How many times have we heard about someone knocking over a fast food joint or a convenience store and killing the clerk?
Dangerous passing stunt on two lane road
- Thread starter Donald
- Start date
How many times have we heard about someone knocking over a fast food joint or a convenience store and killing the clerk?
Yes, however it is not such simple equation. Bcs. they don’t care as you exert pressure they will do more reckless things as pursuit goes. That is why most departments in big cities quit chase as potential risk to public outweighs the benefit of catching someone who fled. If family dies bcs. chase, really at that point is irrelevant whether crook was apprehended or not.
This was probably the ONLY time talking on the phone resulted in avoiding a crash...
We are in the tourista section of southern Vermont. Lots of touristas from NY, NJ and southern New England. Not many east-west through roads in this area. One is route 11. Route 11 is hilly with short sight distances. At Bromley Mountain in Winhall VT, it is two lanes westbound, one east bound, and an east bound shoulder.
One day, I am going east bound. I crest a hill, and see in front of me, three cars, side by side, occupying the two west bound lanes and the east bound lane. It appears that two touristas stopped side by side to talk, a third tourista was attempting to pass them by going into the east bound lane, and when he saw me cresting the hill, stopped in his tracks. I was able to slow down and pass these idiots on the shoulder.
One day, I am going east bound. I crest a hill, and see in front of me, three cars, side by side, occupying the two west bound lanes and the east bound lane. It appears that two touristas stopped side by side to talk, a third tourista was attempting to pass them by going into the east bound lane, and when he saw me cresting the hill, stopped in his tracks. I was able to slow down and pass these idiots on the shoulder.
What is a tourista?
From that post the police made the proper decision to stop pursuit . They likely witnessed the stunt pulled on you and did proper thing.
No one needs to die over a couple grand of loss at Home Depot.
No one needs to die over a couple grand of loss at Home Depot.
It is Latin American Spanish for "tourist", usually one who is acting stupidly.
Get who? The plate doesn't tell you who is driving the car.
Maybe they just tow the vehicle and impound it for being used in a crime? I don't know? Anyways, they're not a lot of high speed pursuits here or a lot of crime so it must be working pretty well.
dnewton3
Staff member
Here's an example of a pursuit that was terminated, and several minutes later the fleeing vehicle still caused a serious crash with the death of an innocent person. The termination of the pursuit did nothing to save lives.
fox59.com
The pursuit ceased at 9:50pm. The wreck occurred at 9:55pm; it was reported immediately when it happened by a witness. So FIVE MINUTES after the pursuit was terminated, the reckless driver was still presenting serious danger to the general public.
Pursuing a vehicle has risks.
Not pursuing a vehicle has risks.
Neither policy has a 100% assurance of success or failure.
Those who would say that terminating a pursuit assures public safety are incorrect. A significant number of pursuits which are terminated still end up with the suspects causing crashes. This is likely because the underlying action(s) which caused police to become engaged in pursuit still exist AFTER the pursuit would be terminated. Reckless driving before the pursuit, and during the pursuit, often continues after the pursuit terminates. Intoxicated persons who become engaged in a pursuit don't suddenly and immediately become sober as soon as the emergency lights are turned off. Criminals fleeing the scene of a crime still flee if the sirens go silent.
I'm not saying that pursuits should not be terminated. I believe any pursuit should be terminated when the actions/choices of the OFFICER place the public at risk. But terminating a pursuit has little effect on the SUSPECT(S); they continue to present a risk to the public regardless if the pursuit is terminated or not. A large portion of pursuits which are terminated still result in accidents caused by the suspects, as evidenced by the storyline above.
3 killed in crash after police terminate pursuit on Indy’s east side
INDIANAPOLIS – Indiana State Police are investigating a crash that killed three people Tuesday night on Indy’s east side. ISP said that at approximately 9:37 p.m., a state trooper attem…
fox59.com
Pursuing a vehicle has risks.
Not pursuing a vehicle has risks.
Neither policy has a 100% assurance of success or failure.
