• Police shot teenager after his father reported stolen truck
    230 replies, posted
[QUOTE=FordLord;42796294]Everytime i get out of my car, i do a quick inspection. If they are right behind me, what is the point of a gps tracker? From what i can find, two city blocks is about 1/4 of a mile. Every where ive been, you can usually just look in your mirror and see that far. With that in mind, if a cop pulls up close enough to shoot a gps tracker, then backs off 1/4 mile and keeps following, its pretty safe to say that he did put a tracker on you[/QUOTE] so he can track you without being in your line of sight then he'd back up even further fuck you're debating hypothetical policies that I just made up as if you're going to be able to outsmart the people who are pouring money into inventing this thing [editline]8th November 2013[/editline] k I'm going to bed. I'm going to recap everything in one post because all this information I've gathered pretty much covers itself full circle. [B]WHY CHASES ARE BAD [/B] They kill innocent people [url]http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2013/10/31/starchase_police_gps_cannon_system_aims_to_stop_dangerous_high_speed_chases.html[/url] [QUOTE]Each day, someone in the United States dies as a result of a high-speed car chase [/QUOTE][QUOTE]Of all the people killed in pursuits, 42 percent are innocent third parties.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE]In 2008, for instance, only 8.6 percent of police chases were the result of a violent crime. Most of them are for traffic violations.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE]one officer is killed every six weeks in a chase or responding to a non-life-threatening call.[/QUOTE] [B]WHY THEY ARE NOT GOOD[/B] "Don't they prevent fleeing?" [url]http://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/publications/law-enforcement-bulletin/march-2010/evidence-based-decisions-on-police-pursuits[/url] [QUOTE]In addition, research has shown that if the police refrain from chasing all offenders or terminate their pursuits, no significant increase in the number of suspects who flee would occur.[/QUOTE] "Won't the suspect keep driving recklessly even when not chased?" [QUOTE]One of the more interesting findings from the suspects concerned their willingness to slow down when the police stopped chasing them. Approximately 75 percent reported that they would slow down when they felt safe. They explained that on average, they would have “to be free from the police show of authority by emergency lights or siren for approximately two blocks in town...and 2.5 miles on a freeway.”11 In other words, suspects who have fled from the police report that once the officer terminates the pursuit, they will slow down within a reasonable period.[/QUOTE] Safe alternatives exist [url]http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2013/10/31/starchase_police_gps_cannon_system_aims_to_stop_dangerous_high_speed_chases.html[/url] [B]BUT MOST IMPORTANTLY[/B] it comes down to one simple thing: protecting civilian lives is more important than catching criminals feel free to make arguments then read this post again then make the same argument again and so on in that fashion, it will be like I never left.
Only one person dies per day from a high speed chase in the US? Holy fuck, i thought itd be a lot more than that. Youre arguing about a number so low that most people here would be shocked that its so low. Based on that, about every other day, an innocent person dies. And one officer every six weeks? I almost cant believe its that low. " protecting civilian lives is more important than catching criminals" That is pretty silly. You protect the civilian, letting the criminal go, so that you have to protect another civilian while letting another criminal go, and it just repeats. Eventually, you smarten up and just nab the criminals which stops the civilians from being dangered in the first place. I doubt this country will ever just start letting criminals go
[QUOTE=FordLord;42796252]Chances are, the cops wont have a description of the guy. When a guy goes flying by a cop, he might be lucky enough to get the color of his skin and shirt. Not exactly helpful.[/QUOTE] At least you got their vehicle now, so impound that bitch. If you can't contact the owner and he never claims it, sell it at the next police auction and get way more than you would from a speeding ticket :v:
"182 innocent lives a year is worth it to enforce traffic laws" - FordLord As for the second part you still don't get it. Reread. All the information's there. I could spoon-feed it but it's time to be a big boy now.
