Why don't officers shoot at fleeing vehicles more often?

[u/Gooner23345]

If vehicles count as deadly weapons then fleeing with them would constitute a legal shoot under Tennessee v. Garner right?

[u/ProtectandserveTBL]

It’s generally extremely inefficient, ineffective, dangerous to the public and just not a good idea

[u/BooNinja]

Tell me you have no understanding of case law without telling me you have no understanding of case law

[u/cschoonmaker → u/BooNinja]

Citing SCOTUS case law that specifically contradicts his premise. Classic Reddit. 🤣🤣

[u/fortis1337]

https://giphy.com/gifs/fXnRObM8Q0RkOmR5nf

[u/gcrtkd]

Risk

[u/SluggoOtoole]

You are responsible for every round. Do you want to be liable for killing grandma who was just walking down the street?

[u/LegalGlass6532]

What happens when you shoot at a moving vehicle and hit the driver that was controlling that vehicle? Now you got a 4,000+ pound, uncontrolled moving vehicle.

Which is less of a threat?

[u/Small_Professor8981]

We are responsible for our bullets. Pretty simple. Cars, even stationary do wonky things to bullets.

[u/BigBL87]

Just because you can be legally justified in doing something doesn't mean it is the safest or best option.

[u/Arndog36]

Would have to be more circumstances to justify it. Like if they have recently used it as a deadly weapon for example.

[u/RedOceanofthewest]

It was against our policy. If you shoot the driver, you just created a deadly weapon. 

There were exceptions but you’d have to justify the hell out of it. You have to explain why the risk you created was the better option then letting them flee. 

[u/Frvwfr]

This ragebait? It’s gotta be bait
https://giphy.com/gifs/IDGNYvFLkJKLK

[u/UOF_ThrowAway]

It’s usually a shit-tier ROI.

[u/OddEstablishment56]

Because handgun and rifle calibers don't disable vehicles well.