To my non-legally-trained mind, it seems ridiculous that the case discussed here made it as far as the Supreme Court. I mean, I definitely think that police should be prevented from using unreasonable force, but it seems that any idiot would assume that, if you're driving along two-lane roads (not always in the correct lane) at speeds in excess of 100 mph, you could expect to be injured--probably seriously. And would you not also expect the police to try to stop you from hurting somebody else? And wasn't there a judge on any lower court smart enough to figure this out?
Is it too harsh to be thankful that this guy is no longer able to drive, since apparently the suspended license didn't stop him from endangering himself, the police, and everyone else on the roads?