-
Welcome, Guest! We hope you enjoy the excellent technical knowledge, event information and discussions that the BMW MOA forum provides. Some forum content will be hidden from you if you remain logged out. If you want to view all content, please click the 'Log in' button above and enter your BMW MOA username and password. If you are not an MOA member, why not take the time to join the club, so you can enjoy posting on the forum, the BMW Owners News magazine, and all of the discounts and benefits the BMW MOA offers?
-
Beginning April 1st, and running through April 30th, there is a new 2024 BMW MOA Election discussion area within The Club section of the forum. Within this forum area is also a sticky post that provides the ground rules for participating in the Election forum area. Also, the candidates statements are provided. Please read before joining the conversation, because the rules are very specific to maintain civility.
The Election forum is here: Election Forum
Don't rob a bank in Spain...
- Thread starter burnszilla
- Start date
R
RIDERR1150GSADV
Guest
Two thumb's up
Two thumb's up for the Spanish police!
Better than Hollywood!! I gues that idiot won't be riding a bike anytime soon
Two thumb's up for the Spanish police!
Better than Hollywood!! I gues that idiot won't be riding a bike anytime soon
B
BklynPete
Guest
dancogan said:Let's see now. The hostage had been released, the bandit is making his getaway, and the police basically attempt to execute him in the middle of the street. Doesn't anything else think this was maybe just a bit of excess? (Oh boy, I can hear it now.)
the only issue i have with what happened is that they ruined a perfectly good motorcycle.
i'm sorry, i feel anyone dumb or brazen enough to threaten the life of another human being (holding someone hostage) deserves eveything he or she gets. here in the states if that happened, he would sue and get a big settlement to boot, is that right? pete
sheridesabeemer
I Used to Be Someone
important question
But what kind of bikes are those?
But what kind of bikes are those?
JetDoc
New member
bklyn pete said:the only issue i have with what happened is that they ruined a perfectly good motorcycle.
pete
All I can say is "DAMN!"
I think the guy got what he deserved, but unfortunately, Pete is right. If it happened here in the States, the bad guy would be an instant millionaire, and the cops would all be in jail.
Hey... at least they gave him a helmet!
BRADFORDBENN
Slowpoke & Proud of It!
I figured they would have just put a little gas in the tank or something like that, but hey if the guy was dumb enough to think he would get away....
What a waste of a motorcycle.
What a waste of a motorcycle.
Fritzc
New member
dancogan said:Let's see now. The hostage had been released, the bandit is making his getaway, and the police basically attempt to execute him in the middle of the street. Doesn't anybody else think this was maybe just a bit of excess? (Oh boy, I can hear it now.)
Sure! Let him go rather than hurt him, THEN HE CAN TRY IT AGAIN!!
fRITZ
R
RIDERR1150GSADV
Guest
Now now!!! no kids!! 
. At least we can agree on the fact that a perfectly good bike was completely wasted on that moron 
.
kids!! . At least we can agree on the fact that a perfectly good bike was completely wasted on that moron .
U
USERNAME
Guest
Fritz said:
i have to agree with fritz here. i see no usefulness to an orderly justice system, i think it is better for police officers to mete out physical punishment, possibly life-threatening, as they see fit. the whole notion of separation of powers and any distinction between an executive branch and a judicial branch is an anachronism. it was a fad. it's over. just look at the word "executive." one, executives are better than regular people. two, the root word is execute, and this is exactly what the cops tried to do to this fellow. sounds like they were just doing their jobs to me. you guys are quick to condemn these police officers without hearing their side of the story.
and think of the time we could save if we got rid of all the lawyers and judges, and police could just physically abuse suspects - who are only *technically* innocent until proven guilty, when we know they are all evil and guilty - on the spot.
you liberals are going to ruin everything this country is based on.
Fritzc
New member
Bank Robbers Rights
I suspect an attempt at irony here! Not sure, as I consider myself a Liberal!
In the afore mentioned story it was the Bank Robber who decided robbing banks was a legitimate career choice and any one trying to stop him was endangering his free choice so the robber is entitled to kill, maim or threaten harm to many people? A Policeman's job is to enforce the law and defend the law abiding citizens against harm and losss of their property. This guy was a potential killer and if he escaped he was prone to do the same thing again.
The police were obligated to try to stop this guy. I have seen many similar scenes on "Police Videos" where after the horrific collision the driver jumps up and runs off. I don't remember the fate of the bank robber, was he killed? He was wearing a helmet! LOL
I don't recall condoning police officers prowling the streets looking for criminals to execute on the spot but criminals that go around sticking their heads into the mouth of a lion shoud be prepared to lose their head.
username said:i have to agree with fritz here. i see no usefulness to an orderly justice system, i think it is better for police officers to mete out physical punishment, possibly life-threatening, as they see fit. the whole
and think of the time we could save if we got rid of all the lawyers and judges, and police could just physically abuse suspects - who are only *technically* innocent until proven guilty, when we know they are all evil and guilty - on the spot.
you liberals are going to ruin everything this country is based on.
