A state trooper hit a pregnant woman's car to enforce a traffic stop. It flipped and crashed.

Harper was cited in the incident for speeding and failure to yield to an emergency vehicle, Denton said.

Click to expand...

Because I know when I'm trying to get away from somebody I start going slower.

SummerMadness said:

Arkansas state trooper sued for allegedly causing a pregnant woman's car to flip during traffic stop



I guess next time she should just stop in the middle of the road and let the state trooper figure it out his own safety.

Click to expand...

That would make sense to me, except I have opened my window and signaled that I understood what he was doing. Seems to me it's a case for the courts.

I hope the child is fine. I only looked at the limited footage on the video.

SummerMadness said:

Arkansas state trooper sued for allegedly causing a pregnant woman's car to flip during traffic stop



I guess next time she should just stop in the middle of the road and let the state trooper figure it out his own safety.

Click to expand...

Let's add that to my "I don't believe it" file.

God bless the brave police officers who put their lives on the line every day to protect us from these dangerous and out of control criminal lawbreakers out on our streets.

HTacianas said:

Let's add that to my "I don't believe it" file.

Click to expand...

What exactly don't you believe?

Arcangl86 said:

What exactly don't you believe?

Click to expand...

It's literally on video. He turns on his lights, she puts on her four way flashers, gets into the right lane and slows down. After a bit, he decides to do a lot maneuver on her. She was less than a mile from the exit.

Arcangl86 said:

What exactly don't you believe?

Click to expand...

Generally, the intent of the article. It is patently propaganda. Propaganda in that it is an "argument from suppressed evidence" fallacy. Further, it makes it appear that the woman's pregnancy was an issue, as if the cop knew that she was pregnant and performed a PIT maneuver anyway.

Even the facts glossed over in the story are evidence that there is more to it, but it was written for consumption by people who won't read it critically.

.

HTacianas said:

Further, it makes it appear that the woman's pregnancy was an issue, as if the cop knew that she was pregnant and performed a PIT maneuver anyway.

Click to expand...

Whether or not the cop knew she was pregnant is irrelevant. The fact is he performed a PIT maneuver, something that is very dangerous to do, on someone who was doing exactly what they are supposed to do and was in no way a threat to anyone. That person happened to be pregnant, which makes it even worse. For all the cop knew, there could have been little kids in the car too. He had no idea. Yet he performed a totally unnecessary, dangerous maneuver.

Whoever was in that car could have been very seriously injured. For no reason. It was an inexcusable maneuver to perform. The driver wasn't driving erratically, wasn't speeding, wasn't a danger to anyone. The driver was slowly driving with hazard lights in the right lane.

Even the facts glossed over in the story are evidence that there is more to it, but it was written for consumption by people who won't read it critically.

Click to expand...

What exactly is glossed over? The whole thing is on video.

trunks2k said:

Whether or not the cop knew she was pregnant is irrelevant. The fact is he performed a PIT maneuver, something that is very dangerous to do, on someone who was doing exactly what they are supposed to do and was in no way a threat to anyone. That person happened to be pregnant, which makes it even worse. For all the cop knew, there could have been little kids in the car too. He had no idea. Yet he performed a totally unnecessary, dangerous maneuver.

Whoever was in that car could have been very seriously injured. For no reason. It was an inexcusable maneuver to perform. The driver wasn't driving erratically, wasn't speeding, wasn't a danger to anyone. The driver was slowly driving with hazard lights in the right lane.


What exactly is glossed over? The whole thing is on video.

Click to expand...

Cops do not perform PIT maneuvers for no reason. And according to the story the woman traveled at least two and a half miles with the police behind her without stopping.

HTacianas said:

Cops do not perform PIT maneuvers for no reason.

Click to expand...

"You didn't pull over right away" is not a reason.

And according to the story the woman traveled at least two and a half miles with the police behind her without stopping.

Click to expand...

2ish miles because she was between exits. She had her hazards on, she slowed down, she was in the right lane. She was driving to an exit. She wasn't fleeing. She was doing exactly what the state says she should do if she doesn't feel it's safe to pull over.

It's utterly ridiculous that anyone could think performing this maneuver was necessary. It was transparently unnecessary.

