Police Car chases in urbna areas - is it right?

[Deleted member 16999]

Yes it is, but let's be honest, you get more than enough opportunity to come quietly before the taser is deployed; if you are innocent with nothing to hide, why not come in and prove it?

What about the mentally ill or the innocent who the Police mistake for someone else (Tube Shooting)
Nothing is clear cut, but we have to give the Police 100% support and the best resources and training to protect them and us.

 

[hovis]

Is it not innocent until proven guilty in this country anymore?

I am not against police using tazers or firearms for that matter but any response must be proportionate else we will find ourselves in a police state.

Innocent or guilty if a copper tells you to pull over or put your hands behind your back then you do it '' no questions asked" resist? Prepared to be tazered.

Its not rocket science

 

[Deleted member 16999]

Innocent or guilty if a copper tells you to pull over or put your hands behind your back then you do it '' no questions asked" resist? Prepared to be tazered.

Its not rocket science

No, sorry, 100% behind the coppers, but what you're describing is a Police State, they must and should be accountable.

 

[hovis]

No, sorry, 100% behind the coppers, but what you're describing is a Police State, they must and should be accountable.

No I'm not. I'm saying at the point of arrest then you do exactly what the police officer says. Any problems get ironed out at the police station. It's people that resist with all this "rights" crap that get tazered

I've never heard a copper say " well, you was under arrested but your protest has changed my mind! Your free to go"

 

[Deleted member 16999]

No I'm not. I'm saying at the point of arrest then you do exactly what the police officer says. Any problems get ironed out at the police station. It's people that resistant with all this "rights" crap that get tazered

I've never heard a copper say " well, you was under arrested but your protest has changed my mind! You free to go"

You said if a copper asks you to pull over or put your hands behind your back, you never mentioned point of arrest or a reason, hence my post back.

 

[hovis]

You said if a copper asks you to pull over or put your hands behind your back, you never mentioned point of arrest or a reason, hence my post back.

I thought you would assume that if a copper was telling you to put your hands behind your back your under arrest.

And its a legal requirement to pull over if requested. So you pull over

 

[Deleted member 16999]

I thought you would assume that if a copper was telling you to put your hands behind your back your under arrest.

And its a legal requirement to pull over if requested. So you pull over

Big jump from failing to pull over to instant tazering, you have heard of mistaken identity or cloned plates etc, that's the point about Coppers needing to have checks and balances.
I hear the argument from people that if you've got nothing to hide then it's no problem, but there needs to be a line.

 

[Trojan615]

No, sorry, 100% behind the coppers, but what you're describing is a Police State, they must and should be accountable.

No one said they shouldn't be accountable.. What's suggested is that if your stopped you should be compliant

 

[hors limite]

I have just seen the latest BBC News report on the deaths in London caused by the pursuit by the police of a stolen car. The car was some tatty old piece of rubbish that can't have been worth a grand. Having said that, had it been a top end luxury car would it have been worth pursuing it with such awful consequences? I think that you have got to take a hard look at what the police are seeking to achieve. The recovery of the stolen vehicle and the arrest of the thief I presume. The proportion of the thousands upon thousands of cars stolen every year in the UK that are recovered in a pursuit must be infinitesimal - is the risk worth the potential reward, I would say no.
Having nabbed the thief, what is the typical outcome - a modest fine and/or community service?
I really can't see how these so called benefits can justify such lethal risks.

 

[Hobbit]

Chase every time until it is obviously dangerous to do so. The alternative is to, basically, tell the scroats they are free to do what they like within certain areas. And then what happens when suburbia expands? 20 square miles where it isn't safe to have a car/go out?

Beef up sentences, and make the crime unattractive.

 

[Deleted member 16999]

No one said they shouldn't be accountable.. What's suggested is that if your stopped you should be compliant

But they should and must have reason to stop you, they can't just stop anyone and everyone 'just in case"

 

[hors limite]

OK How do you make the judgement " until it is obviously dangerous to do so"? I guess the police involved in the latest tragedy thought they had it all sorted - but they hadn't.
The courts view stealing cars as a petty criminal offence. Until that changes is it worth killing people?
As for preserving a law abiding citizen friendly environment, I can think of greater priorities for the police than car theft.
I think I am not very far away from the Hobbit in terms of his sentiments about sentencing and deterrents - I just don't see how risking such tragedies is worth it.

