If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
More power to the police in high speed pursuit
There are at least three good questions that I've seen about the
chase, only one of which was addressed in the decision: 1) artifically low speed limits to raise revenue. Completely irrelevant to the case, sorry. I don't care if the limit was 15 (we have 15mph school zones on 40mph roads around here), when the lights come on, you stop. If you're on a suspended license (the kid in the case was), you make damn sure you don't do anything to get stopped for -- not driving at all being a really good choice, and setting your cruise control for speedlimit-1 being a poor second. Speeding on a back-country road is somewhere near the bottom of possible choices. Haven't heard if he was drunk; if he was, that would move it all the way to the bottom. 2) should the cops have chased him? If a third party had been injured in the case, that would have been a really good question. All I've seen about the case gives the impression that it was just a speed stop; if so, there aren't many jurisdictions that would allow a high-speed chase, as it raises the bar too high for a minor offense. But no third parties were injured, so this one wasn't addressed either. 3) should they have nerfed him? How could anybody watch the tape and conclude otherwise? At that point, he was using his vehicle as a deadly weapon, and had to be stopped. Looking at the lights he ran, the vehicles getting out of the way, and the little trip through the roadblock, they should have stopped him much earlier than they did. A spiked board back at the roadblock would have been a much better way, however (I haven't seen any claims that that was tried). |
Ads |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
More power to the police in high speed pursuit
In article >, Joe Pfeiffer wrote:
> There are at least three good questions that I've seen about the > chase, only one of which was addressed in the decision: > > 1) artifically low speed limits to raise revenue. Completely > irrelevant to the case, sorry. I don't care if the limit was 15 > (we have 15mph school zones on 40mph roads around here), when the > lights come on, you stop. You've missed the point entirely. Proper speed limits means only stopping those drivers who should be targeted for enforcement. Less stops mean fewer chases. Same with picking people up at their homes if they have a warrant instead of waiting for them to be pulled over. It's also better for the people because then cops just can't pick and choose anyone to stop. (either being in violation of the speed limit or driving unusually slow) > If you're on a suspended license (the > kid in the case was), you make damn sure you don't do anything > to get stopped for Driving to the letter law attracts police attention, especially on friday and saturday nights. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
More power to the police in high speed pursuit
|
#14
|
|||
|
|||
More power to the police in high speed pursuit
"Ashton Crusher" > wrote in message
... > On Mon, 30 Apr 2007 19:49:56 -0400, "dwight" > > wrote: > >>Let's see if I have this right... >> >>Police take off after a black Caddy doing 73mph in a 55mph zone, which >>leads >>to a high speed pursuit in the black Georgia night. The 19 year old yahoo >>behind the wheel of the Caddy is obviously of no mind to pull over. After >>almost 8 minutes of the chase through light traffic, one police cruiser >>bumps the Caddy from behind, at which point yahoo loses control of the car >>and careens off the road into (what appears to be) a telephone pole. >> >>Bottom line, the yahoo (who, originally, was guilty of driving at 18mph >>over >>the posted speed limit) is now a quadraplegic. >> >>Yahoo sues the police officer who "caused the crash" under the terms of >>the >>4th Amendment (some weird logic about unlawful seizure?). >> >>"In this case, both a lower court and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the >>11th >>Circuit ruled in favor of [the yahoo]. The 11th Circuit said that [the >>officer's] actions constituted deadly force and that it was unreasonable >>because the officer had no reason to think [yahoo] had done anything more >>than violate traffic laws. The police gave chase because they clocked him >>going 73 mph in a 55-mph zone. >> >>'Far from being the cautious and controlled driver the lower court >>depicts, >>what we see on the video more closely resembles a Hollywood-style car >>chase >>of the most frightening sort, placing police officers and innocent >>bystanders alike at great risk of serious injury,' wrote Justice Antonin >>Scalia. >>Scalia was incredulous that the lower courts had said Harris's case >>against >>Scott could proceed." >> >>(source: http://www.policeone.com/legal/articles/1241449/, among others) >> >>Now, I've viewed the video posted on the Supreme Court's website, and I >>have >>to say, "What the $*^&$# was that yahoo thinking?!?" The video is about >>92MB >>and runs some 15+ minutes, showing what the onboard cameras of the police >>cruisers saw that night. First, you see the Caddy from the lead pursuit >>cruiser, then