Tackling someone is assault. Assault is against the law. Assaulting a child is even worse.

Police officers are (supposed to be) trained observers, it’s a necessary part of police work. They aren’t supposed to charge into a situation without making a careful assessment of what’s going on and he clearly didn’t do that.

The video starts mid-way through, so all I see is a dude choking out someone who is on his property. No “get off my lawn,” no “what are you doing here,” etc.... You don’t see anything wrong with attacking someone on your property without saying a word to them? Only threatening their life crosses the line?

Then end up dead because people like you think it’s perfectly rational to use excessive force against them when all they were being were kids. How did you you simply disregard the early part of my post that said the right response to kids on your property it to tell them to leave not physically restrain them?

I don’t see anything wrong with this situation except the killing statement which is ridiculous and not announcing that he was a police officer.

You stop at stop signs?! Holy crap, give this man a medal!

Well that’s one way to reduce health care costs.

Hey. It had “initial quality”.... then it went to shit.

Insurance companies are middle men, brokers, heath dealers who are not actually adding anything of value to the healthcare system. They take a large chunk of the money going directly to a medication or medical procedure, and they inflate the prices of medical care by allowing doctors and hospitals to charge more…

“Is that really so opaque a concept?”

Jesus fucking Christ no that fucking isn’t capitalism. Bailing out the rich because the people gave them carte blanche to fucking own the government isn’t capitalism. I’m sorry, isn’t fucking capitalism.

As in our own system, rich people in the U.K. can afford “every treatment under the sun” to prolong their lives, but poor people get better care in the U.K. than in the U.S..

Where they develop their torque is a pointless statistic when we’re talking about accelerating from a dead stop.

There are already marked lanes on the highway, why are motorcyles allowed to create a new one? Seems wildly dangerous to me. (I get that it’s legal, not the question or argument). It seems like it’s akin for a car to decide to use the shoulder or breakdown lane as they see fit.

Do you have one of these studies? I can’t fathom how this makes thing BETTER to have vehicles travelling in unmarked lanes.

Sure, lane splitting is legal in some jurisdictions. Legal standing does not make it safe for either riders or cagers. We lament all the time that cagers don’t look for us, and don’t see us even when looking straight at us — and now we’re gonna advocate what amounts to stealth riding? The sheer lunacy of putting…

‘It actually does ease congestion and studies have proven that.’

Really? They did studies to prove that bike riders can ease congestion by lane splitting? Oh, do tell. Exactly how does one asshole lane splitting on the highway eases up congestion? Am I missing something here?

There is still a fear when I may not see a lane splitter when changing lanes. I know the legality of it was originally to allow bike cops to do it, but it’s taking an object on the road that is more difficult to see and allowing riders to be out in a more dangerous situation. I have a question, who has right of way…

Sorry but if a biker attacks my car that’s an attack on me. Not because I love my car but because an idiot biker is ATTACKING and threatening me.

Probably the lamest murder attempt ever caught on video. Killing a motorcyclist with an automobile should be like shooting fish in a barrel. But no, this guy manages to screw it up in spectacular fashion.