 

[hovis]

But they should and must have reason to stop you, they can't just stop anyone and everyone 'just in case"

So would you be offended if a policeman stopped you for a random search?

 

[Deleted member 16999]

So would you be offended if a policeman stopped you for a random search?

By the Law they can stop and question you at anytime, to search you they must have reasonable grounds, if he thinks he has reasonable grounds then I don't have an issue, if he doesn't then yes I would be offended. They have to follow the law as well.

https://www.gov.uk/police-powers-to-stop-and-search-your-rights

 

[Bunkermagnet]

I was in the area yesterday, and my brother had the police cars pass him. Just because the car being chased was old and scrappy, has no bearing on who was in this car. The driver is who they wanted, for whatever reason that is. Whilst accidents happen, the police must be allowed to enforce and enact the laws of the land. Sadly, what with financial cutbacks meaning less bobbys on the beat and a general declining of respect for the police means arguements like this one will proceed long into the night.
I for one will hope the police carry on trying to enforce our laws.

 

[TonyN]

Im pursuit trained, and yes OP, you're talking rubbish.

The decision to pursue is not taken lightly. Its risk assessed dynamically over and over. Every Street junction and hazard changes the continued assessment and risk. The driver feeds it all back via live commentary as well as everything eles. The control room supervisor review the commentary and also risk assess and will often cancel the pursuit if they feel it is too high a risk.

No Police Officer I know (including me) wants to pursue a stolen vehicle because of the dangers involved and potential consequences of making a mistake which could ultimately be jail.

But, if you dont try to stop them, they will go on to commit further offences. Dangerous driving anyway, without police behind them. Mostly driven by unlicensed drivers who will eventually crash without anyone chasing them.

When you consider lots of stolen cars are used purely for violence offences including robbery/ assault/ kidnapp etc, do you not try to prevent this, or just leave the car to it and tell the victims we didn't want to intervene in case the car crashed?

Almost every stolen car I have recovered has had drugs paraphernalia in it. Most driversare under the influence of cannabis when theybare driving, if not cocaine, heroin or alcohol. Do we allow these people to just carry on driving innthe hope that once we leave them be they will loc the car up and walk?

Good luck getting a chopper over head. Most pursuits last no more than a few minutes. Choppers wont even lift in this time.

Drones? This isn't afghan, we're not navy seals looking to secure a high profile target that posses a significant threat to a nation.

UAV's? A non starter.

Cctv? The real world isnt watchdogs, its not all linked and most of it is so poor it cant even read a reg let alone ID an offender.

DNA, as soon as the car is scrambled and lost, its burnt out, No DNA.

And if you even knew how difficult the legal process was in order to convict people who are caught after a police pursuit, you'd know why you need to physically pull a driver out of the drivers seat. Even that isn't enough sometimes.

Denying criminals the unlawful use of the road network and disrupting their operations is why we live in a reletively safe country. You allow this problem to go unchallenged and eventually it will require much more drastic action.

You allow a driver to go, unchallenged in a stolen car, they grow more confident, take more risks, feel more powerful eventually untouchable. That is when a criminal is most dangerous and most active.

The amount of training required and level of skill need to even drive a police car on blues, let alone pursue a vehicle is immense, its not all done on a whim and a prayer. Yes, inevitably some will end with a negative result, but you dont hear about the thousands that end positively.

All Police vehicles have a 'black box' and are subject to serious scrutiny following a police vehicle collision. Us more so than criminals usually.

You want a solution to the problem? Lobby your MPs for tougher sentencing.

Prevention is always better than cure.

 

[TonyN]

I was in the area yesterday, and my brother had the police cars pass him. Just because the car being chased was old and scrappy, has no bearing on who was in this car. The driver is who they wanted, for whatever reason that is. Whilst accidents happen, the police must be allowed to enforce and enact the laws of the land. Sadly, what with financial cutbacks meaning less bobbys on the beat and a general declining of respect for the police means arguements like this one will proceed long into the night.
I for one will hope the police carry on trying to enforce our laws.