you get the same chase as seen from a second cruiser, the >>one >>which ultimately knocks the Caddy into the woods. >> >>(video at: >>http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinio..._v_harris.rmvb) >> >>Watching the California Patrol in hot pursuit after a white Bronco doing >>20mph for hours on end is one thing, but the chase in this video is >>typical >>of the ones being debated over recent years. At what point do the police >>engage in pursuit, and when do they just let the evil-doer go, hoping to >>pick him up later. >> > > From watching this video they clearly should have called off this > chase long before it ended. The cops were making a bad situation > worse to catch someone who was barely speeding in the first place. > > >>The original crime here was not armed robbery or carjacking or leaving the >>scene of an accident, it was doing 73mph in a 55 zone. (Remember: I've >>said >>before that 72 is the magic number.) I have no idea why yahoo decided to >>try >>to escape, rather than simply pull over and accept the damn ticket. >> >>When the police officer is chasing down a speeder with siren and lights >>on, >>and the speeder just keeps on going, putting any number of other motorists >>in danger, the police officer can now use deadly force (i.e.: his front >>bumper) with a little more authority, thanks to today's Supreme Court >>ruling. >> > > Which makes us all LESS safe then we were before with no meaningful > improvement in crime reduction. > > >>I'm no lawyer, but it seems to me that yahoo compounded his possible >>speeding ticket with resisting arrest (always a good generic criminal >>activity, when everything else fails). But then leading the police on an >>8-minute chase around any number of other motorists (most of whom had the >>good sense to pull over to the side of the road) has to be a serious >>crime. >>The potential for disaster is all over that video. >> >>I would have dismissed this case from the start. >> > > I would have ruled in favor of the yahoo to some extent. This chase > should have ended after the first minute when they got close enough to > get the plate. ....then just pull over and wave bye bye? What?!? No, don't think so. At the very least, the police have to follow this nut to be on the scene when he slams into something other than a tree. When someone fails to surrender, you think they should just be let go? dwight |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
More power to the police in high speed pursuit
"dwight" > writes:
> > No, don't think so. At the very least, the police have to follow this nut to > be on the scene when he slams into something other than a tree. > > When someone fails to surrender, you think they should just be let go? Not exactly. But depending on what you want them for, and what the danger to others is, that may be the best bet -- if all he was wanted for was speeding (and he wasn't driving erratically), the chase probably shouldn't have happened. If they really think he's going to slam into something other than a tree, they need to get him stopped before that happens. Once the chase was under weigh in earnest, and he was weaving and running stop lights, it was time to get him stopped. |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
More power to the police in high speed pursuit
In article >, Joe Pfeiffer wrote:
> (Brent P) writes: > >> In article >, Joe Pfeiffer wrote: >> > There are at least three good questions that I've seen about the >> > chase, only one of which was addressed in the decision: >> > >> > 1) artifically low speed limits to raise revenue. Completely >> > irrelevant to the case, sorry. I don't care if the limit was 15 >> > (we have 15mph school zones on 40mph roads around here), when the >> > lights come on, you stop. >> >> You've missed the point entirely. Proper speed limits means only stopping >> those drivers who should be targeted for enforcement. Less stops mean >> fewer chases. Same with picking people up at their homes if they have a >> warrant instead of waiting for them to be pulled over. It's also better for >> the people because then cops just can't pick and choose anyone to stop. >> (either being in violation of the speed limit or driving unusually slow) > > No, I haven't. I'm actually a big fan of engineering the road to > encourage driving at a safe speed, and then setting a speed limit > based on actual usage (so only the nuts are driving over the limit). > > That is completely irrelevant in whether the police were justified in > ending this chase as they did, which is what the suit was about. The dangerous chases don't happen as much without the idiotic speed limits and revenuing on the road. That's the relevance. It's a way to reduce these events. >> > If you're on a suspended license (the >> > kid in the case was), you make damn sure you don't do anything >> > to get stopped for >> >> Driving to the letter law attracts police attention, especially on >> friday and saturday nights. > I've only been stopped half a dozen times in my driving career (which > extends several decades), and I've never been at the speed limit when > it's happened. I have. > The cops may watch you more closely (I was once > followed for over five miles in my Charger), I've been followed like that a good number of times. usually on the order of 2-3 miles. > but a kid in a Cadillac > driving the speed limit isn't going to be stopped. Certainly not as > readily as one driving 18 over the limit. I notice, incidentally, > that you edited out the note that the best way to avoid getting > stopped while on a suspended license is to not be driving at all. Because I had no objection to it. I am presenting an argument on a way to reduce the number of these sort of events. |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
