Why would police not be allowed to pursue? [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : Why would police not be allowed to pursue?


DanaT
05-21-2011, 08:26
There is this article in the local paper and was on the local news last night:

http://www.denverpost.com/breakingnews/ci_18097770?source=rss

http://www.9news.com/video/default.aspx?bctid=952901262001&odyssey=mod|newswell|text|FRONTPAGE|featured

If you watch the video (I am assuming its the same as was on the news), it says police saw the what they believed to be this car (based upon color, no license, loud...its not street legal) on highway going in excess of 100mph. The police said that they were not authorized to pursue cars like this.

Why would this be? Is there something specific that police shouldn't pursue cars that are too fast or going too fast? This doesnt make sense to me.

-Dana

Knute
05-21-2011, 08:33
Many departments, including most in Colorado, have adopted a limited pursuit policy. Even though legally law enforcement can pursue anybody who flees, most departments have been sued from pursuits that ended up with someone getting hurt and/or killed. So many have modified their policies to allow pursuits only for violent felonies (people crimes) as opposed to property crimes (ie. stolen cars). Yes this frustrates us.

Dragoon44
05-21-2011, 08:35
There is this article in the local paper and was on the local news last night:

http://www.denverpost.com/breakingnews/ci_18097770?source=rss

http://www.9news.com/video/default.aspx?bctid=952901262001&odyssey=mod|newswell|text|FRONTPAGE|featured

If you watch the video (I am assuming its the same as was on the news), it says police saw the what they believed to be this car (based upon color, no license, loud...its not street legal) on highway going in excess of 100mph. The police said that they were not authorized to pursue cars like this.

Why would this be? Is there something specific that police shouldn't pursue cars that are too fast or going too fast? This doesnt make sense to me.

-Dana

LIABILITY, When depts are run by liability lawyers they will prohibit virtually anything they see as opening the City or county to a potential lawsuit.

DanaT
05-21-2011, 08:58
Well...now I know I can speed and police wont chase me as long as I go fast enough.....

:)

Or I will just go to Germany to drive fast..may need a beer run....

-Dana

TBO
05-21-2011, 10:02
The target of a civil lawsuit is not the guilty party, but the deepest pockets.

DanaT
05-21-2011, 10:28
The target of a civil lawsuit is not the guilty party, but the deepest pockets.

True True.

-Dana

DanaT
05-21-2011, 10:37
Not pursuing, on a highway, at 100mph seems stupid to me. 100mph is not fast (depending upon traffic).

-Dana

CAcop
05-21-2011, 10:49
This man http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Yagman has made millions suing police departments and he is just one of many like that in CA.

Sam Spade
05-21-2011, 11:46
The rule makers have decided that a little more crime is okay, as long as no one blames them for the other guy's acts. The other guys have discovered that they just need to be a little more reckless, and they're left alone.

Sucks to be you.

teleblaster
05-21-2011, 11:47
There were a few paragraphs about this in the book Blink, written by Malcolm Gladwell, who wrote The Tipping Point. The section in general dealt with the poor decision making that occurs during extreme stress or excitement. He said that about 300 people are killed each year because of high speed chases, and that both criminals and police officers often make very poor judgements because of physiological changes that occur during these events: hightened pulse rates, tunnel vision, predatory cardiovascular reactions. This can lead to both criminals and officers doing ill-considered things which lead to someone getting killed or hurt.

Lawsuits can certainly result, but there is also concern about innocent people and police officers, (and the criminals) getting hurt or killed. I know we will hear countervailing reasons allowing the pursuits, but it is not just lawsuits that drive the policies; it is also not wanting to expose the citizenry to unnecessary risk.

steveksux
05-21-2011, 11:55
Many departments, including most in Colorado, have adopted a limited pursuit policy. Even though legally law enforcement can pursue anybody who flees, most departments have been sued from pursuits that ended up with someone getting hurt and/or killed. So many have modified their policies to allow pursuits only for violent felonies (people crimes) as opposed to property crimes (ie. stolen cars). Yes this frustrates us.

LIABILITY, When depts are run by liability lawyers they will prohibit virtually anything they see as opening the City or county to a potential lawsuit.

The rule makers have decided that a little more crime is okay, as long as no one blames them for the other guy's acts. The other guys have discovered that they just need to be a little more reckless, and they're left alone.

