I cannot believe anyone else could make such a statement other than one of the, cause of the week, pick me up in your UFO, haven't got a clue, screen personalities so prevalent in Hollywood. This man died trying to uphold his sworn duties to protect the public. How can you call him negligent? True you cannot out run the radio but he would have been negligent if he had let them go. Suppose this guy had been pointing a gun at someone's head. Would you have wanted the officer to say "I don't want him to shoot me, I will let him go and call someone else." No, I think you would want this officer to put himself in harm's way and try to prevent this gun weilding person from killing someone. It's not the same you say, yes it is!
These criminals' (Yes, they are criminals just as we are if we exceed the speed limit or rob a bank.) choice of weapons were motor vehicles. They are just as dangerous and potentially deadly as any firearm. The article states that the motorcycle was racing a Porsche. I do not think they were only going 75 in a 60 mph zone. These two were in wanton disregard for the law and endangering anyone on the interstate as well as themselves. If this officer had let these two go and a mile up the interstate they ran a school bus off the road and killed 7 kids would he have been negligent?
You cannot out run the radio but the way the laws are written you have to make a positive identification on the vehicle by getting the tag number or in some states once you lose a visual on the vehicle then he has gotten away and you cannot arrest the operator at a later time. I do not know Fla's laws as it pertains to this but he may have only been trying to get close enough to identify the vehicles. Yes he had a radio and I am sure he was using it but like all law enforcement agencies I am sure that they do not have enough officers to place one every couple of miles 24 hours a day so he may have not known if anyone else was in a position to assist him. So then what did he do? What he was supposed to! His job.
He did not choose the rate of speed that he was having to drive. He was having to drive that rate to try to catch the two who made the decision to break the law. Then you state, "From the picture of the officer he is older, thus his reflexes are allot slower and his own actions could have contributed to his death". How do you tell how good his reflexes were from a photo? Just because he may appear older than you are does not mean he needed to give up his license and retire. You may be younger than many people on here but I think they would agree that was just an idiotic thing to say and they would go against you any day of the week in a reflex contest. You are right though when you said who knows for sure. But I bet people will agree that physics and Newton's laws played a much larger role in his death than his reflexes did if they remember that his tire blew out.
At least you do admit there was a crime when you say that his family were the real victims. Yes they are. I know that we are playing a what if and why game. So to continue, what if someone with a gun fired a bullet up into the air, did not aim at anyone but just shot up in the air, and this bullet came down and killed a little girl playing in a field. Would the person, even though he did not mean to, be guilty of killing this girl? If he didn't mean to then it was an accident and people should not be punished for accidents should they? Why not? This person knew that the bullet had to land somewhere
and shot it anyway, therefore he was responsible. This racer knew street racing was illegal. It did not matter if he saw the officer or not. He pulled the trigger anyway.
As far as the sentence given you have to look at it in perspective. Was this a high profile crime. I would say that since an officer lost his life then yes it was so the judge handed out the maximum sentence. There is more than a good chance that this individual will be able to go back to court and get it reduced in the future. I must admit that I am not familiar with Florida's sentencing structure but if it is anything like the fair sentencing act that used to be used in NC then his time is automatically cut in half for good behavior anyway and as long as he stays out of trouble in prison then he will be eligible for parole even sooner. BTW, the man that killed the little girl by shooting up in the air got 25 years for doing it even though he did not mean to.
People think speeding is not a crime. It's not as long as you do not get caught. Then they say it's a victimless crime. But this time there was a victim and although the racer did not physically cause the blow out he was the one who committed the crime that caused the chase.
Did he get what he deserved? YES. Alec Baldwin, go home!
So what if a police officer gets called out to a domestic dispute and on the way over he blows a red light and somebody T-bones him and he dies?? Will they give the people having the domestic dispute 30 years as well
Something tells me he wouldn't...
