US Supreme Court rules on high speed chases

[ppd101]

patroldog hit the nail on the head. Law enforcement has been dictated by events that are few and far between. For example, traffic stops. The accusation of Racially Profilling someone has made officers stop conducting traffic stops. And Departments are making officers complete a form to find out why you stopped a vehicle. Then you have the Taser issue. Police departments are now forbidding them because of people saying they are causing suspects to die. But not one incident has the taser been shown to cause any deaths. And lets not forget defensive tacticts. Suspect shoots, punches, kicks, bites and spits at an officer and we are the ones accused of excessive force when we arrest someone when using force to effect the arrest. So departments and city leaders are changing policies when an officer can use force and for what crimes. Pursuits is just one of many tacticts that police use that are now being restricted because of public opinion. At this rate, we will be walking the beat with only a cell phone and prayer. Because our patrol cars, radio, flashlight and gun will be taken away because we look to intimidating.

[patroldog]

My organization also has a "No Pursuit" policy, do I agree ? No, do i adhere, yes, for the most part. I tend to agree with a lot of the members that these policies should remain unknown to the public, if a perp knows you won't chase him/her, they will run, causing more danger to the public and another blow to the effectiveness of law enforcement. Actual policing has been chipped away by the adaption of laws effectively reducing the times police can be proactive and enhancing the ability of the criminal to ply his/her trade without fear of apprehension due to some B/S politically correct "LAW". Stay Safe out there.

[scratched13]

Funny, I was thinking the same thing about you.

You apparently think we should chase everyone for everything no matter what and should never stop regardless of the danger.

I think we should chase everything but continually evaluate the danger to all involved and weigh the value of catching them (traffic violation, armed robber, serial rapist, etc...) vs the danger to the community (including yourself). From there we make the decision of whether or not to continue the pursuit.
Seriously scratched, have you ever even been in a pursuit? Because you talk about this stuff like you read about it in a book.

Nothing that I have bolded do I really object to. The PROBLEM with it is that policies are written AND INTERPRETTED by admin guys. If it works out okay, then usually no problem. When bad things happen - NO MATTER WHAT THE SITUATION IS - you are screwed. I can articulate very easily the risk to chasing a MURDER suspect being OUTWEIGHED by the risk to innocents on the streets. You chase a murder suspect and there is a bad crash - you @ss is grass in our city. Policies that are written (like most chase policies) so that the result (IE wreck) determines whether or not the policy is broken. And that is BS.

Oh, I have been in a few chases. And a few "following the suspect at a distance without activating my emergency equipment so as to determine his general direction" 's.

[Chief Wiggum]

Make up whatever response you want to...but what you are typing is just plain hogwash.

Funny, I was thinking the same thing about you.

You apparently think we should chase everyone for everything no matter what and should never stop regardless of the danger.

I think we should chase everything but continually evaluate the danger to all involved and weigh the value of catching them (traffic violation, armed robber, serial rapist, etc...) vs the danger to the community (including yourself). From there we make the decision of whether or not to continue the pursuit.

Seriously scratched, have you ever even been in a pursuit? Because you talk about this stuff like you read about it in a book.

[scratched13]

Outstanding and intelligent response. I expect no less from you. Obviously you are done discussing this so I guess I am too. Have a nice day.

Make up whatever response you want to ("if saving the day for the entire world means that I am greedy, etc ........"), but what you are typing is just plain hogwash.


Oh, yeah ......................

[Chief Wiggum]

Ohhhhhhh, puuuuuuuulllllllleeeeeaaaassssssssseeeeeeeeee..... ...

Outstanding and intelligent response. I expect no less from you. Obviously you are done discussing this so I guess I am too. Have a nice day.

[scratched13]

If not continuing a pursuit for a traffic offense when it hits excessive speeds through residential neighborhoods is greedy and selfish then yes.

Ohhhhhhh, puuuuuuuulllllllleeeeeaaaassssssssseeeeeeeeee..... ...

[Chief Wiggum]

No, greedy and selfish - no matter the cost to the rest of us. That decribe you?

If not continuing a pursuit for a traffic offense when it hits excessive speeds through residential neighborhoods is greedy and selfish then yes.

[scratched13]

Those must be some smart lawyers if they agree with me.

No, greedy and selfish - no matter the cost to the rest of us. That decribe you?

[Chief Wiggum]

Virtually every lawyer who is out to make a few million no matter how destructive it is to our society AGREES with you. Congratulations!

Those must be some smart lawyers if they agree with me.

[scratched13]

Virtually every expert in the field and every PD in the country disagrees with you, but that's your opinion I guess. That and $5 will get you a cup of coffee at Starbucks.

Damn coffee is expensive!!! Glad I don't drink it.

Virtually every lawyer who is out to make a few million no matter how destructive it is to our society AGREES with you. Congratulations!

[Chief Wiggum]

Wig - you are the one missing the big picture. As usual. Once again.

Virtually every expert in the field and every PD in the country disagrees with you, but that's your opinion I guess. That and $5 will get you a cup of coffee at Starbucks.

Damn coffee is expensive!!! Glad I don't drink it.

[scratched13]

Wig - you are the one missing the big picture. As usual. Once again.

[jerrymaccauley]

Pursuits are like any other use of force issue. If you don't think that following a car at 90 MPH through a residential area is dangerous, than you're in the wrong business. That being said, we don't shoot unless we're pretty damn sure that we need to. Most of us have had a small level of pursuit training, but not much in the way of high speed pursuit training. Those who have access to a good track and qualified instructors are in the minority. Bad guys have even less training, but they also have less concern for anyone who walks or drives into their path. Pursue when appropriate but police need to pick their battles. The Supremes gave us permission to use our tools so we need to use them wisely.

[ppd101]

I totally agree with you chief about chasing for traffic. Chase them until it does it becomes very dangerous. But as for homicide suspects, if you let a gang member who just committed a drive-by go, the likelyhood of him doing it again, is very high.

I have said we could reduce dangerous chases by having a countywide policy that would have every department involved. If one department starts a pursuit, every agency in that department assisists with it. Blocking intersections, laying out stop sticks. Just saturate the area with patrol cars. This would, more than likely, make the suspect ditch the car and run on foot.

Then we have to get with the DA's and ask them to charge these idiots who run. How many time have we gone to court and the suspect plead out to a charge and the Fleeing and Eluding charge gets dismissed.

Pursuits are dangerous, but if we don't allow them to happen, we are allowing these drivers to continue running from us until they do kill someone and we allowing them to continue the crimes they are running from.