Sucks to be you.
I think all of the above are correct. Which one is the dominant reason depends on your level of cynicism... :supergrin:

Randy

Streetking
05-22-2011, 00:04
There were a few paragraphs about this in the book Blink, written by Malcolm Gladwell, who wrote The Tipping Point. The section in general dealt with the poor decision making that occurs during extreme stress or excitement. He said that about 300 people are killed each year because of high speed chases, and that both criminals and police officers often make very poor judgements because of physiological changes that occur during these events: hightened pulse rates, tunnel vision, predatory cardiovascular reactions. This can lead to both criminals and officers doing ill-considered things which lead to someone getting killed or hurt.

Lawsuits can certainly result, but there is also concern about innocent people and police officers, (and the criminals) getting hurt or killed. I know we will hear countervailing reasons allowing the pursuits, but it is not just lawsuits that drive the policies; it is also not wanting to expose the citizenry to unnecessary risk.

Good evening fellas,
This seems to support my position in a previous thread for which I was severely excoriated. I don't mind. I know you're just kiddin'.

The Racker
05-22-2011, 00:33
Well, there are sometimes alternatives. They may speed but Motorola is still faster. In one case, the driver was detained and then arrested when he finally got home and a deputy that IDed him met with the other deputies who detained him. And, yes, pursuits are dangerous for too many people so, like most things, cops need to figure out ways around the issue. They are generally smarter than the bad guys.

7th District
05-22-2011, 01:59
They are generally smarter than the bad guys.

I'm sure the bad guys will figure out to remove or cover their plates, so no more showing up at the registered owner's home at a later time.

Morris
05-22-2011, 02:40
LIABILITY, When depts are run by liability lawyers they will prohibit virtually anything they see as opening the City or county to a potential lawsuit.

LOP - Liability Oriented Policing

Switched plates, altered plates, stolen plates - plates are not reliable.

We're limited to BAARRKK for pursuing: Burglary, Arson, serious Assault, Rape, Robbery, Kidnapping, Killing. The bad guys know this so they run even more.

x_out86
05-22-2011, 23:48
The target of a civil lawsuit is not the guilty party, but the deepest pockets.
As always TBO hits it right on the head with an infamous one liner.

Well played my friend...Well played.

OLY-M4gery
05-23-2011, 00:20
Well, there are sometimes alternatives. They may speed but Motorola is still faster. In one case, the driver was detained and then arrested when he finally got home and a deputy that IDed him met with the other deputies who detained him. And, yes, pursuits are dangerous for too many people so, like most things, cops need to figure out ways around the issue. They are generally smarter than the bad guys.

How does that work with a stolen car, that doesn't have plates?

I bet the likelyhood of a stolen car showing back up at the owner's house is just about nil.

But thanx for your brainstorming.

BushBond
05-23-2011, 01:18
What about if you work in an area where every car is registered to some 68 yr old lady who lives two counties away? I stop so few cars where the driver is the registered owner, that it is worth sharing with my back up when it pops up on the MDT. Not to mention, only a moron drives straight back to the house, after being in a chase. Most of ours set the car on fire, then report it stolen.
I'm glad that I work in an area that still chases everything. I can recall several robbery and burglary suspects that were caught after a chase, where the initial reason for stop was a tag lamp out, or no turn signal. We once chased a car for unlawful lane change , that at the end of the pursuit, had a dead chick in the bed of the pick up. Some times they are just running because they dont have a DL, sometimes its because they just shot someone. If you dont catch them, you may never find out.

silverado_mick
05-23-2011, 02:58
I love our pursuit policy: "chase'em till the wheels fall off". Actually, it's up to the officer involved and the LT to determine who chases what for how long. Case by case basis.

merlynusn
05-23-2011, 06:17
Our policy is now "Crime dangerous to life." It used to be "Felony dangerous to life." But since you can shoot at someone here (ADW) and miss, it's considered a misdemeanor. That's one of the primary reasons we can now chase crimes dangerous to life. Yes, the bad guys knew this. When they changed the policy, that meant we could now chase burglary suspects as well. The first few pursuits following that the suspects kept saying "You can't chase us for burglary, it's not a felony dangerous to life."

And yes, chase policies are only restricted by the departments due to liability.

Kadetklapp
05-23-2011, 07:06
Good evening fellas,
This seems to support my position in a previous thread for which I was severely excoriated. I don't mind. I know you're just kiddin'.

I can't wait for you and your family to be a victim of a violent crime. :wavey:

ChiefWPD
05-23-2011, 07:10
Well, there are sometimes alternatives. They may speed but Motorola is still faster. In one case, the driver was detained and then arrested when he finally got home and a deputy that IDed him met with the other deputies who detained him. And, yes, pursuits are dangerous for too many people so, like most things, cops need to figure out ways around the issue. They are generally smarter than the bad guys.

