Dashcam Video Shows 53-Second Shootout With Arkansas Police Officer

Arkansas Shootout Washington County

courtesy ABC News and Washington County Sheriff’s Office

An Arkansas traffic stop turned into two exchanges of gunfire with police and a car chase earlier this week. The Washington County Sheriff’s Department has released this video which captures the first shootout with an officer.

In dashcam footage released by the Washington County Sheriff’s Office, the suspect, identified as 29-year-old Luis Cobos-Cenobio, is seen eventually pulling over, leaning out of his car and firing his gun directly at the officer’s vehicle parked behind him. The video then shows Cobos-Cenobio leaving his car and continuing to shoot while approaching the deputy’s vehicle.

Cobos-Cenobio and Corporal Brett Thompson exchanged 50 rounds. The officer wasn’t hit and the suspect sustained a single gunshot wound to the shoulder.

Note the passing car that stops and watches before backing away from the gunfire.

An alert was issued for Cobos-Cenobio and his vehicle. He was spotted by officers with the Springdale Police Department, after which Cobos-Cenobio exchanged gunfire with them while officers tried to stop the vehicle, according to authorities.

The chase continued into Fayetteville, Arkansas, with officers from the Fayetteville Police Department and Arkansas State Police assisting. The suspect eventually returned to Springdale, where he stopped and surrendered, according to Springdale Police.

Cobos-Cenobio will be getting a first hand tour of the inner workings of the Arkansas criminal justice system.

Cobos-Cenobio was charged with four counts of attempted capital murder, committing a terroristic act, fleeing, possession of a controlled substance and possession of drug paraphernalia, and was being held on $500,000 bond, Kelly Cantrell, a spokesperson for the Washington County Sheriff’s Office, told ABC News.

 

 

comments

  1. avatar L says:

    That car in the opposite lane… there is no limit to my disappointment.

    1. avatar Elaine D. says:

      Waallllll…..I gotta say, if it had been me and I wasn’t armed….would likely have done the same thing to get well out of the gunfight area. I just hope the person called 911 to report what was going on instead of just fleeing the scene. But, can’t say I haven’t sped away from what looked like a gunfight brewing a time or two, especially road rage situations.

      1. avatar L says:

        I might be the only one, but if I come by someone in a life-threatening situation, I don’t even think twice. It’s just instinct. Seconds are the difference between life and death, there is no time to spare. I’m armed at all times but even if I wasn’t and I was in that driver’s shoes, I’d have T-boned that guy full-force. You can replace a car, you can’t replace an innocent life.

        1. avatar Elaine D. says:

          @L

          Interesting, I wouldn’t have thought of using my car as a weapon. Esp with the woman in the perp’s car, she also could be armed and go after you, you just don’t know.

          In thinking about it I guess a decision to intervene would be very situation dependent for me. In the case of two road raging civilians that seem like they’re about to pull guns, no way to know who’s the instigator. This situation was more clear because one person was a cop, but the woman in the car would have made me hesitate not knowing if she was armed.

        2. avatar strych9 says:

          You’re not the only one.

          I was thinking the same thing and while watching the video. I was also hoping that the vehicle backing up was backing up to get enough distance to get to ramming speed, by which I mean a speed meant to cause [serious] injury to the guy shooting at the cop.

          If the guy managed to get out of the car in the time it took me to back up then I would just run his ass over at speed. Either way my goal would be to make sure that my intended targets weren’t gonna get back up.

          In fact, this would probably be my tactic even if I was armed. Back up, run into them, then get out with a gun and see what’s what.

        3. avatar Craig in IA says:

          Nice thought about joining in. The after action question becomes: exactly who will pay to fix the damage to your vehicle? I know that sounds coarse, just being realistic. At least in this case, a police cruiser and another vehicle’s occupant shooting at the cop it’d be pretty clear cut. Sometimes not so much, need to be careful as a Good Samaritan sometimes.

        4. avatar Aaron says:

          Ok there, Audie Murphy. Sure.

        5. avatar LarryinTX says:

          I have 2 cars, both nice. But one, I would have backed away, the other I would have closed that guy’s door for him. And if there was someone else in the car with me, forget the whole thing. OTOH, the one I consider expendable also contains a loaded .45, would probably have dumped 2 mags.

      2. avatar Simon says:

        Yeah, I don’t think he necessarily picked a wrong course of action. He could have rammed into the criminal, but that would have put him in the middle of a gunfight. Who know if he had any passengers, possibly any children.

