A Cars forum. AutoBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AutoBanter forum » Auto makers » Ford Mustang
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

More power to the police in high speed pursuit



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old May 3rd 07, 12:39 AM posted to rec.autos.makers.ford.mustang
Joe Pfeiffer
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 433
Default More power to the police in high speed pursuit

There are at least three good questions that I've seen about the
chase, only one of which was addressed in the decision:

1) artifically low speed limits to raise revenue. Completely
irrelevant to the case, sorry. I don't care if the limit was 15
(we have 15mph school zones on 40mph roads around here), when the
lights come on, you stop. If you're on a suspended license (the
kid in the case was), you make damn sure you don't do anything
to get stopped for -- not driving at all being a really good
choice, and setting your cruise control for speedlimit-1 being a
poor second. Speeding on a back-country road is somewhere near the
bottom of possible choices. Haven't heard if he was drunk; if he
was, that would move it all the way to the bottom.

2) should the cops have chased him? If a third party had been injured
in the case, that would have been a really good question. All I've
seen about the case gives the impression that it was just a speed
stop; if so, there aren't many jurisdictions that would allow a
high-speed chase, as it raises the bar too high for a minor
offense. But no third parties were injured, so this one wasn't
addressed either.

3) should they have nerfed him? How could anybody watch the tape and
conclude otherwise? At that point, he was using his vehicle as a
deadly weapon, and had to be stopped. Looking at the lights he
ran, the vehicles getting out of the way, and the little trip
through the roadblock, they should have stopped him much earlier
than they did. A spiked board back at the roadblock would have
been a much better way, however (I haven't seen any claims that
that was tried).

Ads
  #12  
Old May 3rd 07, 01:24 AM posted to rec.autos.makers.ford.mustang
Brent P[_1_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,639
Default More power to the police in high speed pursuit

In article >, Joe Pfeiffer wrote:
> There are at least three good questions that I've seen about the
> chase, only one of which was addressed in the decision:
>
> 1) artifically low speed limits to raise revenue. Completely
> irrelevant to the case, sorry. I don't care if the limit was 15
> (we have 15mph school zones on 40mph roads around here), when the
> lights come on, you stop.


You've missed the point entirely. Proper speed limits means only stopping
those drivers who should be targeted for enforcement. Less stops mean
fewer chases. Same with picking people up at their homes if they have a
warrant instead of waiting for them to be pulled over. It's also better for
the people because then cops just can't pick and choose anyone to stop.
(either being in violation of the speed limit or driving unusually slow)

> If you're on a suspended license (the
> kid in the case was), you make damn sure you don't do anything
> to get stopped for


Driving to the letter law attracts police attention, especially on
friday and saturday nights.



  #13  
Old May 3rd 07, 03:13 AM posted to rec.autos.makers.ford.mustang
Joe Pfeiffer
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 433
Default More power to the police in high speed pursuit

(Brent P) writes:

> In article >, Joe Pfeiffer wrote:
> > There are at least three good questions that I've seen about the
> > chase, only one of which was addressed in the decision:
> >
> > 1) artifically low speed limits to raise revenue. Completely
> > irrelevant to the case, sorry. I don't care if the limit was 15
> > (we have 15mph school zones on 40mph roads around here), when the
> > lights come on, you stop.

>
> You've missed the point entirely. Proper speed limits means only stopping
> those drivers who should be targeted for enforcement. Less stops mean
> fewer chases. Same with picking people up at their homes if they have a
> warrant instead of waiting for them to be pulled over. It's also better for
> the people because then cops just can't pick and choose anyone to stop.
> (either being in violation of the speed limit or driving unusually slow)


No, I haven't. I'm actually a big fan of engineering the road to
encourage driving at a safe speed, and then setting a speed limit
based on actual usage (so only the nuts are driving over the limit).

That is completely irrelevant in whether the police were justified in
ending this chase as they did, which is what the suit was about.

> > If you're on a suspended license (the
> > kid in the case was), you make damn sure you don't do anything
> > to get stopped for

>
> Driving to the letter law attracts police attention, especially on
> friday and saturday nights.