More power to the police in high speed pursuit
In article >, Brent P
> wrote: > Because I had no objection to it. I am presenting an argument on a way to > reduce the number of these sort of events. > > While I still lived in L.A. (80's), the policy was changed to scramble an air unit ASAP when any pursuit lasted more than a few moments. Once Air had a fix on the perp, the ground vehicles were supposed to back off far enough so he would not see them, and thus slow down. Air would then follow and bring ground back in when the perp was stationary. This appeared to work in the beginning, as back then there were usually several units upstairs at any given time. However, in the dozens of LAPD police chases I've seen on TV and YouTube since then, it appears that, Air or not, ground units continue to dog a suspect's heels. I can only assume that the previous policy was not effectual in in the belated snaring of the bad guy. I agree that many warrants can be served at a residence. However, you should not assume that this does not happen. My neighbor back in L.A. was picked up at his house, much to his surprise, on a misdemeanor warrant on a nice weekday afternoon by plainclothes from Devonshire Division. Every agency has different policies. You cannot assume that the license plate on a pursued vehicle will lead you later on to his doorstep where you can comfortably hook him up. The car could be borrowed or stolen or have fictitious plates, and the registered address can be stale. For some reason, people with warrants tend to move around and not update their info. Hmm. How many of you have been pulled over, and the officer asks you if the address on your license is current? That is SOP. As this issue is one big gray fog, I see valid points from most of the posters. The technology to shut off the ignition from satellite has been included in cars built the last few years. The technology to read a VIN "chip" on a moving vehicle with a scanner exists now. The use of these two will eventually be established. On a lighter note: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=87UgXXgXHKc&NR=1 A public service from me. Realize that the law enforcement officer does not know the situation when he pulls you over. When you are lit up, try to pull over where passing traffic will not constitute a hazard to the officer(s), who is looking at you and does not have eyes in the back of his head. Roll all the windows down if they are powered. Turn off the engine. Put your left hand on the outside of the door. Put your right hand on the top of your steering wheel. The officer can now see that you have no weapon. (If you are pulled over at night turn on your interior lights first). When asked for your license and reg, tell him first where they are before reaching anywhere. Keep your hands visible after giving him the documents, even when he's back at his car running you for Wants and Warrants (28-29). If you have several people in the car, have them do the same thing with hands outside the doors or palms placed against the rear window. If you have a friend with a cop attitude, tell him to keep his mouth shut or you'll break his jaw. Using the above and politeness will often go a long way towards a lesser ticket, or maybe no ticket at all. You will often be asked where you learned all that. Tell them someone that used to be in the system mentioned it, and it made good sense. -- CobraJet |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
More power to the police in high speed pursuit
In article >, CobraJet wrote:
> You cannot assume that the license plate on a pursued vehicle will > lead you later on to his doorstep where you can comfortably hook him > up. The car could be borrowed or stolen or have fictitious plates, and > the registered address can be stale. For some reason, people with > warrants tend to move around and not update their info. Hmm. How many > of you have been pulled over, and the officer asks you if the address > on your license is current? That is SOP. While I knew better than to make a plates argument and didn't. I've had to tell the officer that it was not current, they never asked. I had the same physical license for a very long time, like 8-10 years because I could just renew by mail and did so. It was so old that when I was carded people would give it a triple take because they were too young to even know that format once existed. > As this issue is one big gray fog, I see valid points from most of > the posters. The technology to shut off the