        1. avatar CZ Rider says:

          Yeah, as effective as the car would be, I wouldn’t take the risk of drawing attention and fire in that situation. Especially since doing so would also place you in the path of any incoming fire from the cop. That said, if the driver had a firearm available it would’ve been about a 4 yard shot on a distracted and non-mobile target. I’d probably have taken those odds.

      3. avatar Silver Fox says:

        Unless you and everyone with you are armored (most likely not) and willing to join in (also most likely not) the best RESPONSIBLE course of action is to get the flock out and retreat to cover. 50 shots fired and only ONE hit! Where did the other shots land? 😟

    2. avatar Adam says:

      The “nope car” at the 30 second mark made me laugh out loud. I can just envision myself in that car and hitting reverse while just yelling that whole time “Nope nope nope”.

      1. avatar Jonathan-Houston says:

        Me, too. Only thing I would have done differently, assuming paasengers were with me, would have been to make a U-turn or a two point turn and raced out of there. That lengthy and fairly swift reverse action was impressive, for not losing control and careening off into the woods, but was also risky.

    3. avatar DapperGunsmith says:

      I assume he was unarmed and had wife and kids in the car. Other than that I agree with you.

      1. avatar Joe in San Antonio says:

        If I had family in the car I definitely would not inject them into a rolling gun fight. Either way intervening in a gunfight with multiple suspects would take some strategy. I don’t want to spook the cop and become another target. I don’t want to become an immobile target which is a possibility if I crash my car( air bags/doors getting stuck).

    4. avatar Southern Cross says:

      Hitting a stationary 200lb object with a car is going to do damage to the car. I’ve seen cars that had collisions with wildlife that weighed a lot less than a person and most were write-offs.

      And who pays for the damage? Nearly all insurance companies will reject the claim.

      But a 4×4 with a bull bar is another story.

    5. avatar million says:

      Was the driver a soccer mom with kids in the back seat?

    6. avatar little horn says:

      you are not a smart person

  2. avatar Cruzo1981 says:

    Death penalty too much for this individual?

    1. avatar FlamencoD says:

      He didn’t actually kill anyone, so obviously, yes, too much.

      1. avatar SGC says:

        Obviously no…if he made a decision to engage in a gun battle on the side of the road with a police officer: endangering himself, the officer, his passenger, the people in the house beside him, the other motorists on the roadway…I don’t see a problem with the death penalty here. He “didn’t kill anyone” but it was obviously not from lack of trying…intent means as much as accomplishment here.

        1. avatar FlamencoD says:

          Ask the police officers if the perp’s intent to kill them was the same as actually killing them. I think they and their families would disagree. Hence the charges are different: attempted murder in lieu of murder. Sheesh, the thought process of some on this site is suspect.

        2. avatar LarryinTX says:

          Perp is guilty of *exactly* the same thing as he would have been if he successfully killed that cop. Hang him high.

    2. avatar Some dude says:

      There has always been a principle in American justice that a life may not be taken as forfeiture where no life has been taken.

      That said, there is a point in the commission of most crimes, where lethal force is justified, as it was in this case. Once the perp is in custody is well past that time. The death penalty, in this case, would be tantamount to murdering a captured prisoner.

      Too bad the officer wasn’t a better shot. Tming is everything…

      1. avatar Big Bill says:

        “There has always been a principle in American justice that a life may not be taken as forfeiture where no life has been taken.”

        Umm, no.
        There have been many crimes for which the ultimate sentence was death.
        Treason still carries a death penalty (18 U.S. Code § 2381).
        Into the late 1800s, cattle rustling was a hanging offense.
        Just a few examples.

        1. avatar LarryinTX says:

          Everybody knows what we do with horse thieves around these parts.

  3. avatar uncommon_sense says:

    His tactics were actually pretty darned good. He hugged his car’s side pillars and presented very little target area. Then he advanced on the police after apparently loading a fresh magazine. Finally, after apparently driving the police back, he re-entered his vehicle and fled.

    1. avatar Simon says:

      He clearly had shooting experience. Makes you wonder about his background.

      1. avatar DDay says:

        He’s an illegal alien according to several articles I read on him. I’d be surprised if he didn’t have gang or drug cartel links

    2. avatar Craig in IA says:

      I’m sad to say that I have to agree. We can’t see the officer so it’s tough to rush to judgement but that’s a lot of incoming fire being directed at the vehicle from a decent stance and grip. Hope he goes away for a long time but this video needs to become a part of just about every LEO training.