[QUOTE=Mr. Someguy;42796375]At least you got their vehicle now, so impound that bitch. If you can't contact the owner and he never claims it, sell it at the next police auction and get way more than you would from a speeding ticket :v:[/QUOTE] Thats the thing, whos to say it was even the owner driving the car? Perhaps the real owner is on vacation somewhere, someone notices and decides to take his car. Cops try to pull him over because hes speeding, he runs. Car gets tagged, he eventually ditches it. Cops catch up, and end up impounding an innocent mans car
[QUOTE=FordLord;42796392]Thats the thing, whos to say it was even the owner driving the car? Perhaps the real owner is on vacation somewhere, someone notices and decides to take his car. Cops try to pull him over because hes speeding, he runs. Car gets tagged, he eventually ditches it. Cops catch up, and end up impounding an innocent mans car[/QUOTE] I never said you had to sell it the next day. It can sit in an impound lot for months, or even until the registration expires. If they can't contact the owner, and the owner never steps forward or says it's stolen, then it's fair game.
[QUOTE=FordLord;42796392]Thats the thing, whos to say it was even the owner driving the car? Perhaps the real owner is on vacation somewhere, someone notices and decides to take his car. Cops try to pull him over because hes speeding, he runs. Car gets tagged, he eventually ditches it. Cops catch up, and end up impounding an innocent mans car[/QUOTE] When he gets back he'll report it stolen dingus Use your imagination instead of playing what-if with everybody
Even if someone does come to claim it, that person has to pay the towing fee [I]and[/I] the impound fee. Which would probably total up much more than a speeding ticket.
[QUOTE=Mr. Someguy;42796415]Even if someone does come to claim it, that person has to pay the towing fee [I]and[/I] the impound fee. Which would probably total up much more than a speeding ticket.[/QUOTE] But that innocent man has to pay the impound fee! Clearly the alternative where they ram it and destroy the car is preferable for him!
[QUOTE=Venezuelan;42796387]"182 innocent lives a year is worth it to enforce traffic laws" - FordLord As for the second part you still don't get it. Reread. All the information's there. I could spoon-feed it but it's time to be a big boy now.[/QUOTE] Funny, when i didnt even say that :v: As far as i can see, you dont have information about what im talking about. If youre letting criminals go that were speeding, theyre just going to keep speeding until you actually give them a ticket. When someone speeds daily with no consequences, they keep speeding. Not stopping them is the exact opposite of protecting civilians [editline]8th November 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=Venezuelan;42796427]Clearly the alternative where they ram it and destroy the car is preferable for him![/QUOTE] What is automobile insurance? Do you not have that in Venezuela? A guy could get an even better car with the insurance money, usually anyways
[QUOTE=Venezuelan;42796387]"182 innocent lives a year is worth it to enforce traffic laws" - FordLord As for the second part you still don't get it. Reread. All the information's there. I could spoon-feed it but it's time to be a big boy now.[/QUOTE] Its weird that you say that because the public certainly thinks 182 lives a year is worth it otherwise they would condemn the police department policy regarding chasing people and breaking traffic laws to do so. Everyone can draw up better solutions to end the problem in hindsight, but when you're actually there and have to make a decision in an instant... you just go. You dont sit there and think "oh boy, I should just let this stolen car get away" -- you think "Someones $20k vehicle was reported stolen and I have it in front of me. I want this car. I'm going to get this car." If the son had just pulled over, and not ran from the cops, this would've ended a lot differently.
Just pull over and get out when a cop tells you to, if it's unlawful or whatever you can deal with that later.
I'm sorry but UK traffic police manage to stop vehicles without shooting the occupants in high speed chases, why can't American police do the same?
[QUOTE=Bengley;42797821]I'm sorry but UK traffic police manage to stop vehicles without shooting the occupants in high speed chases, why can't American police do the same?[/QUOTE] These cases are rare that's why they're in the news, we don't ever see "Police pull over guy without too much issue" as a headline. Also in the UK police probably have more resources they can call upon if needed since it's much more packed, for a small town of just 12k people they probably can't justify having all that extra equipment.
I love how Venezuelan keeps dumb spamming those who disagree with him and regurgitates the same awful argument over and over again.
