From: "Rich Gauszka" 

You misread me. I'm in favor of the ruling.

"Gary Britt"  wrote in
message news:4637603c$1{at}w3.nls.net...
> So they got one right.  You have a problem with this ruling.  It was 8 to
> 1 wasn't it?  Nothing unusual, it merely says that the lives of fleeing
> felons are not as valuable to society as the lives of the innocent they
> threaten to kill with their illegal behavior.  Running is illegal, all the
> traffic laws they break while running are illegal, the underlying reason
> why they are running is illegal.  They voluntarily waive their right to be
> kept safe from harm by endangering others with the criminal/illegal
> behavior.
>
> The idiot relatives of the felon had sued for MONEY, and the Supremes said
> we don't reward felons because they get hurt during the commission of
> their crimes.  Nothing surprising except the people who are surprised by
> this.
>
> Gary
>
> Rich Gauszka wrote:
>> Good - far too many of these idiots fleeing and injuring innocent people.
>>
>> http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0501/p25s01-usju.html
>>
>> In an important ruling defining Fourth Amendment protections against
>> unreasonable searches and seizures in the context of high-speed police
>> chases, the US Supreme Court on Monday gave a green light to law
>> enforcement to use violent force to stop fleeing suspects who pose a
>> substantial and immediate risk of serious physical injury to others.
>>
>> "A police officer's attempt to terminate a dangerous
high-speed car chase
>> that threatens the lives of innocent bystanders does not violate the
>> Fourth Amendment, even when it places the fleeing motorist at risk of
>> serious injury or death," writes Justice Antonin Scalia in the majority
>> opinion.
>>

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5