Police pursuits.....your thoughts?

Forums › Off topic › Police pursuits.....your thoughts?

1 | 2 | 3

6473 posts

Uber Geek

Retired Mod

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#373901 28-Aug-2010 11:50

Regs: There arent many cars these ays that would continue to run after all the electrics are shut down.

The same is true if that driver is taken out.

Another positive to my idea - it would help clear some of the crud out of the gene pool, reducing this issue in the future.

nickd

447 posts

Ultimate Geek

#373903 28-Aug-2010 11:53

@nate: Are you also going to send a bill to the family for the bullet & maintenance of the gun?

corksta

2397 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Subscriber

#373915 28-Aug-2010 12:55

Another thing that has irked me a lot is the call for pursuits that result from 'minor offending' to be immediately abandoned.

How the hell do you define 'minor offending'? A speeding vehicle: are they just cruising along in their own little world and not aware of what speed they're doing, or have they just committed a burglary around the corner and are speeding away? Was the car just stolen? Is there a mobile P lab in the boot? Have they broken into a bunch of cars and now their car is full of loot? The police aren't going to know any of these facts until AFTER the pursuit has finished. Until that point it's 'just' a speeding vehicle and supposedly falls into the definition of a minor offence which wouldn't qualify for a pursuit to be continued once the person refused to stop.

There are just too many variables and possibilities to categorically define what constitutes a minor offence and a person's reason for not pulling over.

People don't take off just because they don't feel like pulling over today, there's always an ulterior motive. In my 10 years of policing I've been the lead car in many pursuits and there's always been a reason why people haven't stopped, from having a warrant for their arrest right down to not wanting a ticket for not wearing a seat belt. And I can tell you I don't particularly enjoy them because they're like walking on egg shells - in the blink of an eye lives can be changed forever, but as I said above the focus and blame needs to be put squarely on the person who created the situation by not stopping in the first place.

wmoore

510 posts

Ultimate Geek

#374015 28-Aug-2010 19:43

corksta: Another thing that has irked me a lot is the call for pursuits that result from 'minor offending' to be immediately abandoned.

How the hell do you define 'minor offending'? A speeding vehicle: are they just cruising along in their own little world and not aware of what speed they're doing, or have they just committed a burglary around the corner and are speeding away? Was the car just stolen? Is there a mobile P lab in the boot? Have they broken into a bunch of cars and now their car is full of loot? The police aren't going to know any of these facts until AFTER the pursuit has finished. Until that point it's 'just' a speeding vehicle and supposedly falls into the definition of a minor offence which wouldn't qualify for a pursuit to be continued once the person refused to stop.

There are just too many variables and possibilities to categorically define what constitutes a minor offence and a person's reason for not pulling over.

People don't take off just because they don't feel like pulling over today, there's always an ulterior motive. In my 10 years of policing I've been the lead car in many pursuits and there's always been a reason why people haven't stopped, from having a warrant for their arrest right down to not wanting a ticket for not wearing a seat belt. And I can tell you I don't particularly enjoy them because they're like walking on egg shells - in the blink of an eye lives can be changed forever, but as I said above the focus and blame needs to be put squarely on the person who created the situation by not stopping in the first place.

Corksta, Just some questions if you don't mind. What type of training do you get in regards to high speed driving ? How often do you train ? Does any of this training take place on public roads ? And your thoughts on not allowing to box in a vehicle.

"In the end, it's not the years in your life that count. It's the life in your years." -
-- Abraham lincoln

bazzer

3438 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#374039 28-Aug-2010 21:17

c71931f: A mate was in a major pursuit recently involving a stolen car & he's hoping to get home d as it'll be his first conviction...
Got in three pursuits in total during the day & then he ended up getting bitten/chased by a police dog...

WTF?!

dukester

475 posts

Ultimate Geek

ID Verified

Lifetime subscriber

#374043 28-Aug-2010 21:30

I pretty much agree with everything thats been said here. Any measures to hamstring the police from chasing these offenders will not prevent people runnning. It would only encourage more people to try and I am certain there will still be accidents as most accidents seem to happen within seconds of a someone doing a runner.

mckenndk

911 posts

Ultimate Geek

#374056 28-Aug-2010 22:21

The media needs to change the headlines regarding this just like railway crossing incidents ("Train hits car", should say "Car/Truck drives in front of train causing incident") or ("police chase ends in death" should say "fleeing driver kills innocient people").

I am all for a free media but they have a bad habbit of not getting it right or manipulating it to make the headline sound like there is a case to be answered for by the innocient Party.
The police are also for some reason are required also to put innocient people on trial, like people that have defended themselves from someone holding a weapon at them and they have used a weapon to stop the person etc from hurting them and/or others.
It is ok for a crimminal to hurt/kill anyone but you are not allowed to defend yourself otherwise you are in for a stressful court case and off to jail for hurting your attacker.

