stops the chase. is this good police policy?
2006-12-01 02:02:02 · 15 answers · asked by Beaujock 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Law Enforcement & Police
The decision in that instance is to determine if the chase is more dangerous to the public than the criminal being pursued or if the person can be located and charged at a later date without the danger of high speed driving in heavy traffic. Cop cars have video systems and there is often a good chance to identifying the person. But if the person has committed a violent crime it may be a toss up, if the person escapes could he kill or harm others or can be picked up later, in a more safe manner. Because we love to criticize people (as though we know better) cops are always second guessed and you can find these stories with the media taking one side when it works out or the other side when it does not. The truth is we put young men and women out there is law enforcement to do the best we can for us but most people only remember that some cop told them to slow down or gave us a ticket ten years ago. This is a good question and there is no easy answer.
2006-12-01 02:07:52 · answer #1 · answered by Tom W 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
It is considered a liability issue. There is an on-going court case in, I believe, Kansas City, MO ref a police chase. The police car ended up hitting another vehicle, going through an intersection, one of the people in that vehicle, an 18 yo female, will not be able to have children because of the collision. The officers driving the vehicle are being charged criminally for the collision. Some police departments don't want to deal with that type of problem, so they take the easy route and have a no chase policy. At my department, it all depends on what the person is being chased for. If they didn't rob a bank or kill someone then we generally aren't allowed to chase. It would be hard to say if it is a good policy or not. It all depends on the perspective. Most police officers would say that it isn't a good policy because we believe they must be running for a good reason, a good reason we need to find out. But the upper echelon of the police department is more concerned with publicity and money.
2006-12-01 02:16:23 · answer #2 · answered by Sheila V 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, it's not.
This is to Mandy and everyone else who thinks this is a good idea.
Mindy someone kidnaps you, puts you in the trunk of a car. This person is in a hurry to get where their going to do whatever to you. A nice policeman, sorry police person, tries to stop the car for speeding, they run. The police person, take down the license
number stops the pursuit, and will one day might decide to pay the person a visit and give them a ticket.
In the meantime you are at the mercy of your kidnapper. Think about that. Then ask if the police should stop a pursuit. They don't know why the person is running. Does the person who is running think it's fun? Or maybe they have you in the trunk.
If you really want to stop 99% pursuits? Try this. The nice police person, calls out over the PA to pull over, they repeat it three times, after that they start pumping shotgun rounds into the driver's door. After all the person who is running is endangering people while running from the police.
It won't happen but I'd bet it would stop people from running from the police while driving a car.
2006-12-01 05:47:19 · answer #3 · answered by Richard 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I believe that it is very good policy, but there are some key areas in any good pursuit policy that must be addressed. It isn't quite as black and white as just stopping because they didn't stop, but it basically boils down to that when you factor in what may have taken place or what is going on.
Our pursuit policy has very defined threshholds that allow for a pursuit to take place, much less continue. It can range from whether the driver of a "known" vehicle may possibly be accessory/suspect in a very serious crime, or is wanted by police for various other reasons, or whether they were merely speeding and refused to pull over. Depending on the gravity of the situation, some chases certainly are not worth forsaking the welfare of bystanders, other drivers, and the police conducting the pursuit.
2006-12-01 03:12:02 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
That depends on:
(age of driver, road and weather conditions, traffic conditions, type of road, time of pursuit, need to apprehend, type of vehicle being driven etc....) It also depends on departmental policy. All police services have policies in regards to pursuits that officers have to follow.
Example 1
If I am pursuing a 1991 Dodge Caravan worth $700 driven by the 15 year old and it takes out a family of four going out to soccer practise then I as the police officer can be charged with dangerous driving, because I am responsible for initiating the pursuit and continuing it (this happened in Ontario). The offence here is "theft under $5000" and is a minor offence (and a fail to stop for police).
Example 2
If a man shoots his wife and child, takes the gun and is going to his parents place to kill them, then stopping the suspect from committing further murders would be very important. The need to apprehend in this case may outweigh the general risk to the public by continuing the pursuit.
If the risk to public safety outweighs the need to apprehend the suspect then the pursuit must be discontinued.
Pursuits can be very dangerous to all (police, bad guy and public) and alternative methods of stopping should be attempted first if possible (spike belt, rolling blocks etc)
The officer usually has just seconds to make this decision.
2006-12-01 04:22:27 · answer #5 · answered by joeanonymous 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The police should put the good of the community ahead of the individual. So yes it is a good policy. There are several reasons why the driver refuses to stop and very few reasons why to pursue. The police should be there to serve and protect and not to just generate revenue for the government.
2006-12-01 03:54:18 · answer #6 · answered by Billy M 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No. The policy was created due to a couple of high-profile wrecks involving bystanders. People evading the police tend to drive wrecklessly and have accidents which hurt or kill other drivers. The problem is that people evading police are often much more of a danger to society if they are let go.
2006-12-01 02:21:03 · answer #7 · answered by FabMom 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
This could all be ended by new technology that is out that allows the Police to kill a suspects engine while being pursued. A better question would be why aren't we able to use it?
2006-12-01 02:25:38 · answer #8 · answered by SGT. D 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
That's stupid! Here they just keep on chasing 'em until they catch them or have to beat 'em. Why let criminals on the loose, just because you're too lazy to catch them. (HELLO!!! You're DRIVING,not RUNNING)
Even so, think of it this way, if a rapist raped your sister,girlfriend, friend etc., and the police decided since they couldn't catch him the first 5 minutes they gave up, and he's still out there and PURPOSELY given another opportunity to rape another person. He'd think if he got away with it the first time he could do it again and again! Wouldn't you be furious?!
2006-12-01 02:17:05 · answer #9 · answered by standinbhindourtroops 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
The cops are caught in a dilemma. If they surrender the pursuit, the criminal gets away and an opportunity is lost.
If they chase and cause an accident, they get sued
2006-12-01 02:16:20 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