      1. avatar CZJay says:

        Horrible quality. Maybe someone can find the original Facebook video.

        It appears the cop put most of the rounds in the SUV to keep the shooter away and to not expose himself. A lot of keyholing… He may have been aiming directly at the shooter, but the barrier [SUV] made sure the rounds didn’t go where they needed to. He didn’t get shot, so it worked. Maybe next time shooting under the vehicle could be a successful option.

        1. avatar CZJay says:

          The windshield shows a lot of deflection. I assume most of those holes are from the shooter. Shorter barreled guns apparently don’t do well against glass.

        2. avatar uncommon_sense says:

          CZJay,

          Shorter barreled guns apparently don’t do well against glass.

          Which is why I carry a handgun with a 4.25 inch barrel and load it with cartridges that have 180 grain bullets. If I end up having to shoot through auto glass at oblique angles, I want to know that my bullets will continue on a straight path with minimal loss in velocity.

        3. avatar Hannibal says:

          The first thing I think of when seeing these situations unfold is to assassinate those those ankles from under the car. Few expect it.

        4. avatar uncommon_sense says:

          Hannibal,

          While I very much like the idea of shooting at the attacker’s feet/ankles as you stated, it seems like it could be a very risky tactic. Here is why:

          (1) It requires you to lay down on the road surface so that you can actually see the attacker’s feet/ankles under your car.
          (2) If the attacker decides to quickly advance on you while you are laying down, he could easily be within 10 feet of you within about 1 second. (And the attacker would still be closing and at contact distance within another 1/2 second or so.)
          (3) There is no way in the world that you or anyone else can mentally register the attacker’s rush, get up on your feet, and be mobile within 1 second.

          Thus, if your attacker decides to rush you, he is pretty much guaranteed to be able to put multiple shots into you without you being able to put shots into him (since you are in the process of getting up from a prone position on the road surface).

          As for the odds of your attacker deciding to rush you when you lay down on the road surface, I am not sure. If his goal is to take you out of the fight, he might think that you collapsed from a gunshot wound and take that opportunity to leave. He might think that you just made yourself vulnerable and rush you. Or he might think that you are wounded and then rush you to finish you off.

          Unless you or a partner has the attacker’s undivided attention and the other person can sneak into a prone position to take out the attacker’s feet/ankles, I would think you are better off staying on your feet and moving to a better position (either a better defensive or offensive position).

        5. avatar jwm says:

          Uncommon. If you’re proned out next to the car and he bum rushes you you do not have to get to your feet. Simply roll onto your back. You have an amazing arc of fire from your back.

          Try it in the privacy of your home.

        6. avatar uncommon_sense says:

          jwm,

          I thought about that if I understand your description — basically rolling over and then spinning around to shoot between your feet at an approaching attacker.

          I am thinking that it would take nearly one second to perform even that maneuver: and when you add the time it takes to mentally register and decide to act I am still thinking that your attacker would be on top of you right as you are ready to start pulling the trigger. (And you would not be able to move anywhere because you are lying on your back.)

          On the other hand, if you are already on your feet and engaged in a shootout with your attacker, I have to think that your reaction time to move (left or right to cover or to keep cover between you) in response to your attacker’s bum rush is almost instant, probably less than 1/4 second.

          Personally I would choose to stay on my feet unless, as I stated above, I had a partner who had the attacker’s undivided attention and I was able to sneak into position.

        7. avatar Anymouse says:

          The problem with going prone is that bullet impacts against the asphalt/concrete aren’t elastic – they don’t bounce off at the same angle as the hit, like a pool ball does. They tend to travel parallel to the ground, so you’d be much easier to hit while prone. This is also why you shouldn’t hug the walls.

    3. avatar Sian says:

      For sure didn’t look like his first gunfight.

    4. avatar Vitsaus says:

      Thats the Zetas training right there.

  4. avatar Alexander says:

    He looks to me as a very special kind of stupid. I wonder will he get the Darwin Award or did he already spread his genes?

    1. avatar CZJay says:

      He didn’t die. So not that stupid.

      This guy on the other hand didn’t pass go:

      1. Criminal or open carry? Didn’t see the gun. P/O Barney Fife shot this guy down and almost nailed his partner in close proximity! Who said these Paramilitarized police aren’t trigger happy. Looked like a group of clerks from TARGET!