[QUOTE=thelurker1234;42797837]These cases are rare that's why they're in the news, we don't ever see "Police pull over guy without too much issue" as a headline. Also in the UK police probably have more resources they can call upon if needed since it's much more packed, for a small town of just 12k people they probably can't justify having all that extra equipment.[/QUOTE] I guess that makes sense but I just can't help but feel they could have used a less lethal option.
[QUOTE=Bengley;42797870]I guess that makes sense but I just can't help but feel they could have used a less lethal option.[/QUOTE] Probably wasn't one readily available, and in the thick of that moment they didn't have much time to think. Pretty safe to say police officers don't WANT to kill people.
I always love police threads because people are absolutely convinced they can do a trained professional's job better than they can. I mean, come on, people, a solution to a problem isn't always the ideal solution, but some people have demonstrably no idea about what goes through a police officer's head. Don't get me wrong, I'm not defending the undeniably wrong police officers out there, like the ones that shoot completely harmless dogs. But stop pretending you can do a cop's job better than a cop, because the majority of them out there [I]are good at what they do.[/I]
[QUOTE=Bengley;42797870]I guess that makes sense but I just can't help but feel they could have used a less lethal option.[/QUOTE] You can't taze people during a car chase.
[QUOTE=Rangergxi;42798416]You can't taze people during a car chase.[/QUOTE]You'd have a better chance of tasing yourself than your target from the barbs just flying back and hitting you.
[QUOTE=Rangergxi;42798416]You can't taze people during a car chase.[/QUOTE] I don't necessarily mean taze, they could have boxed him in with several cars, they could have stunned him by taking a window out in his face. [url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yVYZRZ5dJks[/url] Much like this.
[QUOTE=T-Sonar.0;42797867]I love how Venezuelan keeps dumb spamming those who disagree with him and regurgitates the same awful argument over and over again.[/QUOTE] The reason I'm reposting shit is no one reads it and every argument they post is answered already. Like no one has posted any compelling counter at all. In fact, most have demonstrated multiple times (yourself included) that they don't fully understand my argument. If the kid didn't die but a random bystander did I guarantee you'd change your tune. But Facepunch will be Facepunch and saying "we should change police policy to prevent tragedy" is the same as saying "WOW FUCK THE PIG COPS ALL THEIR FAULT" to you guys
[QUOTE=Venezuelan;42800614]The reason I'm reposting shit is no one reads it and every argument they post is answered already. Like no one has posted any compelling counter at all. In fact, most have demonstrated multiple times (yourself included) that they don't fully understand my argument. If the kid didn't die but a random bystander did I guarantee you'd change your tune. But Facepunch will be Facepunch and saying "we should change police policy to prevent tragedy" is the same as saying "WOW FUCK THE PIG COPS ALL THEIR FAULT" to you guys[/QUOTE] Probably not, we'd likely blame the kid for it and say he deserved what came to him if he killed someone with the truck.
[QUOTE=areolop;42797673]Its weird that you say that because the public certainly thinks 182 lives a year is worth it otherwise they would condemn the police department policy regarding chasing people and breaking traffic laws to do so.[/QUOTE] They do. Do you think I'm the only one in America or something? [url]http://pursuitsafety.org/[/url] [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kristie's_Law[/url] [url]http://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/publications/law-enforcement-bulletin/march-2010/evidence-based-decisions-on-police-pursuits[/url] People who aren't against it might easily just not know about it. I'm trying to raise awareness but FP prefer's to plug it's ears and shout. Still others are hung up on myths about the benefits of police chases but yeah, if you're given all this information and still think chases for speeding or other minor infractions is okay because "only one person is killed every day" I do genuinely believe you are a sociopath and I'm not apologetic about that [QUOTE=areolop;42797673]Everyone can draw up better solutions to end the problem in hindsight, but when you're actually there and have to make a decision in an instant... you just go. You dont sit there and think "oh boy, I should just let this stolen car get away" -- you think "Someones $20k vehicle was reported stolen and I have it in front of me. I want this car. I'm going to get this car." If the son had just pulled over, and not ran from the cops, this would've ended a lot differently.