Let me know how that works for ya in the South Bronx...

mrsurfboard
05-23-2011, 08:20
Here are New Jersey's, if you want to read them.

http://www.state.nj.us/lps/dcj/agguide/vehpurs_2009.pdf

CBennett
05-23-2011, 09:17
Politics+Liability= no or limited pursuit/no pursuit.

DaBigBR
05-23-2011, 10:17
I love our pursuit policy: "chase'em till the wheels fall off". Actually, it's up to the officer involved and the LT to determine who chases what for how long. Case by case basis.

Ours is pretty similar, but we're small enough that there is usually just one officer on. I had one Friday night...turned on him, he took off, made it about 45 seconds, and smased in to a pole. Probably would not have even had time for a supervisor to call it off if I worked in such an agency. He was drunk and walked away. Car was totally destroyed.

Our policy is now "Crime dangerous to life." It used to be "Felony dangerous to life." But since you can shoot at someone here (ADW) and miss, it's considered a misdemeanor. That's one of the primary reasons we can now chase crimes dangerous to life. Yes, the bad guys knew this. When they changed the policy, that meant we could now chase burglary suspects as well. The first few pursuits following that the suspects kept saying "You can't chase us for burglary, it's not a felony dangerous to life."

And yes, chase policies are only restricted by the departments due to liability.

Does that include an obviously drunk driver then? Seems to be a common exception around here.

Morris
05-23-2011, 21:17
One note: our radios work like crap. In several sections of our city, the radios work nil. Cars routinely outrun the radios.

silverado_mick
05-24-2011, 01:54
One note: our radios work like crap. In several sections of our city, the radios work nil. Cars routinely outrun the radios.

Or like when you light a car up and they start to run just as another unit begins their long-winded 45 second dissertation on the disposition of the call they are clearing. Nothing like fighting for airtime when things are moving more quickly than you would like!

glock_19guy1983
05-24-2011, 03:47
I would love to know if the police around here have to drop pursuit at 100mph. Seems that all i would have to do to get out of a regular speeding ticket is increase my speed. On a good road im comfortable at 150 all day long on my bike. There are no law enforcement helicopters for at least 250 miles and troopers are spread thin in this state so it would be easy to get away

TBO
05-24-2011, 05:30
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v90/TheeBadOne/TBO/076bb4c8.jpg

Bruce M
05-24-2011, 06:07
I would love to know if the police around here have to drop pursuit at 100mph. Seems that all i would have to do to get out of a regular speeding ticket is increase my speed. On a good road im comfortable at 150 all day long on my bike. There are no law enforcement helicopters for at least 250 miles and troopers are spread thin in this state so it would be easy to get away


My initial guess is that an area that sparsely populated has few enough attorneys such that the agencies probably would still engage in a pursuit. Or possibly radio ahead and set up a roadblock (maybe using a piece of chain or steel cable.)

merlynusn
05-24-2011, 07:41
Does that include an obviously drunk driver then? Seems to be a common exception around here.

You mean can we chase? Nope.

And believe me, we are not happy about it either.

We also aren't allowed to chase in the opposing lane of traffic, though we can respond to a call in opposing lane of traffic if we need to.

I think the only way we'd be able to chase an obvious drunk driver is if we could justify how dangerous they were, etc. But it'd be a stretch and you'd most likely end up getting suspended.

Morris
05-24-2011, 09:21
Remember, in these times, the pretty lights and noise makers are merely for show . . . and impressing little kids and old ladies.

DaBigBR
05-24-2011, 10:47
I would love to know if the police around here have to drop pursuit at 100mph. Seems that all i would have to do to get out of a regular speeding ticket is increase my speed. On a good road im comfortable at 150 all day long on my bike. There are no law enforcement helicopters for at least 250 miles and troopers are spread thin in this state so it would be easy to get away

You can get away a hundred times, you only get to crash once.

Trigger Finger
05-24-2011, 14:16
This man http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Yagman has made millions suing police departments and he is just one of many like that in CA.


WHY did you have to bring up Yagman. He never had anything to do with pursuits!!

He hounded a Specialized Surveillance Unit on my department and is now disbarred!
He actually tried to sue the department over the North Hollywood Shootout. He gives new meaning to the term "money hungry Shiester" :steamed:

pgg00
05-25-2011, 11:54
Simple answer? **ssy courts, and admin.

My agency still chases everything. The pursuit is monitored. The supervisor or the officer can call it off if they feel the need.

Morris
05-25-2011, 12:02
Jesus. That wikipedia posting sounds like Yagman wrote it himself.

Why did he get disbarred? -- Never mind, found out why. Natch, he a cheating scumbag.