How can you call off a police chase in 30 seconds you have only turned on your siren and lights but somehow the press in that situation seems to know better.

Even longer time in prision does not seem to stop the career criminal's who are in it for the thrill or just want to be sent back to prision as they can't handle being on the outside and fines are not working either due to most of them either being full of money due to dealing of drugs etc or don't have any money at all and have not intention of paying.

It's hard to say what the best solution is maybe crush their car with them in it?

Dion

Quic Broadband

Move to New Zealand's best fibre broadband service (affiliate link). Free setup code: R587125ERQ6VE. Note that to use Quic Broadband you must be comfortable with configuring your own router.

corksta

2397 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Subscriber

#374058 28-Aug-2010 22:38

wmoore:
corksta: Another thing that has irked me a lot is the call for pursuits that result from 'minor offending' to be immediately abandoned.

How the hell do you define 'minor offending'? A speeding vehicle: are they just cruising along in their own little world and not aware of what speed they're doing, or have they just committed a burglary around the corner and are speeding away? Was the car just stolen? Is there a mobile P lab in the boot? Have they broken into a bunch of cars and now their car is full of loot? The police aren't going to know any of these facts until AFTER the pursuit has finished. Until that point it's 'just' a speeding vehicle and supposedly falls into the definition of a minor offence which wouldn't qualify for a pursuit to be continued once the person refused to stop.

There are just too many variables and possibilities to categorically define what constitutes a minor offence and a person's reason for not pulling over.

People don't take off just because they don't feel like pulling over today, there's always an ulterior motive. In my 10 years of policing I've been the lead car in many pursuits and there's always been a reason why people haven't stopped, from having a warrant for their arrest right down to not wanting a ticket for not wearing a seat belt. And I can tell you I don't particularly enjoy them because they're like walking on egg shells - in the blink of an eye lives can be changed forever, but as I said above the focus and blame needs to be put squarely on the person who created the situation by not stopping in the first place.

Corksta, Just some questions if you don't mind. What type of training do you get in regards to high speed driving ? How often do you train ? Does any of this training take place on public roads ? And your thoughts on not allowing to box in a vehicle.

Sure no problem!

In terms of driving we have two major policies - one for urgent duty driving (lights/siren responding to an incident) and one for pursuits. Where I work in Auckland scheduled classroom based training occurs about every six months where we go through the policies, otherwise all our policies are on our Intranet and can be accessed at any time if someone wants to brush up on something. The pursuit policy is very detailed and clearly outlines the roles and responsibilities of everyone involved (driver, passenger, Comms operator, etc). Actual training (getting into a car and driving) doesn't exist, however quite a bit of time is spent on this at police college. Amongst other things you learn how to recover from skids, manoeuvre cars with ABS engaged, and spend time at a race track where you practice pursuing each other, but obviously in a controlled environment.

So no training takes place on public roads, but even if it did there's just no way to simulate the same kind of pursuit that you get with a real criminal in a real environment.

My personal opinion is that we should be allowed to box cars in and/or do the P.I.T manoeuvre, however that's just my opinion and not something that will ever happen, especially the latter! I think we used to be able to box cars in when they were travelling at or below a certain speed, but that's since been pulled and I guess almost even a moot point as many of these recent crashes have occurred at high speeds and so soon after the pursuit has started when it wouldn't be possible or even allowed to box it in.

I think to a point the policy itself can contribute to a fatal outcome. Criminals honestly do know that if they drive like an idiot (headlights off, insane speed, wrong side of road, swerving at pedestrians, etc) for a period of time that the pursuit will usually be abandoned. So it's their attempt to have it abandoned when things seem to be going horribly wrong.

Tahii

115 posts

Master Geek

#374067 29-Aug-2010 00:28

One thing I read with regard to the latest incident is that the driver is probably going to be charged with manslaughter for the two deaths - my belief is that anyone who fails to stop for Police, and in the process of the persuit, kills someone, should be charged with murder.

The theory being, they were in the persuit of their own free will, and in a lot of cases, it appears premeditated.

They are literally choosing to kill innocent victims.

meesham

973 posts

Ultimate Geek

#374072 29-Aug-2010 02:16

I agree with most people here (except maybe for Nate's suggestion, it's a waste of perfectly good bullets).

I think the following should happen if you don't pull over:
1. Suspension of license for X months (probably 6 should do it)
2. Big fine (around the $5K mark should hurt most people)
3. Made to do *LOTS* of community service (think hundreds of hours), maybe cleaning roads and removing graffiti in bright pink uniforms near where they work/go to school

If they don't comply with any of these penalties then throw them in prison, it needs to be a last resort (and I don't particularly want my tax money to pay for their stay in there).

