3 ms·

I don’t think you’ll find that most chases are over issues that warrant turning it into a situation involving significant risk of serious injury or death for bo

I don’t think you’ll find that most chases are over issues that warrant turning it into a situation involving significant risk of serious injury or death for both those involved (which may include passengers in the fleeing car) and bystanders.

unsnap_biceps 2y ago
I completely understand, however, if they don't chase and it's not enough to try to catch the person in their house/work/whatever, it's practically the same as the law not being enforced, right? I struggle to think it's fair to people that don't run if they're held responsible but people that run aren't.
- vundercind 2y ago
  How many deaths is this effort at fairness worth? I think enough would be caught by passive/invisible surveillance (drone tracking and other methods—these are already used) and simply following up at home or work that we’re not talking about some kind of get-away-free card, here. This also assumes a very-high rate of apprehension from chases, which does not seem to be the case (possibly under 50% when relatively-loose chase policies are in place—rates of apprehension, though not total apprehensions, appear to trend much higher with more-restrictive chase policies, as one might expect) There have been some places that have either restricted or loosened restrictions on police chases over the last couple decades, which should give us an excellent data set to see the effects of these policies… unfortunately, police data gathering and sharing is notoriously awful, with the result that most attempts at analyzing the statistics of policing in the US are necessarily full of guesswork.
  - unsnap_biceps 2y ago
    Just to be clear, I'm completely for restricted, even levels that could be considered highly restricted, chases. I'm just not sure that I'm okay with completely eliminating chases entirely. I also worry that expanding "passive/invisible surveillance (drone tracking and other methods—these are already used)" is a net loss for citizens, however, I struggle on how to quantify that loss compared to the cost of accidents.

unsnap_biceps 2y ago

I completely understand, however, if they don't chase and it's not enough to try to catch the person in their house/work/whatever, it's practically the same as the law not being enforced, right? I struggle to think it's fair to people that don't run if they're held responsible but people that run aren't.

vundercind 2y ago
How many deaths is this effort at fairness worth? I think enough would be caught by passive/invisible surveillance (drone tracking and other methods—these are already used) and simply following up at home or work that we’re not talking about some kind of get-away-free card, here. This also assumes a very-high rate of apprehension from chases, which does not seem to be the case (possibly under 50% when relatively-loose chase policies are in place—rates of apprehension, though not total apprehensions, appear to trend much higher with more-restrictive chase policies, as one might expect) There have been some places that have either restricted or loosened restrictions on police chases over the last couple decades, which should give us an excellent data set to see the effects of these policies… unfortunately, police data gathering and sharing is notoriously awful, with the result that most attempts at analyzing the statistics of policing in the US are necessarily full of guesswork.
- unsnap_biceps 2y ago
  Just to be clear, I'm completely for restricted, even levels that could be considered highly restricted, chases. I'm just not sure that I'm okay with completely eliminating chases entirely. I also worry that expanding "passive/invisible surveillance (drone tracking and other methods—these are already used)" is a net loss for citizens, however, I struggle on how to quantify that loss compared to the cost of accidents.