ignition from satellite has > been included in cars built the last few years. The technology to read > a VIN "chip" on a moving vehicle with a scanner exists now. The use of > these two will eventually be established. So criminals will just steal older cars. > A public service from me. Realize that the law enforcement officer > does not know the situation when he pulls you over. That's my other argument against road-side taxation and why speed limits need to make sense to minimize stops. It puts the officer's life at risk to collect a little revenue. > When you are lit > up, try to pull over where passing traffic will not constitute a hazard > to the officer(s), who is looking at you and does not have eyes in the > back of his head. And there's the other risk to the revenue collection. Stops should be minimized to those that are actually needed and the officers wouldn't be put at risk so often. > Using the above and politeness will often go a long way towards a > lesser ticket, or maybe no ticket at all. You will often be asked where > you learned all that. Tell them someone that used to be in the system > mentioned it, and it made good sense. It's showing the submissiveness to the state. I don't particularly like it, but have done it in the past. It's a social-animal thing really. I would prefer to live in a free country again. |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
More power to the police in high speed pursuit
|
#20
|
|||
|
|||
More power to the police in high speed pursuit
On Wed, 02 May 2007 17:16:56 -0700, Ashton Crusher >
wrote: >On Wed, 02 May 2007 13:01:58 -0700, GILL > wrote: > >>Spike wrote: >>> On Mon, 30 Apr 2007 23:35:34 -0500, >>> (Brent P) wrote: >>> >>>> In article >, dwight wrote: >>>> >>>>> In this particular case, this 19 year old kid could have chosen to pull over SNIP >>runners just go? > >Guess what. Some places have done that. Guess what, nothing happens >any different there as far as their overall crime rate. IOW, the >change in policy had no effect other then to eliminate the deadly >police chases thereby lessening the chance of INNOCENT bystanders >being killed. The change in policy did NOT increase the number of >times people tried to run from the cops. And in most cases they get >the guy anyway, just not thru a dangerous pursuit. > > It is stupid for the cops to be engaging in high speed pursuits for >anything other then things like going after a known murderer. Going >after a guy because "he's driving fast and might kill someone" is >absurd on it's face. You don't increase safety by encouraging someone >to engage in MORE unsafe acts. >I say let the police do their job with FULL regard for the safety of >others they might endanger. There are VERY few instances where a high >speed pursuit is warranted. Now we are supposed to be mind readesr? If someone is going to run for a simple traffic infraction, how are cops supposed to know why? Is it because they just killed their cheating girlfriend, robbed a 7/11, or whatever? Afterall, the girls body may not be found for a few days. People run for the stupidest reasons... "because I didn't have my license with me", "because I had a joint in my purse", or the one I really liked was, "because I didn't know if you were really a cop" (marked vehicle, gumballs, siren). As for pursuits, someone who is whacked out on drugs, drunk, mentally ill, or even a diabetic in insulin shock, has no idea what they are doing. Doesn't matter if there is a cop present or not. They'll roll right through an intersection they didn't see, or a school zone filled with kids, or even down the wrong side of the freeway. Of course they also run because they news choppers have put them on TV for their 15 minutes of fame. Want to lower the rates of chases? Pass a law which prohibits the news choppers from making a chase a big production for the evening news. Many of the idiots being chased have been filmed waving to the choppers.... like 'hey, momma and you homies, look at me!' But you'd say just let them go and get them later. Want to explain that to the families of the people they happen to kill? One night I had to have one of my best friends relieved of duty in order to explain to him how a drunk crossed the centerline and hit his wife head on, killing her, their son, and their unborn child. The drunk survived. And he wasn't being chased. Then you'll see someone driving like a nut, at speed, who cuts you off and you'll complain because the cop you see cruising behind you didn't do anything. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
From the Land of the Police Pursuit | Eeyore | Driving | 4 | February 4th 07 05:27 AM |
Police in pursuit of a stolen Dump Truck..................news footage | Lufthansi | Driving | 1 | July 21st 06 05:45 PM |
1972 Beetle Loses Power at Sustained High Speed / RPMs | [email protected] | VW air cooled | 11 | April 23rd 06 02:37 PM |
High speed pursuit of a BMW with an almost insane tragic ending ( Video-Clip ) | [email protected] | BMW | 1 | March 18th 06 02:12 AM |
High speed police chase in California -> where is full video ofshooting? | Some Guy | Driving | 2 | May 17th 05 08:55 AM |