Originally Posted by bobby94928
That's an easy answer. He didn't shoot at the car because he didn't want to risk harming the boy. Not so, the helicopter.......
...and potentially have the helicopter crash on unsuspecting civilians? I'm not sure that's responsible, either.
If the helicopter were flying too low to be tracked by RADAR, they should have been able to keep track of it on the ground via police ground patrols until a bird of their own could get airborn (or one already in the air could be diverted to track it).
I guess my biggest question is, how do you get an "unregistered" helicopter? Is it like Airwolf where you keep it in a desert cave and never have to fuel up anywhere or get it maintained? If they mean the flight wasn't logged, it should still be able to be tracked down via registration number and the pilot questioned.
Originally Posted by bruce73
Point. But he couldn't have aimed at the tires?
In his defense, it was a high risk shot when he was close to a heart attack from being zapped and running around. I wouldn't trust myself to not put one through the vehicle where the kid was sitting in that condition.
Contrary to popular believe, bullets go through car bodies quite easily. The big bullets come out the other side.