        1. avatar FedUp says:

          I’m the last guy to pass up an opportunity to demand prison time for armed enforcers who eliminate possible threats, but this guy was reaching for something, it looked all the world like he was attempting a draw, while one of the cops was yelling ‘don’t do it, don’t do it’.

          In my book, that’s a good shoot all day every day.

          Or is my sarcasm detector not working right?

        2. avatar Aaron Walker says:

          That’s 50/50…P/O: Said “He’s got a knife, he’s got a gun, he’s got a knife…” Then continues to exclaim he’s got a gun…Then pops guy the 3-4 times and nearly perforates one of his fellow officer’s. And when all jump on the LEO train, everything was already in motion…From a brief observation the guy kind of looked like a “schizoid.” Worked with a co-worker who turned out to be “bipolar/schizophrenic”. If off his MEDS 💉 , he would sudden act irrational. Sometimes doing off-the-wall things, acting belligerent, threaten suicide, threaten to kill people ,or even become violent…Lucky for him our workplace was “Very Liberal, full diversity freaks, granola munchers, etc…”

  5. avatar jwm says:

    I’ve heard the dude was an illegal. If so, he’s a hillary voter.

    1. avatar former water walker says:

      Heard the same on FOX. Illegal alien POS. I love all these “I would’ve rammed the shooter”. He took the best course of action. The armed up cop was OK without Rambo…I hope he called 911.

      1. avatar Hannibal says:

        A win is a win but ramming a shooter is a VERY underappreciated tactic so it’s worth mentioning. Police get lots of shooting training in the academy but I think they should include ‘run that fucker over’ situations in the EVOC training as well (like get some dummies or something). Not only is it more likely to disable the suspect but I bet that they have a better chance of surviving than being shot multiple times in the chest (which is usually what it takes to drop someone).

        1. avatar Anymouse says:

          Spoiler for latest episode of The Rookie:

          They used this technique. A rookie was freezing under fire, so his TO made him stay in the car. The TO wad taking fire, and the rookie eventually used the car to hit the BG.

    2. avatar CZJay says:

      So he gets to stay in America and still take property from Americans to fund his existence? Now he can hang out with his fellow Mexicans and partake in race wars for many years to come.

      1. avatar Craig in IA says:

        3 squares, a “health club” to work out in, cable TV, library, most- likely with internet, bed. Probably better deal than south of the border.

      2. avatar jwm says:

        We could always deport him. Take him up to about twenty thousand feet over Mexico. Handcuff him to the steering wheel of his car and shove it out.

  6. avatar Geoff "Mess with the bull, get the horns" PR says:

    53 seconds while lead is flying is an eternity…

  7. avatar Jon in CO says:

    Where’s the white girl that fled out after he let her out? Why the hell did she sit there while rounds were flying and then decided after the fact to get out?

    Dude definitely had some sort of former use with a gun. He was far too calm and collected. Probably not the first time for him. Even took cover to reload.

    1. avatar FedUp says:

      If she has any self preservation instinct, she was curled up in the right front footwell from the instant she saw a gun until he drove to relative safety and she said “let me out of here so we don’t both go down in a hail of bullets ten minutes from now”.

    2. avatar Ardent says:

      In the full video the female returns after the shooter has left the scene, surrenders to the officer and is taken into custody.

  8. avatar William W. says:

    While watching the video I also thought of using my JEEP to trap the shooter in the door, regardless of passenger. She was probably down on the floor anyway. It would depend on who’s in my car also. My family? No way. Might back up and observe and call 911, and cover with my Ruger SP101 Snub .357mag. If alone, probably would have involved myself either with my JEEP or my firearm or both. Of course, this is armchair, after the fact, speculation in every ones part.

    1. avatar L says:

      I’ll bite. Why does your family being in the car make a difference? The criminal is aggressive towards the cop and very likely towards you after you help the cop. What’s the danger? The criminal isn’t going to take his attention off the cop and you who are both shooting at him to shoot at bystanders who aren’t actively trying to stop him from his goal.

      1. avatar Swarf says:

        Because they might get shot?

        Jesus.

      2. avatar William W. says:

        Ok Brave One. Why put my family directly in danger, when my primary purpose of carrying is to protect them and myself. They would also be trapped in a car, like me, and possibly take on gunfire. I could back up and put them out and rejoin the melee, but unlike you, Brave One, would not put my family in direct line of fire. Have you every been fired at? If you do have a family, ask what they think about your plan. Bite and Chew on that for awhile.