Got it on one!

Major cuts to police funding means proactive Policing is a thing of the past.

Criminals almost have free reign at night to go steal cars because depleated numbers are generally dealing with domestics.

 

[hovis]

Im pursuit trained, and yes OP, you're talking rubbish.

The decision to pursue is not taken lightly. Its risk assessed dynamically over and over. Every Street junction and hazard changes the continued assessment and risk. The driver feeds it all back via live commentary as well as everything eles. The control room supervisor review the commentary and also risk assess and will often cancel the pursuit if they feel it is too high a risk.

No Police Officer I know (including me) wants to pursue a stolen vehicle because of the dangers involved and potential consequences of making a mistake which could ultimately be jail.

But, if you dont try to stop them, they will go on to commit further offences. Dangerous driving anyway, without police behind them. Mostly driven by unlicensed drivers who will eventually crash without anyone chasing them.

When you consider lots of stolen cars are used purely for violence offences including robbery/ assault/ kidnapp etc, do you not try to prevent this, or just leave the car to it and tell the victims we didn't want to intervene in case the car crashed?

Almost every stolen car I have recovered has had drugs paraphernalia in it. Most driversare under the influence of cannabis when theybare driving, if not cocaine, heroin or alcohol. Do we allow these people to just carry on driving innthe hope that once we leave them be they will loc the car up and walk?

Good luck getting a chopper over head. Most pursuits last no more than a few minutes. Choppers wont even lift in this time.

Drones? This isn't afghan, we're not navy seals looking to secure a high profile target that posses a significant threat to a nation.

UAV's? A non starter.

Cctv? The real world isnt watchdogs, its not all linked and most of it is so poor it cant even read a reg let alone ID an offender.

DNA, as soon as the car is scrambled and lost, its burnt out, No DNA.

And if you even knew how difficult the legal process was in order to convict people who are caught after a police pursuit, you'd know why you need to physically pull a driver out of the drivers seat. Even that isn't enough sometimes.

Denying criminals the unlawful use of the road network and disrupting their operations is why we live in a reletively safe country. You allow this problem to go unchallenged and eventually it will require much more drastic action.

You allow a driver to go, unchallenged in a stolen car, they grow more confident, take more risks, feel more powerful eventually untouchable. That is when a criminal is most dangerous and most active.

The amount of training required and level of skill need to even drive a police car on blues, let alone pursue a vehicle is immense, its not all done on a whim and a prayer. Yes, inevitably some will end with a negative result, but you dont hear about the thousands that end positively.

All Police vehicles have a 'black box' and are subject to serious scrutiny following a police vehicle collision. Us more so than criminals usually.

You want a solution to the problem? Lobby your MPs for tougher sentencing.

Prevention is always better than cure.

I imagine it's frustrating as hell to read the post's in this thread and i agree with all of your post. I drive a fire appliance on blues and the concentration level required is off the chart ( and im not chasing anyone) . I work closely with police and what i have found it your shafted if you do and shafted if you don't

 

[Deleted member 16999]

Im pursuit trained, and yes OP, you're talking rubbish.

The decision to pursue is not taken lightly. Its risk assessed dynamically over and over. Every Street junction and hazard changes the continued assessment and risk. The driver feeds it all back via live commentary as well as everything eles. The control room supervisor review the commentary and also risk assess and will often cancel the pursuit if they feel it is too high a risk.

No Police Officer I know (including me) wants to pursue a stolen vehicle because of the dangers involved and potential consequences of making a mistake which could ultimately be jail.

But, if you dont try to stop them, they will go on to commit further offences. Dangerous driving anyway, without police behind them. Mostly driven by unlicensed drivers who will eventually crash without anyone chasing them.

When you consider lots of stolen cars are used purely for violence offences including robbery/ assault/ kidnapp etc, do you not try to prevent this, or just leave the car to it and tell the victims we didn't want to intervene in case the car crashed?

Almost every stolen car I have recovered has had drugs paraphernalia in it. Most driversare under the influence of cannabis when theybare driving, if not cocaine, heroin or alcohol. Do we allow these people to just carry on driving innthe hope that once we leave them be they will loc the car up and walk?

