2 ms·
> It's a hard question. The minute you start considering public safety, is the minute it stops being a hard question. In my jurisdiction (Ontario), cops will n
by macspoofing 13y ago
> It's a hard question.
The minute you start considering public safety, is the minute it stops being a hard question. In my jurisdiction (Ontario), cops will not to get into high-speed chases if there's a reasonable chance of injury to assailants or civilians. My cop friend told me they won't even attempt to chase after motorcyclist because the risk to him is just too great. It is a judgement call, and chases still happen, but you always consider public safety first before you engage in a reckless chase.
>The officers likely believe that serving and protecting requires them to always chase.
You know, I used to watch American police car chase shows, where they would show video of police chases. Most of those ended in a car crash, and significant of those ended with the assailant ramming into some civilian car. Great police work guys. You got some two-bit criminal but you killed or engendered an innocent bystander.
I think if you look past a typical "always-get-your-man" cowboy mentality you'd find it's just not worth it in the grand scheme of things.
- wpietri 13y agoYou could be right. Indeed, were I to lay money down, it'd be on the side of fewer chases. But there are public safety concerns on either side of this, so just citing "public safety" doesn't cut it. However, the fact that you're citing reality TV as evidence definitely isn't helping your case.