I've only been stopped half a dozen times in my driving career (which
extends several decades), and I've never been at the speed limit when
it's happened. The cops may watch you more closely (I was once
followed for over five miles in my Charger), but a kid in a Cadillac
driving the speed limit isn't going to be stopped. Certainly not as
readily as one driving 18 over the limit. I notice, incidentally,
that you edited out the note that the best way to avoid getting
stopped while on a suspended license is to not be driving at all.
  #14  
Old May 3rd 07, 03:47 AM posted to rec.autos.makers.ford.mustang
dwight[_1_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 519
Default More power to the police in high speed pursuit

"Ashton Crusher" > wrote in message
...
> On Mon, 30 Apr 2007 19:49:56 -0400, "dwight" >
> wrote:
>
>>Let's see if I have this right...
>>
>>Police take off after a black Caddy doing 73mph in a 55mph zone, which
>>leads
>>to a high speed pursuit in the black Georgia night. The 19 year old yahoo
>>behind the wheel of the Caddy is obviously of no mind to pull over. After
>>almost 8 minutes of the chase through light traffic, one police cruiser
>>bumps the Caddy from behind, at which point yahoo loses control of the car
>>and careens off the road into (what appears to be) a telephone pole.
>>
>>Bottom line, the yahoo (who, originally, was guilty of driving at 18mph
>>over
>>the posted speed limit) is now a quadraplegic.
>>
>>Yahoo sues the police officer who "caused the crash" under the terms of
>>the
>>4th Amendment (some weird logic about unlawful seizure?).
>>
>>"In this case, both a lower court and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the
>>11th
>>Circuit ruled in favor of [the yahoo]. The 11th Circuit said that [the
>>officer's] actions constituted deadly force and that it was unreasonable
>>because the officer had no reason to think [yahoo] had done anything more
>>than violate traffic laws. The police gave chase because they clocked him
>>going 73 mph in a 55-mph zone.
>>
>>'Far from being the cautious and controlled driver the lower court
>>depicts,
>>what we see on the video more closely resembles a Hollywood-style car
>>chase
>>of the most frightening sort, placing police officers and innocent
>>bystanders alike at great risk of serious injury,' wrote Justice Antonin
>>Scalia.
>>Scalia was incredulous that the lower courts had said Harris's case
>>against
>>Scott could proceed."
>>
>>(source: http://www.policeone.com/legal/articles/1241449/, among others)
>>
>>Now, I've viewed the video posted on the Supreme Court's website, and I
>>have
>>to say, "What the $*^&$# was that yahoo thinking?!?" The video is about
>>92MB
>>and runs some 15+ minutes, showing what the onboard cameras of the police
>>cruisers saw that night. First, you see the Caddy from the lead pursuit
>>cruiser, then you get the same chase as seen from a second cruiser, the
>>one
>>which ultimately knocks the Caddy into the woods.
>>
>>(video at:
>>http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinio..._v_harris.rmvb)
>>
>>Watching the California Patrol in hot pursuit after a white Bronco doing
>>20mph for hours on end is one thing, but the chase in this video is
>>typical
>>of the ones being debated over recent years. At what point do the police
>>engage in pursuit, and when do they just let the evil-doer go, hoping to
>>pick him up later.
>>

>
> From watching this video they clearly should have called off this
> chase long before it ended. The cops were making a bad situation
> worse to catch someone who was barely speeding in the first place.
>
>
>>The original crime here was not armed robbery or carjacking or leaving the
>>scene of an accident, it was doing 73mph in a 55 zone. (Remember: I've
>>said
>>before that 72 is the magic number.) I have no idea why yahoo decided to
>>try
>>to escape, rather than simply pull over and accept the damn ticket.
>>
>>When the police officer is chasing down a speeder with siren and lights
>>on,
>>and the speeder just keeps on going, putting any number of other motorists
>>in danger, the police officer can now use deadly force (i.e.: his front
>>bumper) with a little more authority, thanks to today's Supreme Court
>>ruling.
>>

>
> Which makes us all LESS safe then we were before with no meaningful
> improvement in crime reduction.
>
>
>>I'm no lawyer, but it seems to me that yahoo compounded his possible
>>speeding ticket with resisting arrest (always a good generic criminal
>>activity, when everything else fails). But then leading the police on an
>>8-minute chase around any number of other motorists (most of whom had the
>>good sense to pull over to the side of the road) has to be a serious
>>crime.
>>The potential for disaster is all over that video.
>>
>>I would have dismissed this case from the start.
>>

>
> I would have ruled in favor of the yahoo to some extent. This chase
> should have ended after the first minute when they got close enough to
> get the plate.


