close

Privacy guaranteed - Your email is not shared with anyone.

Welcome to Glock Talk

Why should YOU join our Glock forum?

  • Converse with other Glock Enthusiasts
  • Learn about the latest hunting products
  • Becoming a member is FREE and EASY

If you consider yourself a beginner or an avid shooter, the Glock Talk community is your place to discuss self defense, concealed carry, reloading, target shooting, and all things Glock.

Why would police not be allowed to pursue?

Discussion in 'Cop Talk' started by DanaT, May 21, 2011.

  1. DanaT

    DanaT Pharaoh

    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....&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
     
  2. Knute

    Knute "Nothin"

    297
    0
    Aug 28, 2004
    Northern Colorado
    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.
     


  3. Dragoon44

    Dragoon44 Unfair Facist Lifetime Member

    19,149
    2,088
    Apr 30, 2005
    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.
     
  4. DanaT

    DanaT Pharaoh

    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
     
  5. TBO

    TBO Why so serious? CLM

    The target of a civil lawsuit is not the guilty party, but the deepest pockets.
     
  6. DanaT

    DanaT Pharaoh

    True True.

    -Dana
     
  7. DanaT

    DanaT Pharaoh

    Not pursuing, on a highway, at 100mph seems stupid to me. 100mph is not fast (depending upon traffic).

    -Dana
     
  8. CAcop

    CAcop

    19,666
    2,294
    Jul 21, 2002
    California
  9. Sam Spade

    Sam Spade Lifetime Member

    14,809
    2,127
    May 4, 2003
    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.
     
  10. teleblaster

    teleblaster

    157
    0
    Mar 13, 2011
    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.
     
  11. steveksux

    steveksux Massive Member

    19,321
    1,805
    Jul 12, 2007
    I think all of the above are correct. Which one is the dominant reason depends on your level of cynicism... :supergrin:

    Randy
     
  12. 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'.
     
  13. 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.
     
  14. 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.
     
  15. 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.
     
  16. x_out86

    x_out86

    1,407
    118
    Feb 19, 2007
    Wisconsin
    As always TBO hits it right on the head with an infamous one liner.

    Well played my friend...Well played.
     
  17. OLY-M4gery

    OLY-M4gery

    2,381
    194
    Nov 7, 2001
    Southern WI
    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.
     
  18. BushBond

    BushBond

    71
    0
    Apr 15, 2010
    extra squeaky CVPI
    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.
     
  19. silverado_mick

    silverado_mick

    1,143
    0
    Nov 30, 2006
    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.
     
  20. merlynusn

    merlynusn

    3,974
    232
    Nov 16, 2007
    NC
    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.