Are Police Supposed To Hit Criminals Back

Who pays if criminals hit your car in a police chase?

It all depends…but, 99% chance you’re probably not at fault.If the suspect vehicle hits you, you are Party 2 (or more) and the suspect’s insurance, or your insurance if he/she is uninsured, will pay to repair the damages. (Note - in a collision ‘party 1’ is at fault or most at fault, all larger numbers are less at fault or at no fault).If a police vehicle hits you, them the municipal government’s carrier pays the damages.If the suspect’s or police vehicle hits you and it is determined to be an unnecessary or needlessly reckless pursuit by the police, then it is a litigation matter with the municipality being the tort defendant. This is a lawyer/insurance item - your insurance will want to recover damages and your lawyer will want to recover damages plus pain and suffering. This is the reason police will often back off a pursuit and go into surveillance mode with a helicopter following in hope the suspect will slow down and flee more carefully. If the suspect fails to slow and drive less recklessly even after the police back off, then the onus goes back to the suspect.If you do something that purposely interferes with the pursuit, or some other unfathomable action that causes the collision…then you will possibly be at fault either civilly and/or criminally.

When chasing a suspect or criminal in a car, why don't the police shoot the tire?               This is purely from TV shows, I see people getting away and a shot at the tire would ve surely stopped them. In reality, do cops think to shoot at tires or is there a reason not to do that?

Shooting a tire would at best deflate one tire, which would make driving at high speed of the pursued vehicle unpredictable.Secondly, it is virtually impossible to take aim from one moving car to hit accurately on another moving car.Thirdly, it has been shown by experiment that a tire hit by a bullet does not necessarily deflate.Fourthly, only the back tires are available to be shot at in most cases.Fifthly, a hand gun is only accurate up to about fifteen feet, even in the hands of an expert.Sixthly, bullets from handguns likely to be used by the police are not as  powerful as weapons used by the military.Seventhly, if the police car was behind the pursuing car (as against alongside it), then it could cause the police car to crash into the pursuded car.Eigthly, if the police car was alongside the pursued car then then it would be better to fire at the car engine.Ninethly, if the police car was close enough to shoot at the police car it would be better (and more common) for the police car to nudge the pursued car so it spins out of control without crashing.Tenthly, unless the chase was in daylight on an uncrowded road with a low chance of other traffic and pedestrians being affected, bullets can ricochet dangerously when they hit moving targets.Eleventhly, TV only reflects reality in the sense that nothing is what is seems.

Is it legal to hit back if a police officer hits you for a wrong reason or no reason at all?

U.S.-based answer. Using ‘he’ pronoun for the hypothetical police officer because the OP did.First, a clarification: It’s not self-defense to strike someone merely because he hit you—that’s retribution, revenge, or retaliation, but don’t call it self-defense. The OP rightly labeled this as retaliation, but I wanted to clarify for other readers.Secondly, I want to make clear that what you describe is universally unacceptable behavior for any cop in the U.S. It is both unprofessional and criminal. That’s not to say it hasn’t happened.To get to your question, let’s assume some cop who shouldn’t be a cop starts throwing around his weight, crosses the line, and assaults you. Technically, it would be legal to defend yourself or leave the scene, but it’s a physical and legal battle you’re likely to lose.Why? Because you’re probably not carrying a radio to call for back up, a baton, pepper spray, TASER, handcuffs, a ballistic vest, and a gun. A police officer will not fight fair; he will fight to win. If the case makes it to court, it’s your word against the word of a police officer, who may or may not have a working body cam. Think about how that is likely to turn out.In the unlikely event this happens, and there are no witnesses around, I suppose my advice would be to do whatever you can to minimize physical harm to yourself, which, unfortunately, probably means to submit to the officer and go with the program. Then get a good lawyer, file a formal complaint, file a Pitchess motionor equivalent, and do not let up so that others don’t suffer the same fate that you did.If there are others around, I would scream my head off for anyone to hear to start video recording what’s happening while offering no resistance whatsoever to the officer.

Is it illegal for a police officer to hit a motorcycle whom he is pursuing?

The officer is going to have a lot of explaining to do if he decides to end a pursuit by hitting a motorcyclist, especially if the motorcyclist ends up injured or dead - a very likely possibility. It would be akin to pulling his weapon and shooting a suspect.It’s also going to depend on the department rules for pursuit. Many departments do not pursue fleeing motorcycles unless they are being pursued for the commission of a felony.The officer is going to have to justify using potentially deadly force to stop a fleeing vehicle. Usually because of the suspected crime. A fleeing murderer, a suspect in a terrorist attack, or the like. If the suspect is showing evidence that they are a further potentially grave danger to society, then use of deadly force may be required.If the officer is simply pursuing them for a minor traffic violation, then his actions - purposely pursuing and intentionally hitting the motorcycle - may result in discipline for the officer and possible loss of job or charges being brought against the officer. The department could be sued as well.