“Explosions that resulted when Crown Victorias were hit from behind at high speeds have killed at least 12 law enforcement officers nationwide since 1983, according to federal investigators, police groups and public interest groups. Both NAPO and Ford confirmed in September that Ford had agreed to pay for the installation of shields around the gas tanks on police-issued Crown Victorias. Some 350,000 police cruisers across the country are to be retrofitted.”
So if these gas tanks are dangerous, which both sides appear to agree is true, then why isn’t Ford installing shield on ALL their Crown Victorias, not just police-issued vehicles? Am I missing something here?
(Any attorney out there looking for a fast and easy class-action lawsuit?)
I may very vell be wrong, but I think Police issued is the key phrase here. IIRC the problem was with the modified versions only. No doubt a more informed Doper will shortly come along and set us straight.
A WAG would be that per thousand Crown Vic’s sold, a greater percentage by far that are struck at high speeds from behind are being operated by law enforcement officers. They are more likely to be struck while doing a traffic stop, and more likely to be in a high speed chase that could actually involve rear impact.
I feel that your title is a pretty heft slam to law enforcement everywhere. Nobody said that one person’s life is worth more than anothers. Nobody. What Ford is doing is attempting to remdiate a much higher risk situation. I will admit that there is a certain amount of political clout being shown here, but personally I feel you’ve really crossed a line here.
I wouldn’t be surprised of they also offer a discounted or free retrofitted shield to civillian-owned Crown Vic’s in the next year or so.
This smells Pit-worthy, not G.Q.-worthy but I ain’t a Mod. :rolleyes:
Oh, World Eater? AFAIK, a so-called “Police Package” in a Crown Vic ( or, any other vehicle ) involves transmission, overall power, supplemental dc/ac converters and a better suspension. I can’t believe there is a custom-made gas tank for patrol cars.
Then why is there a seperate charge for “assault on a police officer” instead of just letting a regular assault charge cover it? Why is there a $10,000 reward for turning in people guilty of killing police officers when there is no incentive to turn in some one who shoots the rest of us?
Simple… to help maintain order. I think the idea is that a stiffer penalty is to make someone think twice about assaulting a cop. Society benefits in that the police are freer to keep order in dangerous situations, hopefully with less worry of being assaulted themselves.
Police officers put their life on the line every day to protect us, and their salaries are pitifully low.
Yeah, I don’t mind at all when things are done to protect and/or help them.
Their lives aren’t worth more than ours, but , they need all the help we can give them.
Also, regarding the Crown Victorias. My understanding is that the civilian versions have a shut off switch that shuts down the fuel pump in the event of a collision. The police versions do not. If the police versions get hit, the fuel pump is allowed to operate so that the vehicle is still driveable, so the officer can still pursue someone. Maybe the added shields help compensate for the fact that the police versions are missing a safety feature that the civilian versions do have.
Probably to help offset the damages done because the targets of assault and killings are police officers. Cops are men and women who ordinarily would not have been assaulted or killed, but were simply because they were performing their jobs. They are working to uphold the law, so the law protects them in a way that helps them do their jobs.
People have all kinds of reasons for committing assault and murder. When the reason is simply that the victim was a cop, then it makes sense to slap the assaulter/killer with a punishment for the same reason.
As a complete WAG, I’d say it doesn’t justify the numbers. 12 officers in 19 years (and how many were riding two to a car)? Police specials log many times the road hours that a normal civilian driver would, and are far more prone to dangerous driving conditions, by their very nature. I doubt there are numbers to justify a recall of this magnitude.
I assume this was hyperbole? I agree with your main point, and support the examples where differences do exist (as a payment for accepting huge personal risks for our safety), they do exist. Examples have already been pointed out, but have not yet mentioned the biggest of them all: the Death Penalty requires “Special circumstances.” In most states, one of those is kiiling a police officer, the only profession so specified, except judges.