LAPD Disclaimer

  • Comments are moderated, and will not appear on this weblog until the monitor has approved them. We encourage you to express your opinions about current events through respectful and insightful discussion. The Department reserves the right to refuse to post those comments that contain inappropriate language and/or material. Additionally, hyper-links or E-mail addresses will not be posted. To report or help us solve a crime go to To commend an employee or report employee misconduct - click here.

LAPD Photos

    This is a Flickr badge showing public photos from lapdblog. Make your own badge here.


  • Disclaimer: The® website has made reasonable efforts to provide an accurate translation. However, no automated or computerized translation is perfect and is not intended to replace human or traditional translation methods. The official text is the English version of the® website. If any questions arise concerning the accuracy of the information presented by the translated version of the website, please refer to the English edition of the website, which is the official version.

Become a Fan

LAPD Blog RSS Feed

« Notes from the July 31, 2007 Police Commission Weekly Meeting | Main | SUV Backing in Driveway Kills Toddler »

August 01, 2007


I wonder if the outcome would have been different if the officers involved had defended themselves during this deadly assault. Of course since we are not allowed to shoot at a driver who is attempting to kill us with his vehicle; officers are injured. How long before one of gets killed because of this policy?

Wonder what would of happened to that guy if he would have done that in Texas, Oklahoma, or Pennsylvania? Oh, I know the police would have been able to defend themselves. Hey cheif do you think that guy would have done that if he knew we could defend ourselves. I don't think so.

All of LAPD


That was the first thought that came to mind when I read this. Then I read your comment. I don't think I need to say more.

I am a police officer in Oregon and I can tell you if a suspect displayed actions as he did to the LAPD, deadly force would have been used and he would not of had the opportunity to attack another officer in another police vehicle. God bless all the officers in Los Angeles having to put up with policy changes provoked by politics. You do a job for a department that I could not.

This is rediculous.. This guy should have been shot and stopped. He tried to kill two sets of police officers. Now officers have to try to get out of the way. What is it going to take Chief? Officers are going to die because of this don't shoot at moving vehicle policy. A vehicle is a deadly weapon. The second time he tried to run over the police car he should have been stopped. But now cops are second guessing themselves and they are not sure. Well i'm sure, the policy sucks!

Wait a second!!! We are already getting killed!!!! That 'not shooting at a moving vehicle' rule is ridiculous! When someone continues to use his vehicle as a weapon, then it's deadly force time! Do we not remember that holocaust survivor that was killed in Tarzana? How about the fact that in the North Hollywood shootout, that over 1100 rounds were fired and yet no innocent people lost; yet jump over to Santa Monica and you have one old man with an accelerator pedal and you get TEN people dead, including an infant child. How about someone take a look at ODMP.ORG and look at how many vehicular assaults there are, especially the ones that end up in fatalities. Also, how did we lose two officers this week? Vehicles are deadly weapons!!!!

Larry is on point, Chief. I think this decision was an example of fixing something that was not broken. As a leader, you might want to revisit this decision before your attrition rate gets worse in the saddest manner possible.

The comments to this entry are closed.



May 2018

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
    1 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
27 28 29 30 31