Those who would say that terminating a pursuit assures public safety are incorrect. A significant number of pursuits which are terminated still end up with the suspects causing crashes. This is likely because the underlying action(s) which caused police to become engaged in pursuit still exist AFTER the pursuit would be terminated. Reckless driving before the pursuit, and during the pursuit, often continues after the pursuit terminates. Intoxicated persons who become engaged in a pursuit don't suddenly and immediately become sober as soon as the emergency lights are turned off. Criminals fleeing the scene of a crime still flee if the sirens go silent.
I'm not saying that pursuits should not be terminated. I believe any pursuit should be terminated when the actions/choices of the OFFICER place the public at risk. But terminating a pursuit has little effect on the SUSPECT(S); they continue to present a risk to the public regardless if the pursuit is terminated or not. A large portion of pursuits which are terminated still result in accidents caused by the suspects, as evidenced by the storyline above.
Fleeing police, whether on foot or in a vehicle, should add a mandatory 20 years in prison with no time off for good behavior and with the crime sentencing beginning only after the 20 years are complete. That should be a PSA every day and night, like "It's ten o'clock, where are your children?".
dnewton3
Staff member
I've had to delete several posts which are political and rudely argumentative.
Keep it civil, please.
There's nothing wrong with having an opinion and expressing it, but do so without taunting others.
Keep it civil, please.
There's nothing wrong with having an opinion and expressing it, but do so without taunting others.
dnewton3
Staff member
I cannot speak regarding all states; I'm familiar with a few states and their laws (specifically IN as that's where I served). I would expect most state laws are similar, but not the "same".
Fleeing on foot has a fairly low risk factor for injury to others, although there are examples when people fleeing on foot did still cause injury by running into other people and hurting them. I recall many years ago someone was actually killed by a fleeing person when the fleeing suspect ran into another person, and that person ended up being bumped into traffic and was run over by a passing car. Sort of a freak accident, but it was the fleeing person that was the root cause of the death. Some criminals flee on bicycles and other modes of transportation. Still - this is kind of a stretch to say that fleeing on foot is a high-risk for death.
Fleeing in a vehicle in most states is a felony; that alone already carries stiffer penalties. Then, causing death (or serious bodily injury) as a result of the flight also carries separate felonious charges. Obviously, because of the mass of vehicles, and speeds, death is a MUCH more likely result of fleeing.
I don't agree with your assessment that it should be mandatory for 20 incarceration years for fleeing (by any means). I think the current schedule of statutory charges fits the reasonable expectations of most of society. Most states have tiered charging schedules based on the nature and severity of the crimes, and that makes sense to me.
***********
My example above was simply to illuminate the point that terminating a pursuit does not automatically mean that immediate safety is the assured result. Many suspects continue the reckless behavior long after the pursuit is terminated. And it does often end with undesirable results (death/injury/property damage) to others even though LEOs suspended the chase.
Last edited:
It isn't the method used, it's the illegal act of fleeing. Although as you pointed out, even on foot it can be deadly. I'm sticking with 20 years as consequences and penalties need to be too harsh to risk the crime.
I think it was a car thief.
On YouTube or maybe the now defunct live leak, there was a Connecticut cop vs car thief chase that was the most incredible I’ve ever seen. The thief was a competent and fearless driver, the cops were full throttle trying to keep up. It seemed to go on and on.
maybe there is a more thrilling car chase online somewhere, but I’ve never seen it. And I have not been able to find the video since.
It ended up with a minor crash, an on foot search and a firefight.
In the end, I firmly believe we must remove those who can’t behave, from society. The very word civilization defines a society that has citizens who exhibit civil behavior. There is only one way to achieve that.
On YouTube or maybe the now defunct live leak, there was a Connecticut cop vs car thief chase that was the most incredible I’ve ever seen. The thief was a competent and fearless driver, the cops were full throttle trying to keep up. It seemed to go on and on.
maybe there is a more thrilling car chase online somewhere, but I’ve never seen it. And I have not been able to find the video since.