I suspect an attempt at irony here! Not sure, as I consider myself a Liberal!
In the afore mentioned story it was the Bank Robber who decided robbing banks was a legitimate career choice and any one trying to stop him was endangering his free choice so the robber is entitled to kill, maim or threaten harm to many people? A Policeman's job is to enforce the law and defend the law abiding citizens against harm and losss of their property. This guy was a potential killer and if he escaped he was prone to do the same thing again.
The police were obligated to try to stop this guy. I have seen many similar scenes on "Police Videos" where after the horrific collision the driver jumps up and runs off. I don't remember the fate of the bank robber, was he killed? He was wearing a helmet! LOL
I don't recall condoning police officers prowling the streets looking for criminals to execute on the spot but criminals that go around sticking their heads into the mouth of a lion shoud be prepared to lose their head.
U
USERNAME
Guest
never mind, i dont agree with fritz. he backed off his earlier statements.
JetDoc
New member
OK, let's back up and look at the facts as presented in the video clip.
1. The bad guy had attempted to rob a bank, allegedly using a hand grenade as a weapon, and had taken hostages.
2. By giving the suspect a motorcycle, the cops effected the release of the hostages and removed the immediate threat of harm to several innocent people. They further reduced the threat to others, as it would be quite difficult for the suspect to operate a hand grenade while riding the motorcycle.
3. The suspect could have ceased his attempts to escape and surrendered to police at any time prior to his capture, and would not have been injured. It is quite obvious that he declined to do this.
4. By using the admidedly somewhat extreme method of subduing and capturing the suspect, the police effected the capture of an armed and dangerous felon with minimal risk to themselves and to the public in general.
Sounds to me like good police work, or would you prefer that the suspect had been cornered by armed police and used his hand grenade in a crowd of innocent bystanders?
1. The bad guy had attempted to rob a bank, allegedly using a hand grenade as a weapon, and had taken hostages.
2. By giving the suspect a motorcycle, the cops effected the release of the hostages and removed the immediate threat of harm to several innocent people. They further reduced the threat to others, as it would be quite difficult for the suspect to operate a hand grenade while riding the motorcycle.
3. The suspect could have ceased his attempts to escape and surrendered to police at any time prior to his capture, and would not have been injured. It is quite obvious that he declined to do this.
4. By using the admidedly somewhat extreme method of subduing and capturing the suspect, the police effected the capture of an armed and dangerous felon with minimal risk to themselves and to the public in general.
Sounds to me like good police work, or would you prefer that the suspect had been cornered by armed police and used his hand grenade in a crowd of innocent bystanders?
U
USERNAME
Guest
JetDoc said:
fascinating reasoning skills.
in my mind, the justification for the use of deadly force ceases when the *imminent* threat of harm to others is eliminated. if you argue that it is justified at some later time, because he allegedly robbed a bank with an alleged hand grenade, then i must ask, how much later?
i'd have preferred it if:
1. they had a tracking device on the bike and just followed him.
this has risk because he might ditch the bike. but if youre dumb enough to rob a bank with a hand grenade and take hostages, youre probably not smart enough to ditch the bike and steal a different car. this guy doesnt sound like jason bourne to me.
2. they put almost no gas in it, and he ran out in 3 miles.
this has risk because he might just walk into another store with the grenade.
3. they had a copter up, and followed him.
this has risk because the copter might lose him, or he may have negotiated that no helicopters be in the air.
4. a combination of the above.
now none of us were there, so whether we condone or condemn, we're wrong, and lack sufficient knowledge to be right. so to speak with authority about any of this, pro or con, is not a good idea. all im saying is that i am not a fan of deadly force in these kinds of situations. i might change my mind if im in the bank and some fool pulls a grenade out and wants to rob the place. to avoid this, i'll continue to use ATMs.
U
USERNAME
Guest
Blue Knight said:
speculation, so i can't validly argue. i'd think that a tactical police unit would have extraordinary resources at its disposal and plans in place for dealing with common problems. i'd think, 'bank robber' is common. i'd also think that 'bank robber with hostages that wants to negotiate transportation' would also be common. it'd be nice if a less injurious method were available. maybe im not vindictive enough, and if that's the case, i apologize.
Blue Knight said:
that's why i worded what i said carefully - a guy standing inside a bank, taking hostages, purportedly holding a grenade? grease him. but after the imminent threat of him harming someone is decreased? deadly force should not be necessary. again, none of us were there, so we're all monday morning quarterbacking, whether we agree or disagree with what happened, and as such, dont really know what we are talking about.
i guess i dont like seeing people excessivley harmed, whether they "deserve it" or not. and i realize that i dont know how injured the guy was. for all i know he had a couple of minor broken bones, something the guys at advrider would scoff at, and he is fine, and in custody. it's a dramatic video though.
are people innocent until proven guilty in spain? and do they have laws against cruel and unusual punishment, and should the punishment fit the crime?
