Police & High Speed Pursuits.

1

12-34hom

New member
After being involved in three high speed pursuits as a peace officer myself, i was wondering what others here thought of actions of this type of police activity?

From my standpoint, they are the one most dangerous things a peace officer can be involved in. The chances of innocent people being killed and others involved are great. Statistics show that some 400 to 500 people are killed a year during these type actions.

What criteria do you think should apply in these types of situations? Are simple misdameanor traffic violations enough? or should a violent felony be required to allow such actions by police?

Are most police officers trained and skillful enough to drive in this manner?

What type penalties should be imposed on those would elude police vehicles in a wreckless and dangerous manner?

Thanks for any replies or opionions.
 
I will be an LEO in 2.5 yr and my wife and I have discussed this in great degree. Ourfinal conclusion was that no matter what, if a suspect flee's from the police he needs to be chased. To start backing off would send a message to BG's that if you have a fast car and try to run you have a chance of getting away because the police will only go so far.
I think once a chase has started the police should be trained to very aggresively attempt to stop the individual. Shoot out the tires, road block, spike strip, run him off the road, what ever is necessary. The longer the puruit last the more bold and desperate the BG get's. To simply chase the BG around and not take action only endangers civilians. I think whether the department in chase has an air unit also plays a factor. Having a helo in the air ussually means the ground units can back off. I think the helo should be telling the ground unit when the best time is to move in and take aggresive action. The helo can see that the chase is heading towards some kids playing stickball in the street or maybe a busy intersection. At that moment the go ahead should be given to use what ever means necessary to stop the BG.
Will that increase the risk to the police? Yes it will but that comes with the job. If that same BG was heading full steam towards my kids I would do anything in my power to stop that vehicle. Your kids have just as much right to live as mine do.

------------------
"It is easier to get out of jail then it is a morgue"
Live long and defend yourself!
John 3:16
NRA lifer
GOA
GSSF
KABA
 
Geez 12-34hom, you've opened a can of worms with this one. :)
I'll reserve comment until I have more time to post. For now I'll just say my thoughts on the matter are very much in line with leedersert....not the fist time that has happened. ;)

------------------
Gunslinger

I was promised a Shortycicle and I want a Shortycicle!
 
This is a tough one. The question is how many innocent lives are you willing to risk to apprehend someone for a burned out tailight? Of course if the offender fails to pull over, should you let him go because it is too dangerous to pursue?

Somewhere in there the public must draw a line.

In the cases I am aware of, the tag number was recorded at the beginning of the chase, long before the accidents ocurred. If this is known, why not back off and get him later?

Or If we still want to be Rambo, equip each police car with a dye-marker launcher to mark the car for later.

It still comes down to how many lives are you willing to risk.

------------------
You have to be there when it's all over. Otherwise you can't say "I told you so."

Better days to be,

Ed
 
A complex subject.

I don't like high-speed pursuits at all. The combination of adrenaline and excitements leads to less-than-exemplary behavior on the part of less-disciplined officers. They take chances that they shouldn't take.

However, I also don't like the ideas people come up with to replace pursuits.

'No pursuit' policies: a) lead to general contempt for the law, b) a cottage industries of attorneys specializing in 'prove it was my client in the car' cases (which they invariably win), c) allows critters to finish off their victims in peace and quiet, and/or dispose of any evidence, and c) draconian measures to punish the offenders.

The devices touted to allow police to stop pursuits before they start make me nervous. To allow me to touch a button on my dash and turn off any car on the road seems a bit too powerful for the average street cop (in my opinion).

And some are just silly.

The harpoon out of Finland that is fired into the trunk of a speeding car? :rolleyes: Some critter is gonna wind up with a six-inch hole through his/her brisket and that'll make an attorney rich.

The laser-controlled ignition interruption is too easily defeated by tape, mud, or even chewing gum. And we're back to square one.

The rocket-fired wheeled cart? No one's been able to test that one to my satisfaction on Texas roads yet.

I don't like pursuits and I cringe every time I see one, but as long as people are people cops are going to have to chase them.

LawDog
 
Department policies vary. When I was working patrol, the policy we worked under required the supervisor to intercede and decide if the pursuit should continue, basing his decision on the serious of the original violation or crime, the safety of the public at large, and the safety of the officer involved in the pursuit. If possible, we were encouraged in long pursuits to turn over the responsibility for the pursuit to the highway patrol since their officers were much better trained in pursuit driving than our deputies.

If a highway patrol helicopter could be brought into the picture, then once they
positively identified the suspect vehicle we dropped out completely. If were fortunate enough to get a license number, we would have
a police unit at the address of the registered owner waiting for him to show up there.

The highway patrol also had the authority to use the tire blowout strips or force the suspect vehicle to spinout by tapping the rear fender.


[This message has been edited by bruels (edited August 27, 2000).]
 
