Speeding motor cyclist killed by not-speeding cruiser

[since9]

That's obviously, ludicrously false. The cop didn't try to get in another lane, with the motorcyclist following his every lane change. Even a drunken retard wouldn't do that. I mean, seriously, wtf? Anybody here believes that load of crap?

Not I. SOP is to remain in the current lane at current velocity until he passes. At least here in the U.S. Any other course of action would likely cause harm.

However, I hear in Spain the SOP is to crash into the perp...

 

[Brimstone Baritone]

For anyone saying the kid deserved it or that there's on less idiot, would you say the same thing if the police had pull out a firearm and shot the kid for speeding? It's essentially the same thing. They stopped him with deadly force for speeding, evading and reckless driving (That's all I can see from what the story says).

If by 'essentially' you mean 'not'. If the kid had hit a pothole would you be calling the work crew who didn't fill in the pothole murderers? Or would it still be the police for 'chasing' him. The biggest problem with your analogy is that if the cop had shot him, he couldn't have chosen to either slow down or evade. Chosen, as in, the police weren't twisting his arm to make him accelerate. He obviously decided that it was worth the possible consequences to try to get away, and got a full dose of those consequences.

The kid made a choice to speed. Whatever. He made a choice to run from the police. Again, whatever. Unless you can prove the cop swerved to hit the kid, then all I see is someone who drove too fast, got in a wreck, and is lucky he's the only one who died.

If it was my kid, you're damn right I would be saying he was an idiot, and I would be ashamed for having raised such an idiot. Tragedy would be if my kid killed an innocent bystander with his idiocy.