[/quote] The point is you shouldn't have to make a split second decision, you should have a well-trained policy that tells you what to do which you recall in that split second. Humans are awful decision makers that's why policies are put in place. Saying "I have it in front of me. I want this car. I'm going to get this car." and not thinking of the repercussions is exactly my point: you aren't considering public safety, nor your own. You're thinking with adrenaline. That's bad for someone in a position in power. I want to minimize that. That's not ridiculous. That's not too much to ask. [editline]8th November 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=deadoon;42800831]Probably not, we'd likely blame the kid for it and say he deserved what came to him if he killed someone with the truck.[/QUOTE] yeah I'm sure the family of the victim will see it in the same way about their loved one being sacrificed to keep the streets clean of misdemeanors
[QUOTE=Venezuelan;42800960]They do. Do you think I'm the only one in America or something? [url]http://pursuitsafety.org/[/url] [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kristie's_Law[/url] [url]http://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/publications/law-enforcement-bulletin/march-2010/evidence-based-decisions-on-police-pursuits[/url] People who aren't against it might easily just not know about it. I'm trying to raise awareness but FP prefer's to plug it's ears and shout. Still others are hung up on myths about the benefits of police chases but yeah, if you're given all this information and still think chases for speeding or other minor infractions is okay because "only one person is killed every day" I do genuinely believe you are a sociopath and I'm not apologetic about that [/QUOTE] Plug our ears and shout? I knew about the dangers of police chases before this thread, it is called a fight or flight reaction. Myths? At the very least following them keeps tabs on them for assistance. If only 1 person is killed every day in america, that is little more than 1 in a million, there are medicines and actions you do at home that are probably more dangerous. Mitigating every danger is foolish, especially when the dangers are so low. [QUOTE] The point is you shouldn't have to make a split second decision, you should have a well-trained policy that tells you what to do which you recall in that split second. Humans are awful decision makers that's why policies are put in place. Saying "I have it in front of me. I want this car. I'm going to get this car." and not thinking of the repercussions is exactly my point: you aren't considering public safety, nor your own. You're thinking with adrenaline. That's bad for someone in a position in power. I want to minimize that. That's not ridiculous. That's not too much to ask. [/QUOTE] Ok, and follow a policy to the letter allows for that policy to be abused. If they broke off every chase that went through a populated area or active school zone, wouldn't it be a great idea to go to those areas to hide? Or to purposefully endanger people to get the police to stop following you? If I were in those positions and knew what the police would do, I'd abuse the fuck out of it. Use every tool to your advantage. [QUOTE] yeah I'm sure the family of the victim will see it in the same way about their loved one being sacrificed to keep the streets clean of misdemeanors[/QUOTE] This is why nobody is listening to you. You are acting like the end all and be all, being directly inflammatory and calling people out for having a different opinion. What I posted was an observed opinion, and you lash out at it like it was a veritably wrong to every standard fact. If you want people to listen to what you say you shouldn't be an asshole the entire time based on a few facts.