....then just pull over and wave bye bye? What?!?

No, don't think so. At the very least, the police have to follow this nut to
be on the scene when he slams into something other than a tree.

When someone fails to surrender, you think they should just be let go?

dwight


  #15  
Old May 3rd 07, 03:54 AM posted to rec.autos.makers.ford.mustang
Joe Pfeiffer
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 433
Default More power to the police in high speed pursuit

"dwight" > writes:
>
> No, don't think so. At the very least, the police have to follow this nut to
> be on the scene when he slams into something other than a tree.
>
> When someone fails to surrender, you think they should just be let go?


Not exactly. But depending on what you want them for, and what the
danger to others is, that may be the best bet -- if all he was wanted
for was speeding (and he wasn't driving erratically), the chase
probably shouldn't have happened.

If they really think he's going to slam into something other than a
tree, they need to get him stopped before that happens. Once the
chase was under weigh in earnest, and he was weaving and running stop
lights, it was time to get him stopped.

  #16  
Old May 3rd 07, 07:03 AM posted to rec.autos.makers.ford.mustang
Brent P[_1_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,639
Default More power to the police in high speed pursuit

In article >, Joe Pfeiffer wrote:
> (Brent P) writes:
>
>> In article >, Joe Pfeiffer wrote:
>> > There are at least three good questions that I've seen about the
>> > chase, only one of which was addressed in the decision:
>> >
>> > 1) artifically low speed limits to raise revenue. Completely
>> > irrelevant to the case, sorry. I don't care if the limit was 15
>> > (we have 15mph school zones on 40mph roads around here), when the
>> > lights come on, you stop.

>>
>> You've missed the point entirely. Proper speed limits means only stopping
>> those drivers who should be targeted for enforcement. Less stops mean
>> fewer chases. Same with picking people up at their homes if they have a
>> warrant instead of waiting for them to be pulled over. It's also better for
>> the people because then cops just can't pick and choose anyone to stop.
>> (either being in violation of the speed limit or driving unusually slow)

>
> No, I haven't. I'm actually a big fan of engineering the road to
> encourage driving at a safe speed, and then setting a speed limit
> based on actual usage (so only the nuts are driving over the limit).
>
> That is completely irrelevant in whether the police were justified in
> ending this chase as they did, which is what the suit was about.


The dangerous chases don't happen as much without the idiotic speed limits
and revenuing on the road. That's the relevance. It's a way to reduce
these events.

>> > If you're on a suspended license (the
>> > kid in the case was), you make damn sure you don't do anything
>> > to get stopped for

>>
>> Driving to the letter law attracts police attention, especially on
>> friday and saturday nights.


> I've only been stopped half a dozen times in my driving career (which
> extends several decades), and I've never been at the speed limit when
> it's happened.


I have.

> The cops may watch you more closely (I was once
> followed for over five miles in my Charger),


I've been followed like that a good number of times. usually on the order
of 2-3 miles.

> but a kid in a Cadillac
> driving the speed limit isn't going to be stopped. Certainly not as
> readily as one driving 18 over the limit. I notice, incidentally,
> that you edited out the note that the best way to avoid getting
> stopped while on a suspended license is to not be driving at all.


Because I had no objection to it. I am presenting an argument on a way to
reduce the number of these sort of events.


  #17  
Old May 3rd 07, 09:36 PM posted to rec.autos.makers.ford.mustang
CobraJet[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 114
Default More power to the police in high speed pursuit

In article >, Brent P
> wrote:

> Because I had no objection to it. I am presenting an argument on a way to
> reduce the number of these sort of events.
>
>


While I still lived in L.A. (80's), the policy was changed to
scramble an air unit ASAP when any pursuit lasted more than a few
moments. Once Air had a fix on the perp, the ground vehicles were
supposed to back off far enough so he would not see them, and thus slow
down. Air would then follow and bring ground back in when the perp was
stationary. This appeared to work in the beginning, as back then there
were usually several units upstairs at any given time.

However, in the dozens of LAPD police chases I've seen on TV and
YouTube since then, it appears that, Air or not, ground units continue
to dog a suspect's heels. I can only assume that the previous policy
was not effectual in in the belated snaring of the bad guy.