Good luck getting a chopper over head. Most pursuits last no more than a few minutes. Choppers wont even lift in this time.

Drones? This isn't afghan, we're not navy seals looking to secure a high profile target that posses a significant threat to a nation.

UAV's? A non starter.

Cctv? The real world isnt watchdogs, its not all linked and most of it is so poor it cant even read a reg let alone ID an offender.

DNA, as soon as the car is scrambled and lost, its burnt out, No DNA.

And if you even knew how difficult the legal process was in order to convict people who are caught after a police pursuit, you'd know why you need to physically pull a driver out of the drivers seat. Even that isn't enough sometimes.

Denying criminals the unlawful use of the road network and disrupting their operations is why we live in a reletively safe country. You allow this problem to go unchallenged and eventually it will require much more drastic action.

You allow a driver to go, unchallenged in a stolen car, they grow more confident, take more risks, feel more powerful eventually untouchable. That is when a criminal is most dangerous and most active.

The amount of training required and level of skill need to even drive a police car on blues, let alone pursue a vehicle is immense, its not all done on a whim and a prayer. Yes, inevitably some will end with a negative result, but you dont hear about the thousands that end positively.

All Police vehicles have a 'black box' and are subject to serious scrutiny following a police vehicle collision. Us more so than criminals usually.

You want a solution to the problem? Lobby your MPs for tougher sentencing.

Prevention is always better than cure.

Brilliant response, cheers

 

[BesCumber]

Im pursuit trained, and yes OP, you're talking rubbish.

The decision to pursue is not taken lightly. Its risk assessed dynamically over and over. Every Street junction and hazard changes the continued assessment and risk. The driver feeds it all back via live commentary as well as everything eles. The control room supervisor review the commentary and also risk assess and will often cancel the pursuit if they feel it is too high a risk.

No Police Officer I know (including me) wants to pursue a stolen vehicle because of the dangers involved and potential consequences of making a mistake which could ultimately be jail.

But, if you dont try to stop them, they will go on to commit further offences. Dangerous driving anyway, without police behind them. Mostly driven by unlicensed drivers who will eventually crash without anyone chasing them.

When you consider lots of stolen cars are used purely for violence offences including robbery/ assault/ kidnapp etc, do you not try to prevent this, or just leave the car to it and tell the victims we didn't want to intervene in case the car crashed?

Almost every stolen car I have recovered has had drugs paraphernalia in it. Most driversare under the influence of cannabis when theybare driving, if not cocaine, heroin or alcohol. Do we allow these people to just carry on driving innthe hope that once we leave them be they will loc the car up and walk?

Good luck getting a chopper over head. Most pursuits last no more than a few minutes. Choppers wont even lift in this time.

Drones? This isn't afghan, we're not navy seals looking to secure a high profile target that posses a significant threat to a nation.

UAV's? A non starter.

Cctv? The real world isnt watchdogs, its not all linked and most of it is so poor it cant even read a reg let alone ID an offender.

DNA, as soon as the car is scrambled and lost, its burnt out, No DNA.

And if you even knew how difficult the legal process was in order to convict people who are caught after a police pursuit, you'd know why you need to physically pull a driver out of the drivers seat. Even that isn't enough sometimes.

Denying criminals the unlawful use of the road network and disrupting their operations is why we live in a reletively safe country. You allow this problem to go unchallenged and eventually it will require much more drastic action.

You allow a driver to go, unchallenged in a stolen car, they grow more confident, take more risks, feel more powerful eventually untouchable. That is when a criminal is most dangerous and most active.

The amount of training required and level of skill need to even drive a police car on blues, let alone pursue a vehicle is immense, its not all done on a whim and a prayer. Yes, inevitably some will end with a negative result, but you dont hear about the thousands that end positively.

All Police vehicles have a 'black box' and are subject to serious scrutiny following a police vehicle collision. Us more so than criminals usually.

You want a solution to the problem? Lobby your MPs for tougher sentencing.

Prevention is always better than cure.

:clap:
Nothing else to add.

Oh, er a mate of mine got a ticket for.........
:lol: