I'd be awfully suprised to learn any regular politard poster could get on a jury. I'm aware enough of mainstream America to know that no one here holds views that would be considered "normal", myself included.

As for me, I've never had to serve on a jury. The times I've been summoned, I've walked in, wearing a full Class A uniform, fresh haircut shined boots and brass. For some reason they never want me...

ETA: I guess now I'll just go in spouting off about how mandatory minimums are often too short and the problem with the death penalty is we don't utilize it enough, the process takes too long, and I believe the range of crimes prosecutors seek the death penalty for should be increased drastically, to include theft, armed robbery, etc.

Wow, only 20%!? I guess we should be using pursuit MORE frequently?

Well, since it's uninteresting to you to discuss when the police should chase, is your stance still pretty much the police should chase "less" but you're not interested in discussing when those times should be?

Also, please cite where I said we should be chasing more? I'm assuming that's what that remark was meant to imply.

well you've argued that

* chases = bad guys get caught

* 20% isn't unacceptable

obvious conclusion is obvious. if you're not worried about a 20% injury rate and you want to catch more bad guys, we should be LOOSENING chase rules.

Slightly more than 1% of those chases resulted in injuries to innocent bystanders. Honestly, I wouldn't care if 50% or even 80% of chases ended in injuries to the fleeing persons. Do you know why? Because 100% of them could prevent the injuries they suffer by simply pulling over.

OK so that doesn't really change anything. Whatever the number is currently you don't seem to see a problem with it.

I also like the implicit assumption that suspects have zero worth as human beings and that they're all interchangeable. You use the "AXE MURDERER THO" argument but only because you know it's emotionally appealing, you actually don't see any difference between an axe murderer and a shoplifter yourself. It boils down to "they runnin, they challengin MAH AUTHORATAH, they disrupting the social order, ANYTHING GOES at that point, guilty or not isn't really relevant whatever happens we have zero culpability."

nice.

lol is this for real?

Does this same line of reasoning apply to when people are hurt in other areas. I mean if the police kick in a door is it ok if 100% of them get shot, I mean they could have avoided it by going to the right house.

So you are ok with a 16 year old kid dieing in a car crash because he took his neighbors car for a joy ride and now he freaks out when the police pull up behind him?

I am interested in the spike strips and similar devices. It seems these can be deployed without having a chase, just by observing where the car is going.

Kind of a funny story about spike strips, I used to have a brother in law that was a cop. The bad guy got away because they deployed the spike strips improperly and the police ran over them.

It's a sad situation, but this is different than fighting injuries etc, because these injuries are, in the most true sense, self inflicted.

I refuse to blame a police officer because someone dies because they refused to pull over. Traffic accidents are the result of the driver.

Spike strips are a cool idea, we used them with some frequency at my agency, but the issue is that traffic conditions are nearly never ideal for spike strips in a more metropolitan area.

This analogy would be much more appropriate if the police realized they were in the wrong house and turned their guns on themselves.

Sad situation, not your fault though.

Yea, "They chose to drive recklessly and wreck, injuring themselves" = the quoted above.

.

You missed the second part of that quote bro. Sure it was an accident though, right?

it didn't change anything.

Cool story bro. Thanks for stopping by.

What % of those injured pay for their own health insurance? I don't want to see 50K bills for some joker wanted for petty theft, if he's a murderer on a murder spree it's worth it IMO.

I'd imagine that most of the bills are footed by the agency, since (save a small few) I've never seen someone apprehended after a chase who could afford to pay their own bond, let alone pay someone else's medical bills.

I agree with you about the petty theft v murder argument, this issue is, how can you possibly know? You may know at that point who that vehicle is registered through, but you have no idea who's actually inside.

That's the issue. I've heard a few suggestions that actually seemed to work to solve the "who's in the car?" question, but didn't really agree with any because they all seemed to encroach horribly on personal liberty, typically in the right to privacy area.

Wow.

Gah, I know, such an uncaring sociopath huh?

Wow, and you were complaining about people putting words in your mouth earlier?

Dbl do you have any sympathy for people who die of lung cancer from smoking?

Well, I don't believe running from the police creates quite the same chemical dependency issues that a 30+ yr nicotine addict has, so it's not quite the same, but yes, I do.

I don't think these people feel a habitual need to run from the police. I think they're doing it because they're either criminals, or just plain stupid, although likely both.

But as you mentioned, smoking can be a series of years and years of "bad" decisions. Fleeing a cop is a lapse of judgment that lasts seconds, or maybe a minute or two. Is that really all it takes for you to say that you wouldn't care if the person in question had an 80% chance of being injured? Really?