What I don't get is you guys seem to think I don't think the fleeing suspect is at fault which is retarded and I don't know how you could possibly take that away from my arguments unless you are just incapable of critical thinking and have to make every situation black and white morality. Two parties can be at fault, and one party can be wayyyy more at fault than the other. That doesn't mean the second party that only partially shares the blame can't do something to prevent this from happening. [editline]8th November 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=deadoon;42801148] If only 1 person is killed every day in america, that is little more than 1 in a million, there are medicines and actions you do at home that are probably more dangerous. Mitigating every danger is foolish, especially when the dangers are so low. [/QUOTE] mitigating a danger that is directly in our control and reaps no proportional reward is not foolish at all. [editline]8th November 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=deadoon;42801148] Ok, and follow a policy to the letter allows for that policy to be abused. If they broke off every chase that went through a populated area or active school zone, wouldn't it be a great idea to go to those areas to hide? Or to purposefully endanger people to get the police to stop following you? If I were in those positions and knew what the police would do, I'd abuse the fuck out of it. Use every tool to your advantage.[/QUOTE] this is why I'm angry this source has been posted [I]7 times now[/I] and people [I]still [/I]say arguments it covers [url]http://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/publications/law-enforcement-bulletin/march-2010/evidence-based-decisions-on-police-pursuits[/url] [QUOTE]In addition, research has shown that if the police refrain from chasing all offenders or terminate their pursuits, no significant increase in the number of suspects who flee would occur.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Venezuelan;42801167]What I don't get is you guys seem to think I don't think the fleeing suspect is at fault which is retarded and I don't know how you could possibly take that away from my arguments unless you are just incapable of critical thinking and have to make every situation black and white morality. Two parties can be at fault, and one party can be wayyyy more at fault than the other. That doesn't mean the second party that only partially shares the blame can't do something to prevent this from happening.[/QUOTE] And you go back to dumb rating without any backing behind it. Going gray and gray on it is pretty much backpedaling, when someone says that a person is at fault for something it is usually more of "this person is more at fault for the incident than anyone else". You could say it was a store owners fault he got robbed because he never installed any security system. Well yeah that is his fault, but the robber is the one which took advantage of that. See the point even if a bit of a crappy explanation? [QUOTE=Venezuelan;42801167] mitigating a danger that is directly in our control and reaps no proportional reward is not foolish at all. [/QUOTE] Just like how it is within our control to eat foods that are healthy, but we choose junk food? No more reward, but is far less good for us. [QUOTE] this is why I'm angry this source has been posted [I]7 times now[/I] and people [I]still [/I]say arguments it covers [url]http://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/publications/law-enforcement-bulletin/march-2010/evidence-based-decisions-on-police-pursuits[/url][/QUOTE] And the problem with that is that it sources a textbook, which does not cite the actual source of the fact. And leads me to believe that it is taken out of context, if we did not pursue the suspects, how do you expect them to be caught with current police forces without any changes as it suggests? I'd say get more plainclothes police and unmarked cruisers, pursue with the unmarked with an actual trailing out of sight. But that does not fit with the statment
[QUOTE=deadoon;42801148] This is why nobody is listening to you. You are acting like the end all and be all, being directly inflammatory and calling people out for having a different opinion. What I posted was an observed opinion, and you lash out at it like it was a veritably wrong to every standard fact. If you want people to listen to what you say you shouldn't be an asshole the entire time based on a few facts.[/QUOTE] you found that insulting? how sensitive are you? you really shouldn't be on a website that makes calling you "dumb" as easy as a simple click. I wasn't lashing out at all. and it's better than what the other side is doing, which is being an asshole based on absolutely no facts.
My friend saw the tire fly off the truck. Hes at ISU... Also cam footage: [video=youtube;jD91hm57y_U]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jD91hm57y_U[/video] Here are some pictures he took: [thumb]https://scontent-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/575729_10202504619235452_1778541527_n.jpg[/thumb] [thumb]https://scontent-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash4/1452073_10202504617995421_539399240_n.jpg[/thumb] [thumb]https://scontent-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash4/1395814_10202504617155400_2130361738_n.jpg[/thumb] [thumb]https://fbcdn-sphotos-g-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/1450147_10202504616755390_796737077_n.jpg[/thumb]
[QUOTE=deadoon;42801215]And you go back to dumb rating without any backing behind it. [/QUOTE] [IMG]http://puu.sh/5crA1.png[/IMG] seriously dude [editline]8th November 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=deadoon;42801215] Going gray and gray on it is pretty much backpedaling, when someone says that a person is at fault for something it is usually more of "this person is more at fault for the incident than anyone else". You could say it was a store owners fault he got robbed because he never installed any security system. Well yeah that is his fault, but the robber is the one which took advantage of that. See the point even if a bit of a crappy explanation?[/QUOTE] gray on gray isn't backpedaling it's reality. this isn't the movies. I also never once said or implied the police were "at fault" that's just what you guys chose to perceive in bifurcating the situation no victim blaming is obviously another thing entirely. I'm not trying to "blame" at all, I'm trying to argue that responsibility is shared. this is not a crazy revolutionary concept this is a belief the FBI and police share.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.