Thing is, a majority of the times the cop doesn’t know why. But lawful people don’t run from the law.
Dangerous passing stunt on two lane road
- Thread starter Donald
- Start date
The military vs police ROE argument is a bad example to use - that argument came to popularity from some 18-19 year old chairforce pen pusher on facebook. I don't know how police ROEs are but things like no shooting unless you're being shot first - even if they pointed a weapon at you needlessly costed lives. Politicians and generals trying to play warfighter from the comfort of their A/C offices in washington with no idea of what is happening on the ground.
That is a bad law especially when the police interpret it as a reason to assume that anyone who runs must be guilty of something serious. The Supreme Court has ruled that police cannot shoot at suspects merely for running away, and car chases are the same issue. Police activity conducted in public can be dangerous to bystanders and that risk needs to be balanced with any benefit.
wemay
Site Donor 2023
Crazy idiots everywhere. I'll keep my ex Law Enforcement experience and thoughts to myself though.
- Joined
- Jun 8, 2022
- Messages
- 5,567
Your correct in that might be the wrong can of worms to use. My point however is that even the military at war takes civilian risk into account. ie we don't carpet bomb a neighborhood even when we know a really bad guy is there. However the police can chase a suspect into oncoming traffic and its justified because he "might" be a criminal beyond simply running away no matter the risk to the public.
Here is an old study that took data from 1994 to 2002. Hopefully we are doing better now, but 35% of fatalities involving a pursuit were people not in the fleeing vehicle, so innocent motorists or pedestrians. That’s a staggering number.
All for what exactly? Running a stop light and then fleeing? How can one justify it if they have some common sense?
https://injuryprevention.bmj.com/content/10/2/93
All for what exactly? Running a stop light and then fleeing? How can one justify it if they have some common sense?
https://injuryprevention.bmj.com/content/10/2/93
That's fine, here they don't chase if there's a risk to the public, which there is once the guy starts speeding, so they get the plate number and get him at a later time.
I asked my neighbor who is DSP if he knew the details behind this chase and he said he would find out but has no gotten back to me yet.
Most high speed chases in Delaware are short lived. A few minutes of driving 90 MPH and you are in another state (or the ocean).
Most high speed chases in Delaware are short lived. A few minutes of driving 90 MPH and you are in another state (or the ocean).
Sounds like an upstanding fellow 
Nope. That's why you make it automatic 10 years hard labor for fleeing police. No matter what. You run, in vehicle or on foot, and there's video to prove it, you're sentenced. WAY too much leniency for criminals. Ideas like that one just add to the lack of discipline and accountability and cause more and more crime.
Based on that information he should have been shot and left for the fish and turtles.
Probably not, but you might with an appeasement mindset.
This is more akin to a vehicle with 1 military aged male, 1 female, and 2 kids making a high-speed approach to a roadblock and ignoring warning shots. Do you risk shooting the vehicle and it not end up being a VBIED and you end up killing multiple civilians or do you risk holding your fire and getting your team killed?
When Chicago's no-chase rule went into effect, there were "teams" of carjackers that took full advantage of the no-chase policy and these teams ended up killing somebody during subsequent carjackings. If your daughter was hurt or killed by these carjackers, would you be mad at the cops for not pursuing the criminals beforehand?
Not saying you're right or wrong. It's a hard ****ed if you do or ****ed if you don't type situation. I do understand no-chase policies in a very limited way because of the danger chasing can impose on the general driving public, but if my sister's car got jacked with her in it and a cop saw them driving erratic without knowing they just kidnapped my sister, I'd prefer the cop pulling them over.
Last edited:
Yes, and then that penalty could be extended to misgendering someone or being circumcised. Nah, that never happened before…
It’s clear most of you have no idea what you’re asking for in the name of safety.
Nah. He fits in period 1932-1938. 1939 it was all over.
They're already like that. Do you think these people involved in these high speed chases give a hoot about killing someone? All they care about is getting away...
Similar threads