The idea about having video cameras in every Police car is a great idea, with harsh penalties like this there neads to be a) hard proof to guarantee a conviction and b) protect it from abuse by Police (unfortunately gone are the days when every Police officer can be trusted).

wmoore

510 posts

Ultimate Geek

#374134 29-Aug-2010 11:19

corksta:
wmoore:
corksta: Another thing that has irked me a lot is the call for pursuits that result from 'minor offending' to be immediately abandoned.

How the hell do you define 'minor offending'? A speeding vehicle: are they just cruising along in their own little world and not aware of what speed they're doing, or have they just committed a burglary around the corner and are speeding away? Was the car just stolen? Is there a mobile P lab in the boot? Have they broken into a bunch of cars and now their car is full of loot? The police aren't going to know any of these facts until AFTER the pursuit has finished. Until that point it's 'just' a speeding vehicle and supposedly falls into the definition of a minor offence which wouldn't qualify for a pursuit to be continued once the person refused to stop.

There are just too many variables and possibilities to categorically define what constitutes a minor offence and a person's reason for not pulling over.

People don't take off just because they don't feel like pulling over today, there's always an ulterior motive. In my 10 years of policing I've been the lead car in many pursuits and there's always been a reason why people haven't stopped, from having a warrant for their arrest right down to not wanting a ticket for not wearing a seat belt. And I can tell you I don't particularly enjoy them because they're like walking on egg shells - in the blink of an eye lives can be changed forever, but as I said above the focus and blame needs to be put squarely on the person who created the situation by not stopping in the first place.

Corksta, Just some questions if you don't mind. What type of training do you get in regards to high speed driving ? How often do you train ? Does any of this training take place on public roads ? And your thoughts on not allowing to box in a vehicle.

Sure no problem!

In terms of driving we have two major policies - one for urgent duty driving (lights/siren responding to an incident) and one for pursuits. Where I work in Auckland scheduled classroom based training occurs about every six months where we go through the policies, otherwise all our policies are on our Intranet and can be accessed at any time if someone wants to brush up on something. The pursuit policy is very detailed and clearly outlines the roles and responsibilities of everyone involved (driver, passenger, Comms operator, etc). Actual training (getting into a car and driving) doesn't exist, however quite a bit of time is spent on this at police college. Amongst other things you learn how to recover from skids, manoeuvre cars with ABS engaged, and spend time at a race track where you practice pursuing each other, but obviously in a controlled environment.

So no training takes place on public roads, but even if it did there's just no way to simulate the same kind of pursuit that you get with a real criminal in a real environment.

My personal opinion is that we should be allowed to box cars in and/or do the P.I.T manoeuvre, however that's just my opinion and not something that will ever happen, especially the latter! I think we used to be able to box cars in when they were travelling at or below a certain speed, but that's since been pulled and I guess almost even a moot point as many of these recent crashes have occurred at high speeds and so soon after the pursuit has started when it wouldn't be possible or even allowed to box it in.

I think to a point the policy itself can contribute to a fatal outcome. Criminals honestly do know that if they drive like an idiot (headlights off, insane speed, wrong side of road, swerving at pedestrians, etc) for a period of time that the pursuit will usually be abandoned. So it's their attempt to have it abandoned when things seem to be going horribly wrong.

Thanks for that, Just what I thought, Re using Public roads, The police in the UK will practise doing 'Boxing in' on the motorways. And as part of the training must do high speed driving with full running commentary
on a public road (usually back country road) I wonder if the boxing in was banned due to an incident in West Auckland, near Westgate a number of years ago, when The police tried to force the driver off the road the offender presented an firearm, Can't remember the outcome if shots were fired or not.

"In the end, it's not the years in your life that count. It's the life in your years." -
-- Abraham lincoln

corksta

2397 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Subscriber

#374138 29-Aug-2010 11:27

wmoore:
corksta:
wmoore:
corksta: Another thing that has irked me a lot is the call for pursuits that result from 'minor offending' to be immediately abandoned.

How the hell do you define 'minor offending'? A speeding vehicle: are they just cruising along in their own little world and not aware of what speed they're doing, or have they just committed a burglary around the corner and are speeding away? Was the car just stolen? Is there a mobile P lab in the boot? Have they broken into a bunch of cars and now their car is full of loot? The police aren't going to know any of these facts until AFTER the pursuit has finished. Until that point it's 'just' a speeding vehicle and supposedly falls into the definition of a minor offence which wouldn't qualify for a pursuit to be continued once the person refused to stop.

There are just too many variables and possibilities to categorically define what constitutes a minor offence and a person's reason for not pulling over.

People don't take off just because they don't feel like pulling over today, there's always an ulterior motive. In my 10 years of policing I've been the lead car in many pursuits and there's always been a reason why people haven't stopped, from having a warrant for their arrest right down to not wanting a ticket for not wearing a seat belt. And I can tell you I don't particularly enjoy them because they're like walking on egg shells - in the blink of an eye lives can be changed forever, but as I said above the focus and blame needs to be put squarely on the person who created the situation by not stopping in the first place.

Corksta, Just some questions if you don't mind. What type of training do you get in regards to high speed driving ? How often do you train ? Does any of this training take place on public roads ? And your thoughts on not allowing to box in a vehicle.

Sure no problem!

In terms of driving we have two major policies - one for urgent duty driving (lights/siren responding to an incident) and one for pursuits. Where I work in Auckland scheduled classroom based training occurs about every six months where we go through the policies, otherwise all our policies are on our Intranet and can be accessed at any time if someone wants to brush up on something. The pursuit policy is very detailed and clearly outlines the roles and responsibilities of everyone involved (driver, passenger, Comms operator, etc). Actual training (getting into a car and driving) doesn't exist, however quite a bit of time is spent on this at police college. Amongst other things you learn how to recover from skids, manoeuvre cars with ABS engaged, and spend time at a race track where you practice pursuing each other, but obviously in a controlled environment.

So no training takes place on public roads, but even if it did there's just no way to simulate the same kind of pursuit that you get with a real criminal in a real environment.

My personal opinion is that we should be allowed to box cars in and/or do the P.I.T manoeuvre, however that's just my opinion and not something that will ever happen, especially the latter! I think we used to be able to box cars in when they were travelling at or below a certain speed, but that's since been pulled and I guess almost even a moot point as many of these recent crashes have occurred at high speeds and so soon after the pursuit has started when it wouldn't be possible or even allowed to box it in.

I think to a point the policy itself can contribute to a fatal outcome. Criminals honestly do know that if they drive like an idiot (headlights off, insane speed, wrong side of road, swerving at pedestrians, etc) for a period of time that the pursuit will usually be abandoned. So it's their attempt to have it abandoned when things seem to be going horribly wrong.

Thanks for that, Just what I thought, Re using Public roads, The police in the UK will practise doing 'Boxing in' on the motorways. And as part of the training must do high speed driving with full running commentary
on a public road (usually back country road) I wonder if the boxing in was banned due to an incident in West Auckland, near Westgate a number of years ago, when The police tried to force the driver off the road the offender presented an firearm, Can't remember the outcome if shots were fired or not.

Actually I forgot one thing, we do actually get a small amount of training on public roads! Every three years (I think) those who work on the street have to do a driving test, and part of that involves pretending whatever car is in front of you, usually on the motorway, is refusing to stop and you go through what information you would pass to the Comms operator.

nate

6473 posts

Uber Geek

Retired Mod

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#377132 6-Sep-2010 14:21

Adding more weight to my shoot and kill car chase policy:

Waikato speeders alarm police

Police in Waikato say "low-flying" speeding drivers are accidents waiting to happen.

During the weekend three motorists, all under 25, were caught speeding, one doing nearly 190kmh in a 100kmh zone.

SNIP

An 18-year-old engineer was clocked driving his Nissan car over the brow of a hill on Hamilton's southern outskirts at 152kmh. That section of road had an 85kmh speed advisory.

SNIP

Police then about 10.30pm checked a Mitsubishi travelling south towards Huntly at 181kmh... He continued to drive at 160kmh, often on the wrong side of the road. He crashed and was found near his car.

I pity the poor member of the public who gets wiped out by one of these idiots.

freitasm

BDFL - Memuneh
79294 posts

Uber Geek

Administrator

ID Verified

Trusted

Geekzone

Lifetime subscriber

#377159 6-Sep-2010 15:23

nate:

Waikato speeders alarm police

Police then about 10.30pm checked a Mitsubishi travelling south towards Huntly at 181kmh... He continued to drive at 160kmh, often on the wrong side of the road. He crashed and was found near his car.

He was found? Did Darwin claim another trophy for his wall?

Linuxluver

5828 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Subscriber

#377660 7-Sep-2010 20:12

Read the comments. Generally agree.

The police did nothing wrong. The guy who raced off and killed two people is completely in the wrong...and will be paying for it. No way should police not give chase.

I honestly didn't understand the line being taken by some in the media. Maybe they are just trying to stir up a controversy to boost ratings. The NZ Herald does this almost daily and it reduces their credibility.

It's counter-productive at my house as they look like idiots and I turn them off....and do something else the next day....and maybe the day after that.

There are frequently police checkpoints just up the road from my house. Almost every time there is at least one driver who plants boot and takes off...and the police chase them aggressively....often right past my front door.

Yes. Do it. Every time.

The little turds who run need to be taught the painful, slow way through the courts and jails - if need be - that they must respect the law.....or they pay a very high price.

I've worked in prisons. They suck. Idiots go there. Real big idiots go there twice.

_____________________________________________________________________

I've been on Geekzone over 16 years..... Time flies....

1 | 2 | 3