road spikes

In aus.motorcycles on Sun, 08 Jul 2007 22:18:32 +1000

If there's a pusuit every day, then I wonder what the final outcome
is. For the danger to the police and to the bystanders, how many of
those caught are serious dangers to people if they weren't being
chased?

Zebee

 

The final outcome is very few of them make it onto the front page of the
paper...

Nev..
'04 CBR1100XX

 

I could argue against until the cows come home with the rest of you but that
isn't going to offer any incite into effective tactics that can be used by
our police forces in a pursuit situtation.

justAL

 

In aus.motorcycles on Sun, 08 Jul 2007 20:34:35 GMT

You know I don't think that word means what you think it means.

It's funny where it is though.

Zebee

 

Inconceivable!

P

 

G-S wrote:

In theory, that's fine.

In a big deal type case, handled by HQ this is probably what the cops
would prefer to do.

But, I believe that a non-trivial number of pursuits are, at least to
start with, over fairly minor matters.

Cop car signals for vehicle to stop, vehicle disregards, and off they
go. :-(

The typical young cop takes the failure to stop as a personal insult,
and soon, the adrenaline takes over, making them nearly as dangerous as
the target vehicle.

What you say here Geoff is true, but for the police as an organisation.

The police person in the car, or on the bike, has already reacted.

If they have reacted by giving chase, then it's difficult from them to
pull back from that decision.

regards,
CrazyCam

 

I really tried hard to understand that sentence.

Theo

 

And mostly the initial reasons are minor. Trivial pursuit, tragic
consequences. How many pursuits where the alleged perp pulls over and gives
up before they hit something?

Theo

 

And someone gets hurt.

Theo

 

I thought so too.

Theo

 

What he means is, if you go through green lights without checking to see
if someone's gunna run the red, then you are negligent if you should get
hit by a red-light runner.

 

In aus.motorcycles on Mon, 9 Jul 2007 07:25:08 +0800

Be interesteing to know.

The problem I suppose is that if someone doesn't pull up, then they
"get away with it". Presumably stopping the car and running.

I vaguely recall some stat or other that many people are caught at
traffic stops who are nailed for some other crime, and not always
possession of drugs. But it's so vague I can't recall just how many
non-possession offences or what they were.

Of course those are the ones that stop. If someone has a body in the
trunk or the bank robbery proceeds on the back seat, would they stop?

(Those with the proceeds of white collar crime and mass murder are,
of course, given police escorts and top class hotel rooms.)

Zebee

Zebee

 

I think he is trying to say that riding a motorcycle is inherently
dangerous and if you should happen to find yourself in an accident in
which the law would normally find another party 100% at fault you should
accept at least part of the consequences of your actions for failing to
choose to safer form of transport. He's obviously practising to be a
magistrate or a politician or maybe a 3rd party insurer of some sort.

Nev..
'04 CBR1100XX

 

They're kissing again. Do we have to read the kissing parts?

Nev..
'04 CBR1100XX

 

And the Kiddy-Fiddlers are made Judges.

Boxer

 

How about something along the lines of this
http://www.engadget.com/2004/07/14/car-chase-zapper-to-end-oj-style-chases/

If you let them go they will do it again.
If you back off they will learn to leave the car in a car park like at a
shopping centre and get lost in the crowd, helecopter no good there.

Or why not have an immobiliser fitted to every car that can be activated by
police radio, this wont stop professional crims but will slow down young
hoons and car thief's. Cost $50 and to fit and charge us $150.

 

The obvious answer is a 110km/h speed limiter in every car and bike. That
would solve the problem once and for all.

 

no it wouldn't.

betty

 

I'll make an outrageous claim and say that a significant proportion of
people who do a runner from the cops do it because they have stolen the
car, they're DUI, or don't have a license, or all of the above. It
doesn't matter if you catch them or not. The next time the same
circumstance arises, they will react in the same manner. Catching them
or not catching them won't make much difference in the overall scheme of
things. If you catch them, you will charge them, take them to court,
they will receive a penalty of some kind, and what have you done to
ensure they won't do it again?

Nev..
'04 CBR1100XX

 

As true as that glib observation is, try coming up with a realistic
alternative, since the one you seem to be proposing is 'Cop signals offender
to stop, offender speeds off, cop does nothing since someone may get hurt,
logical conclusion of which is we all ignore all cops'.

Are you really proposing that?

Whilst there is a problem, the blame must lie fairly and squarely with the
runner, since it is an offence to fail to stop when ordered to by a Police
Occifer.

P