I agree that many warrants can be served at a residence. However,
you should not assume that this does not happen. My neighbor back in
L.A. was picked up at his house, much to his surprise, on a misdemeanor
warrant on a nice weekday afternoon by plainclothes from Devonshire
Division. Every agency has different policies.

You cannot assume that the license plate on a pursued vehicle will
lead you later on to his doorstep where you can comfortably hook him
up. The car could be borrowed or stolen or have fictitious plates, and
the registered address can be stale. For some reason, people with
warrants tend to move around and not update their info. Hmm. How many
of you have been pulled over, and the officer asks you if the address
on your license is current? That is SOP.

As this issue is one big gray fog, I see valid points from most of
the posters. The technology to shut off the ignition from satellite has
been included in cars built the last few years. The technology to read
a VIN "chip" on a moving vehicle with a scanner exists now. The use of
these two will eventually be established.

On a lighter note:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=87UgXXgXHKc&NR=1

A public service from me. Realize that the law enforcement officer
does not know the situation when he pulls you over. When you are lit
up, try to pull over where passing traffic will not constitute a hazard
to the officer(s), who is looking at you and does not have eyes in the
back of his head. Roll all the windows down if they are powered. Turn
off the engine. Put your left hand on the outside of the door. Put your
right hand on the top of your steering wheel. The officer can now see
that you have no weapon. (If you are pulled over at night turn on your
interior lights first). When asked for your license and reg, tell him
first where they are before reaching anywhere. Keep your hands visible
after giving him the documents, even when he's back at his car running
you for Wants and Warrants (28-29).

If you have several people in the car, have them do the same thing
with hands outside the doors or palms placed against the rear window.
If you have a friend with a cop attitude, tell him to keep his mouth
shut or you'll break his jaw.

Using the above and politeness will often go a long way towards a
lesser ticket, or maybe no ticket at all. You will often be asked where
you learned all that. Tell them someone that used to be in the system
mentioned it, and it made good sense.

--
CobraJet
  #18  
Old May 3rd 07, 10:07 PM posted to rec.autos.makers.ford.mustang
Brent P[_1_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,639
Default More power to the police in high speed pursuit

In article >, CobraJet wrote:

> You cannot assume that the license plate on a pursued vehicle will
> lead you later on to his doorstep where you can comfortably hook him
> up. The car could be borrowed or stolen or have fictitious plates, and
> the registered address can be stale. For some reason, people with
> warrants tend to move around and not update their info. Hmm. How many
> of you have been pulled over, and the officer asks you if the address
> on your license is current? That is SOP.


While I knew better than to make a plates argument and didn't. I've had
to tell the officer that it was not current, they never asked. I had the
same physical license for a very long time, like 8-10 years because I could
just renew by mail and did so. It was so old that when I was carded
people would give it a triple take because they were too young to even
know that format once existed.

> As this issue is one big gray fog, I see valid points from most of
> the posters. The technology to shut off the ignition from satellite has
> been included in cars built the last few years. The technology to read
> a VIN "chip" on a moving vehicle with a scanner exists now. The use of
> these two will eventually be established.


So criminals will just steal older cars.

> A public service from me. Realize that the law enforcement officer
> does not know the situation when he pulls you over.


That's my other argument against road-side taxation and why speed limits
need to make sense to minimize stops. It puts the officer's life at risk
to collect a little revenue.

> When you are lit
> up, try to pull over where passing traffic will not constitute a hazard
> to the officer(s), who is looking at you and does not have eyes in the
> back of his head.


And there's the other risk to the revenue collection. Stops should be
minimized to those that are actually needed and the officers wouldn't be
put at risk so often.

> Using the above and politeness will often go a long way towards a
> lesser ticket, or maybe no ticket at all. You will often be asked where
> you learned all that. Tell them someone that used to be in the system
> mentioned it, and it made good sense.


It's showing the submissiveness to the state. I don't particularly like
it, but have done it in the past. It's a social-animal thing really. I
would prefer to live in a free country again.




  #19  
Old May 4th 07, 04:13 PM posted to rec.autos.makers.ford.mustang
Joe Pfeiffer
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 433
Default More power to the police in high speed pursuit

(Brent P) writes:
> >
> > That is completely irrelevant in whether the police were justified in
> > ending this chase as they did, which is what the suit was about.

>
> The dangerous chases don't happen as much without the idiotic speed limits
> and revenuing on the road. That's the relevance. It's a way to reduce
> these events.


There's a story about a Catholic priest, the pastor of a small parish.
He only had one topic he liked to preach about: the Sacrament of
Reconciliation. Every Sunday he'd get up and talk about confession.
Maybe it was about getting into heaven, maybe it was about being free
of mortal sin before taking Communion. But it was always about
confession.

One day, the bishop called him in, and told him there'd been
complaints; that while confession is a good and worthy topic, it isn't
the only good and worthy topic. The Feast of St. Joseph was coming
up next Sunday, and he wanted the homily to be about St. Joseph. The
priest said, "OK".

Next Sunday, time for the Homily. It started like this:

"Today is the Feast of St. Joseph. A good man; a holy man. Foster
father of Our Lord. A working man; a carpenter, by trade. Made
things out of wood. You know, confessionals are made of wood..."

You remind me of that priest.
  #20  
Old May 4th 07, 09:43 PM posted to rec.autos.makers.ford.mustang
Spike
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 413
Default More power to the police in high speed pursuit

On Wed, 02 May 2007 17:16:56 -0700, Ashton Crusher >
wrote:

>On Wed, 02 May 2007 13:01:58 -0700, GILL > wrote:
>
>>Spike wrote:
>>> On Mon, 30 Apr 2007 23:35:34 -0500,
>>> (Brent P) wrote:
>>>
>>>> In article >, dwight wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> In this particular case, this 19 year old kid could have chosen to pull over

SNIP
>>runners just go?

>
>Guess what. Some places have done that. Guess what, nothing happens
>any different there as far as their overall crime rate. IOW, the
>change in policy had no effect other then to eliminate the deadly
>police chases thereby lessening the chance of INNOCENT bystanders
>being killed. The change in policy did NOT increase the number of
>times people tried to run from the cops. And in most cases they get
>the guy anyway, just not thru a dangerous pursuit.
>
> It is stupid for the cops to be engaging in high speed pursuits for
>anything other then things like going after a known murderer. Going
>after a guy because "he's driving fast and might kill someone" is
>absurd on it's face. You don't increase safety by encouraging someone
>to engage in MORE unsafe acts.


>I say let the police do their job with FULL regard for the safety of
>others they might endanger. There are VERY few instances where a high
>speed pursuit is warranted.


Now we are supposed to be mind readesr? If someone is going to run for
a simple traffic infraction, how are cops supposed to know why? Is it
because they just killed their cheating girlfriend, robbed a 7/11, or
whatever? Afterall, the girls body may not be found for a few days.

People run for the stupidest reasons... "because I didn't have my
license with me", "because I had a joint in my purse", or the one I
really liked was, "because I didn't know if you were really a cop"
(marked vehicle, gumballs, siren). As for pursuits, someone who is
whacked out on drugs, drunk, mentally ill, or even a diabetic in
insulin shock, has no idea what they are doing. Doesn't matter if
there is a cop present or not. They'll roll right through an
intersection they didn't see, or a school zone filled with kids, or
even down the wrong side of the freeway. Of course they also run
because they news choppers have put them on TV for their 15 minutes of
fame. Want to lower the rates of chases? Pass a law which prohibits
the news choppers from making a chase a big production for the evening
news. Many of the idiots being chased have been filmed waving to the
choppers.... like 'hey, momma and you homies, look at me!'

But you'd say just let them go and get them later. Want to explain
that to the families of the people they happen to kill? One night I
had to have one of my best friends relieved of duty in order to
explain to him how a drunk crossed the centerline and hit his wife
head on, killing her, their son, and their unborn child. The drunk
survived. And he wasn't being chased.

Then you'll see someone driving like a nut, at speed, who cuts you off
and you'll complain because the cop you see cruising behind you didn't
do anything.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
From the Land of the Police Pursuit Eeyore Driving 4 February 4th 07 06:27 AM
Police in pursuit of a stolen Dump Truck..................news footage Lufthansi Driving 1 July 21st 06 05:45 PM
1972 Beetle Loses Power at Sustained High Speed / RPMs [email protected] VW air cooled 11 April 23rd 06 02:37 PM
High speed pursuit of a BMW with an almost insane tragic ending ( Video-Clip ) [email protected] BMW 1 March 18th 06 03:12 AM
High speed police chase in California -> where is full video ofshooting? Some Guy Driving 2 May 17th 05 08:55 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:52 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AutoBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.