Its a toughie all right. Simply discontinuing the chase does not necesarily mean the BG will slack off. He may very well continue to speed and recklessly endanger lives. Simply discontinuing may not do anything for public safety and may very well increase it. Hopefully there will be a technology solution to this soon. There's already some stuff in the works.
 
Can we say "discretion"?

The small rural city I work in has some rural highway where a pursuit would obviously be more feasible than with pursuits in urban environs. In times of low traffic, chasing a car down a rural interstate highway would not be out of line for fleeing a stop for a Class C misdimeanor. The question that springs to mind is, of course: Why are they fleeing a simple traffic ticket? What else are they afraid of? Any time that you're in a pursuit, realize that there's the additional charge of fleeing.

But if there's traffic and a likelyhood of an extended pursuit, let 'em go; you'll catch 'em next time.

When "crotch-rocket" race-bikes come flying by at 120 in the opposite direction, we generally wave and keep on going if they don't stop to our overhead lights.

Generally, the best reaction is to quickly use your radio and the equipment you carry between your ears. Sometimes, just following and calling out the location of the guy is effective. Unfortunately, in our litigious society, travelling at high speed without lights and siren are likely to result in huge lawsuits, so you end up driving him to higher speeds when you would've.

The question of the greater good should always be first. Every officer has the option of calling off the pursuit. Sometimes maturity is knowing when to let go.
 
I think Lawdawg and Bruels touched on some very valid points.

My thinkin is that if the suspect's original crime was not such that an ordinary citizen would not be justified in shooting him, then persuit is not justified. Tail him discreetly yes, try to intercept him with a roadblock yes. But don't chase him till he gets over his head and kills or maims.

We recently had an incident where pursuit started in a store parking lot, car "looked suspicious", chase went through residential neighborhood with pursuer recording 80 mph. Suspicious car runs out of street and balls it up, massive injuries including one innocent person. Upshot was charge of possession of drug paraphenalia.....a straw "which may be used to consume cocaine". No drugs. Moral...make sure the straw stays with the empty shake cup.

Sam
 
I've watched some of the TV chase "movies". In what seems to me to be too many cases, the total amount of property damage and the potential for harm to the innocent is far too great. I'm more understanding if the chase is after somebody who's killed or injured somebody, of course.

If it's a stolen car, it's likely 100% insured. If the cops chase it, and several other cars are damaged during the chase and then the stolen car is wrecked, what's the cost to the innocent? To the owner? To begin with, any injuries--not to mention the deductible. Plus any lawsuits.

Open highways can be another matter. Seems to me, then, it's circumstance and judgement.

To become anecdotal, we had a chase in west Texas a few years ago. DPS began chasing a stolen car eastward on I-10, from some 30 miles west of Fort Stockton. The car went south on US 67 to US 90, and then through Alpine and on toward Marfa. The accumulated parade included at least two DPS; three deputies, several Sul Ross Univ. cops, several Alpine cops, and the constable from Marathon in his Datsun pickup. One witness' account said 14 chasers. Had I known, I'd have robbed the bank in Alpine! But this whole scene ran at full speed through Alpine. Law enforcement from Marfa set up a roadblock east of town; as the fleeing car approached, they began shooting. The woman driving was severely injured in the ensuing crash; the male passenger was killed.

My editorial comment is that had they let the car run on through Marfa (about one mile), it would have run out of gas before getting to another town.

Again, I guess it's judgement. From my perspective, I doubt there is enough training in high speed driving; further, the cars just aren't set up for the required handling. Thus speaketh the Old Racer.

Regards, Art
 
Well, I've never been chased but sure have been in a few chases. One started in Detroit going north on I-75 (interstate), thru our city, I got involved and decided to bail out when I looked in my mirrors and saw something like 30-40 cars involved from who the hell knows what departments. Some where along the chase route somebody ran a car off the road and it rolled. No injuries, thank God, but it was one involved accident report.

The problem I have with any chase, is the officer does not know why the person rabbits. Does he/she have 10 kilos of coke in the trunk, or did he/she run because they are driving on a revolked license? I don't envy any officer having to make the decision knowing that if he does chase and there is an accident, he is at fault and if he does not chase and the person fleeing robbed a bank and was escaping, he is at fault for not chasing.

I also know that there are many police cars on the road that should be the topic of Ralph Nader's next edition of UNSAFE AT ANY SPEED. Police car's get taken care of after the fire department vehicles, ambulances and the tractor used to mow around the city hall. Normally by the guy that hates cops because he has been arrested several times.

------------------
Ne Conjuge Nobiscum
"If there be treachery, let there be jehad!"
 
IMHO the best way to deal with a rabbit is coordination. I think it is self defeating to reenact the final scenes from Blues Brothers where everyone with a badge within the radio horizon joins the chase. Too many people, too close, too fast.
Help me out, LEOs out there, how feasible is it to have one or two cars shadow from a distance and coordinate a roadblock? Also have other cars parallel when possible. I realize this would take lots of training and effort but could be worth it. Do dispatchers have map software where they could coordinate such a thing?
I definitely don't think rabbit should just be let go off the cuff but at a LOEs discression. Then, of course, prosecute the fertilizer out of the rabbit for attempting to evade and risking the lives of other people.
Until they start mounting RPGs on the top of squad cars I think coordinating the chase and allowing the individual LEOs discression is the best choice.

