4 ms·

There are three major sets of modification that I can think of which are done to a cruiser: - Light bars/electronics/sirens - Armoring - Ability to detain su

There are three major sets of modification that I can think of which are done to a cruiser: - Light bars/electronics/sirens - Armoring - Ability to detain suspects The first is going to be required for every police or sheriff cruiser. The second will reduce casualties (arguably for both sides) in an armed engagement. Ideally required for any action which could create an armed engagement. Because a minimum of one side is always armed, every encounter can become an armed engagement. Huzzah USA etc. etc. The third is required if the police officer will ever respond to anything that isn't giving out a parking ticket. Traffic stops can include anything from an armed engagement down to a drunk driver or peaceful execution of an outstanding warrant. Then there's simple responding to calls, which can also include all of the above. The lack of ability to detain someone means you need (as stated in the article) more officers responding to an engagement.

vundercind 2y ago
Light bars, cameras, comms equipment. The traffic enforcement cars need those. Not so much the armor and detainment capabilities. If it’s known they don’t pursue and aren’t likely to attack you to secure an arrest, the risk for them from the person they’re stopping (traffic on the e.g. highway they’re standing next to is another matter) in an encounter is a ton lower. Why fight them when you can just leave? And rack up another charge, sure, but one a hell of a lot less serious than attacking someone and then still fleeing. It does mean calling in a regular cop for arrests, but what proportion of stops result in arrests in a day? They also have to call in tow trucks and ambulances and fire trucks.
- falcolas 2y ago
  > If it’s known they don’t pursue and aren’t likely to attack you to secure an arrest, the risk for them from the person they’re stopping If this is true and not just an assumption (FWIW, I think you're wrong - human nature is not that logical when in fight or flight brain) it should be possible to come up with numbers to back this up. There are many locations in the US where the default is not to chase. As a side note, they have to detain someone while waiting. That someone's care is also legally in their hands at that point; it doesn't make a lot of sense from a civilian safety perspective to just set them on the side of the highway.

vundercind 2y ago

Light bars, cameras, comms equipment. The traffic enforcement cars need those. Not so much the armor and detainment capabilities. If it’s known they don’t pursue and aren’t likely to attack you to secure an arrest, the risk for them from the person they’re stopping (traffic on the e.g. highway they’re standing next to is another matter) in an encounter is a ton lower. Why fight them when you can just leave? And rack up another charge, sure, but one a hell of a lot less serious than attacking someone and then still fleeing. It does mean calling in a regular cop for arrests, but what proportion of stops result in arrests in a day? They also have to call in tow trucks and ambulances and fire trucks.

falcolas 2y ago
> If it’s known they don’t pursue and aren’t likely to attack you to secure an arrest, the risk for them from the person they’re stopping If this is true and not just an assumption (FWIW, I think you're wrong - human nature is not that logical when in fight or flight brain) it should be possible to come up with numbers to back this up. There are many locations in the US where the default is not to chase. As a side note, they have to detain someone while waiting. That someone's care is also legally in their hands at that point; it doesn't make a lot of sense from a civilian safety perspective to just set them on the side of the highway.