        1. avatar DapperGunsmith says:

          Exactly…

        2. avatar L says:

          How is your family in “direct line of fire?” You’re arguing your own point but you never addressed mine which directly contradicts that:

          The criminal isn’t going to take his attention off the cop and you who are both shooting at him to shoot at bystanders who aren’t actively trying to stop him from his goal.

        3. avatar Big Bill says:

          L says: “The criminal isn’t going to take his attention off the cop and you who are both shooting at him to shoot at bystanders who aren’t actively trying to stop him from his goal.”
          Any family members in that car aren’t bystanders; they are right there in the battle.
          The perp shot a lot at the LEO, and missed. Those bullets didn’t just turn to vapor, they went somewhere. If he then turns his attention to the new threat (who has family in the car), where will the missed shots go?

        4. avatar William W. says:

          “L”. Please reread my answer again. Then if you can’t figure out what I said and meant, you’re beyond help from me. I said, if I rammed my Jeep into the perp’s car door with any member of my family inside and he directed gunfire my way, that I had put them in unnecessary danger by direct fire. If you don’t care enough because you want to play Rambo, that’s your choice, but I am not that stupid.

      3. avatar Aaron says:

        I’ve rarely read comments as dumb as L’s comments.

      4. avatar Hannibal says:

        uh… what? Do you think that a shootout is a safe place for your family? What if someone misses? What if he decides to carjack a new vehicle to avoid apprehension?

        If you’re going to intervene in a situation (and you’re comfortable doing that not knowing everything about that situation) that’s great, but you better have a plan for your family. Maybe your spouse should know that if you pull over and shout “go” she should get in the driver’s seat and just drive away until you call (or run away with the kids away from the gunshots if you’re in the mall).

        1. avatar DapperGunsmith says:

          L.. my man… i’m having a hard time formulating a response that I think you are intelligent enough to understand. Therefor I will just leave you be.

      5. avatar LarryinTX says:

        Hindsight. Perp dumped 2 mags at the cop, never hit him. Bullets went somewhere. Chances are good if his wife and 3 kids were clustered around him (as they are if all of you are in a car) that at least one would have been hit. *THAT* is why not.

        1. avatar FedUp says:

          At least the cop’s bullets went mostly into his squad, so he wasn’t putting the nope car in too much danger. Driving forward instead of backing up the nope car would have been more dangerous as it turned out.

  9. avatar Gapharmd says:

    Never saw the shoulder hit. Anyone else?

    1. avatar MyName says:

      I couldn’t see it either. Wonder if that happened in the later interaction with the Springdale PD.

      Also, since Fayetteville was mentioned, GO HOGS! (Those who’s names are on the sidewalk will understand, others may not)

    2. avatar Jeremy D. says:

      If he got hit he definitely didnt react. Adrenaline is a helluva drug. His shoulder looked like it was slumping a little when he ran back to the car

  10. avatar J. Justiss says:

    My Grand Marquis quarter panels are easily replaced…no, I wasn’t there but I can’t see not taking a swipe at the guy. While his situational awareness in front of him was impressive, the same can not be said to the rear.

  11. avatar Dr. Van Nostrand says:

    When I was shot at in my PD capacity I don’t think I advised “shots fired” until I had handled bidness… not saying it’s right or wrong Vs what he did but it’s funny how people react differently

  12. avatar TheOtherDavid says:

    Yes, apparently not his first rodeo when it comes to pistol handling. In Mexico, it seems like many of the cartel players are active police and military by day. Makes you wonder what this guy’s background is

    1. avatar Elaine D. says:

      Ja. And they have women in their employ as well.

  13. avatar Specialist38 says:

    All that high powered training.

    This guy would have killed 20 untrained civilians. SARC

  14. avatar Scott says:

    Among other things, he was charged with “committing a terrorist act.”

    I hate the doctrine of charging someone with everything that might possibly stick. Terrorism is violence coupled with a political agenda. While he’s guilty if everything else he’s charged with, he’s NOT guilty of terrorism.

    Eric Frein, the dude who shot two cops and then did Escape and Evasion for a month in Pennsylvania, was also charged and found guilty of terrorism and possessing a weapon of mass destruction.

    It should be concerning that these cases are setting up precedent that everyone who fights the cops are terrorists and that common weapons are WMD’s.