------------------
Those who use arms well cultivate the Way and keep the rules.Thus they can govern in such a way as to prevail over the corrupt- Sun Tzu, The Art of War
 
If there is no chopper avalible let him go.No high speed.Radio ahead pick him down the line. Too many ladies taking there kids to McDonolds or whatever for these kind of risks on city streets.

------------------
Bob--- Age and deceit will overcome youth and speed.
I'm old and deceitful.
 
Just to add fuel to the fire: What d'ye think of requiring ALL autos, by their next registration, to have a computerized, radio controlled switch on the ignition?
BG starts to boogie, shut the whole road down and send in LEOs on small bikes?
BG runs, they could chase him thru the stopped traffic.
If the citizens whose trip home he stopped didn't deal with him. :D

------------------
The Bill of Rights, and the Golden Rule are enough for civilized behavior. The rest is window dressing. Shoot carefully, swifter...
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Apple a Day:

Help me out, LEOs out there, how feasible is it to have one or two cars shadow from a distance and coordinate a roadblock? Also have other cars parallel when possible. I realize this would take lots of training and effort but could be worth it. Do dispatchers have map software where they could coordinate such a thing?

[/quote]

Our department policy was no more than two cars actively engaged in the pursuit. The second car had the communications duty so the first car's driver could concentrate on driving.

Other deputies could place themselves in positions to assist, but were not permitted to join the chase if it went by.

Our dispatchers did not get involved in positioning assets. They did relay information to other agencies in jurisdictions that might get involved.

Our department considered a roadblock use of deadly force. We would rather the guy run out of gas or run off the road than block the highway.
 
I had a cousin who was killed in an accident with a highway patrolman. That branch of my family sees it more like murder, since that LEO had had previous, similar incidents. I don't even think that boy was 20 years old.

I've been on ride-a-longs, and discussed this issue with a few LEO's. From those experiences, bolstered by many comments above, I believe it is clear that, to be frank ... some LEO's really enjoy a good chase. I think that is the long and short of this subject.

In AZ, we have a number of jurisdictions that are using photo radar. Speed or run red lights in those areas, and you receive a ticket in the mail. Those folks never have a chance to 'rabbit'. Makes me wonder how many of those cases might have resulted in a chase.

I like the idea of coordination, perhaps using photo radar to identify the BG, and stiff sentencing for running from LEO's. But, in general, I'd agree that these pursuits are often poor policy. The exception should be capture of a known, dangerous felon.

Regards from AZ
 
Originally posted by Apple a Day:
"Then, of course, prosecute the fertilizer out of the rabbit for attempting to evade and risking the lives of other people."

I agree with Apple a Day, the penalties for evading are to loose. We need to change the laws to make it a serious offense with appropriate penalties. These guys know if they run and get caught it is no big deal.

The problem with across the board not chasing is we do not know why these guys are running. For all we know the guy could have a six year old tied up in the trunk. If the LEOs didn't chase they would be blamed for whatever happened to the six year old after.
 
More fun than Disneyland.

Scene, freeway, 4 lanes plus hi oc lane each way, rabbit jumps on freeway, 60mph traffic jam, Bobby blue badge electronically kills ignition on 500 vehicles, 400 lose power steering, 85 are diesels and don't slow down. The 15 that didn't have power steering are killed by the others. The drivers that could have handled the problem are hit by the ones that couldn't.

Might take a couple weeks to put out the fire and clean up the mess. Definately thin the heard.

Sam
 
**thinks of a white bronco cruzin' down the interstate** :rolleyes:

I think hi-speed chases are just part of the nature of being a police officer. In my bad judgement, a person that runs is running for a good reason (on their part). However, I see both sides of the story. Only thing that interests me.. is.. is it really necessary to have XX number of cars involved in the chase. What gives?

------------------
God, Guns and Guts made this country a great country!

oberkommando sez:
"We lost the first and third and now they are after the Second!(no pun intended)"
 
IMHO, when somebody runs away from a police car at high speed they are either stupid, guilty of something or both. A "no high-speed pursuit" policy would only tell the bad guys that they can get away any time they like. When you get a runner you HAVE to stop them.

I don't care for the things that might go wrong with the EMP gadget and the harpoon. I did see on TV a gadget that looks liek a grenade launcher, but actually spreads out a mat full of caltrops. It can be fired right under the wheels of a speeding vehicle. It's supposed to be more effective than stop strips.

Regardless, no car can outrun radio waves. The best way to end a pursuit fast is to get your blue-clad buddies to cut the runner off. I think the answer to this problem is teamwork, coordination, training and practice.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top