A PIT maneuver is incredibly dangerous. No reason to utilize it in this situation. It was a traffic violation. She wasn't fleeing. She wasn't a criminal. She wasn't a danger to anyone. ZERO reason to do what the cop did.

I would also add that one would think cops would WANT drivers to wait to pull over in a safe, well lit spot, like a gas station. It's safer for everyone involved, especially the cop. The cop can see inside the vehicle more easily, it's harder for the vehicle to suddenly go speeding off, and the cop doesn't have to worry about cars flying past him at 60+MPH.

Aryeh Jay said:

God bless the brave police officers who put their lives on the line every day to protect us from these dangerous and out of control criminal lawbreakers out on our streets.

Click to expand...

Thanks for that... I haven't laughed that hard in days...

trunks2k said:

"You didn't pull over right away" is not a reason.


2ish miles because she was between exits. She had her hazards on, she slowed down, she was in the right lane. She was driving to an exit. She wasn't fleeing. She was doing exactly what the state says she should do if she doesn't feel it's safe to pull over.

It's utterly ridiculous that anyone could think performing this maneuver was necessary. It was transparently unnecessary.

A PIT maneuver is incredibly dangerous. No reason to utilize it in this situation. It was a traffic violation. She wasn't fleeing. She wasn't a criminal. She wasn't a danger to anyone. ZERO reason to do what the cop did.

Click to expand...

She should have pulled over. There is a breakdown lane to the right.

HTacianas said:

She should have pulled over. There is a breakdown lane to the right.

Click to expand...

A breakdown lane that is relatively thin. If you look at the video where the cop is in the breakdown lane, it is barely wide enough to fit the car (of it could at all). At night. On a highway. It's not safe. She is under no obligation to stop where she didn't feel it's safe to do so. I mean, I've literally broken down in a lane wider than that at night and the cop that helped was very clear that he wanted me towed away asap because it was dangerous. He was almost angry I didn't make it up the off ramp to the rest stop I was trying to get to.

She did exactly what the state tells drivers to do, she indicated with her hazards, went to the right, and slowed down until she found a safe place to pull into to.

Even if the state didn't tell drivers to do so, there's the issue of performing a dangerous and potentially deadly maneuver on someone that was absolutely no danger to anyone.

There was no reason for it.

trunks2k said:

A breakdown lane that is relatively thin. At night. On a highway. It's not safe. She is under no obligation to stop where she didn't feel it's safe to do so.

She did exactly what the state tells drivers to do, she indicated with her hazards, went to the right, and slowed down until she found a safe place to pull into to.

Even if the state didn't tell drivers to do so, there's the issue of performing a dangerous and potentially deadly maneuver on someone that was absolutely no danger to anyone.

There was no reason for it.

Click to expand...

I sincerely hope that you are not ever the victim of a crime and your assailant refuses to stop for the police.

There was a place for her to pull over and she didn't. Whether or not the pit maneuver was the appropriate thing to do depends on what the police departments policy is on using it.

But to humor you, we have a case of one person's judgment against another person's judgement.

HTacianas said:

I sincerely hope that you are not ever the victim of a crime and your assailant refuses to stop for the police.

Click to expand...

Utterly ridiculous comparison. It was a traffic stop. She was doing WHAT THE STATE SAYS SHE SHOULD DO.

There was a place for her to pull over and she didn't.

Click to expand...

It wasn't a safe spot to pull over. She was doing what the state says she do. This is something you constantly ignore. She clearly wasn't fleeing. She clearly indicated she intended to stop. She was no threat to anyone.

Whether or not the pit maneuver was the appropriate thing to do depends on what the police departments policy is on using it.

Click to expand...

If you think this was an appropriate situation to use such a dangerous maneuver, then I just feel bad for you.

But to humor you, we have a case of one person's judgment against another person's judgement.

Click to expand...

We have the case of one person's good judgement of trying to find a safe spot to pull over, and indicating that to the police, vs the judgement of a cop who doesn't seem to care about the safety of the people he is supposed to protect.

I think we're done here

HTacianas said:

I sincerely hope that you are not ever the victim of a crime and your assailant refuses to stop for the police.

Click to expand...

Flying goalposts!