    1. avatar rt66paul says:

      That way homeland security can get involved and open the way for more federal law enforcement – that will force the states to allow the feds in state. They will be the real gun grabbers. People from out of state that have been granted immunity from prosecution in the business of doing the fed’s dirty work.

    2. avatar LarryinTX says:

      20 years in USAF here, this “WMD” shit is getting WAY out of hand. As someone who has dealt with both, let me advise you. A 2000 lb bomb, with a lethal radius of 500 yards, is *not* a WMD. A NUCLEAR WEAPON with a yield measured in kilotons or megatons, is a WMD. A magical .50 cal select fire with a jillion explosive bullets is STILL not a WMD. And I do not believe this is a mistake, somebody thinks there is an advantage in getting people to believe that a Colt SAA is a WMD, the lying is deliberate.

  15. avatar Kendahl says:

    At the time the SUV stopped to evaluate the situation, the bad guy had both arms and one leg out of the car. It would have been very easy for the SUV driver to turn his steering wheel to the left and punch the accelerator pedal. Four thousand pounds of SUV hitting the car door at 10 mph would have put a quick end to the bad guy’s shooting. Both arms and one leg would have been broken if not completely crushed. If the driver was worried about retaliation from the passenger, he could have backed up or continued forward past the deputy’s vehicle. I really hate this “It’s not my place to get involved” shit.

    1. avatar Pig Barber Phil says:

      The driver could’ve been killed by cops’ bullets.You’d be saying what a stupid move it was.

      1. avatar baf says:

        I’m finding the comments about ramming the bad guy kind of remarkable. I’m pretty sure I’d have to go ahead and decline driving directly into a cop’s line of fire. But, hey, that’s just me.

        The guy in the SUV is lucky he managed to get out of there and not get whacked by one of those 50 rounds that were flying around missing their targets.

    2. avatar SkepticalJ says:

      There’s no way you or anyone else could have figured out what exactly was going on in those seconds if you were driving down the road in your SUV like in this video. You’re a liar if you think otherwise.

      1. avatar LarryinTX says:

        Suspect you’re correct. Also must give kudos to the driver, suspect when I figured out what was happening I’d have hammered it in reverse and crashed the damn car trying to get away.

    3. avatar Big Bill says:

      I have seen (in real life, not Youtube videos) a deer get hit so hard it flew for over ten feet before hitting the ground and running off like nothing happened. No limp at all.
      Gotta wonder just how much damage a car would actually do.
      Yes, we see reports of people seriously injured by a hit from a car. These reports make the news because they are newsworthy. However, I also hear about people hit with no real damage done. Watch the Youtube vids about stupid drivers, and you will see pedestrians get hit, get up, and just walk away. (Maybe the Russians are sterner folk that us)

  16. avatar Sam I Am says:

    How many cops (and how many POTG) would have imagined the perp exiting at that speed, shooting? Just watching the video, I had to hesitate and ask, “What the heck is he doing?” Hesitation, analysis, reaction – too much time lag. I put this one in the field kit for anticipating bad guys with guns.

    1. avatar Joe in San Antonio says:

      The OODA loop is key

  17. avatar Indiana Farmer says:

    I caught a news bit online where the commentator mentioned the suspect was in fact (wait for it… wait for it…) ANOTHER ILLEGAL ALIEN.

    WE NEED THAT WALL and WE NEED IT NOW!! Friggin zipperheads are cutting the razor wire concertina within an hour of the troops putting it up in Texas and Arizona!

    1. avatar Mister Fleas says:

      The invasion needs to to treated as an invasion. This is the same serious situation as faced Rome when the the barbarians started migrating into Roman territory.

  18. avatar Joe in San Antonio says:

    For the most part I agree with America’s jurisprudence, my one objection is violent rape, assault resulting in extreme permeant injury and extreme abuse of a child. I don’t care what the reasoning if you prey on people, and fundamentally alter their life then society shouldn’t hold the tab for trying to rehabilitate.

  19. avatar B.D. says:

    Never trust a Saturn owner.

    Just think how quickly this could have ended had the driver of the other car been a gun owner.

  20. avatar Red says:

    50 shots exchanged and only 1 hit? Someone needs to seriously learn how to shoot! Fortunately there weren’t a lot of innocent bystanders because otherwise, no doubt, a lot of them would have been hit.

  21. avatar Jan923 says:

    If that was me in that other car…I would have slammed into the bastards door and cut his legs off at the knee.

  22. avatar A-aargh15 says:

    BUILD. THE. WALL.

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email