It ended up with a minor crash, an on foot search and a firefight.
In the end, I firmly believe we must remove those who can’t behave, from society. The very word civilization defines a society that has citizens who exhibit civil behavior. There is only one way to achieve that.
People who flee an attempted police stop usually have good reason to do so, like DUS, DUI, outstanding warrants, operating a stolen vehicle, fleeing the scene of a crime or an accident or carrying illegal substances.
Whether a high speed pursuit should be engaged by the police is a question with no firm answer, since the totality of the circumstances have to be considered.
Penalties do exist in law but only apply if the offending driver can be either stopped or IDed and picked up later.
No easy answers as to what the police response should be in ant given situation.
We did know a young deputy in a neighboring county who was struck and killed by a fleeing scumbag while trying to place stop sticks, so my sympathies don't lie with those fleeing the authorities.
Whether a high speed pursuit should be engaged by the police is a question with no firm answer, since the totality of the circumstances have to be considered.
Penalties do exist in law but only apply if the offending driver can be either stopped or IDed and picked up later.
No easy answers as to what the police response should be in ant given situation.
We did know a young deputy in a neighboring county who was struck and killed by a fleeing scumbag while trying to place stop sticks, so my sympathies don't lie with those fleeing the authorities.
dnewton3
Staff member
Here's part of the problem ...
The person who caused the crash I referenced above (further up this page), the crash which occurred minutes AFTER the pursuit was terminated, was released on a $1000 cash bond plus a surety bond. The suspect (Luis Leyba-Gonzalez) was released after his arraignment after posting bond. A total of SIX felony charges, each for causing death, and he got to walk away for a $6,000 in bond money. I do agree that low-level crimes should not have a high bail set. But fleeing police which results in 6 felonious charges of death, and you're out of jail for $6000? That's incredulous!
There's little deterrence to breaking laws for criminals. If you run fast enough, the police will stop chasing you. And even if you kill people while fleeing, you get out of jail for a pittance. Where's the leverage needed to dissuade people from doing things like this? Further, a real problem exists in that people out on bail often commit crimes while awaiting trial; it's commonplace. For many, the criminal system is a revolving door, mostly because there's not enough to deter/stop them.
There's a good interview with the Supt. of ISP, Douglas Carter, but I cannot link the story here because his interview has a profane word quoting him. But you can google it for yourself (search "Fox59 ISP Carter Gonzalez") to find the interview. He calls out the legal system, and in this case, the judge herself. The judge (Harrison) has a reputation for extreme leniency in both setting bonds and penalties.
The person who caused the crash I referenced above (further up this page), the crash which occurred minutes AFTER the pursuit was terminated, was released on a $1000 cash bond plus a surety bond. The suspect (Luis Leyba-Gonzalez) was released after his arraignment after posting bond. A total of SIX felony charges, each for causing death, and he got to walk away for a $6,000 in bond money. I do agree that low-level crimes should not have a high bail set. But fleeing police which results in 6 felonious charges of death, and you're out of jail for $6000? That's incredulous!
There's little deterrence to breaking laws for criminals. If you run fast enough, the police will stop chasing you. And even if you kill people while fleeing, you get out of jail for a pittance. Where's the leverage needed to dissuade people from doing things like this? Further, a real problem exists in that people out on bail often commit crimes while awaiting trial; it's commonplace. For many, the criminal system is a revolving door, mostly because there's not enough to deter/stop them.
There's a good interview with the Supt. of ISP, Douglas Carter, but I cannot link the story here because his interview has a profane word quoting him. But you can google it for yourself (search "Fox59 ISP Carter Gonzalez") to find the interview. He calls out the legal system, and in this case, the judge herself. The judge (Harrison) has a reputation for extreme leniency in both setting bonds and penalties.
Maybe the police cars should have a drone. Stop the car chase and send up a drone to follow the fleeing car?
Would you have the same outlook if the fleeing “suspect” hit and took the life of one of your loved ones?
Similar threads
