Chance to have another go at the POPO

**marty** · 21st June 2010, 09:54

Originally Posted by DangerousBastard

Kids do think about fines and keeping their drivers' license - it's very important to them.

and if they don't have a driver's licence?

further, my experience is that once they have an unpayable amount of fines (say over $1000 worth) they no longer care, as the writing is on the wall. increasing driving age to 18, roadside removal of licence if breached or offended against, or removal of the car if they have no licence, would go a long way to reducing problems.

**MSTRS:Me** · 21st June 2010, 09:55

Who's being rude? I just pointed out the contradiction in your post.
Whilst most would be worried about extra penalties etc, and/or would stop anyway, there are a significant number who just don't care. They are the ones we hear about getting fines wiped etc, and would drive whilst disqualified too. That number is increasing. And in ChCh appears to be a huge problem. (how many boi-racer problems do we hear about compared to that city?)

**Katman** · 21st June 2010, 09:57

I have no problem with someone who kills themselves while trying to evade the police.

I have a very real problem though, if an innocent person is killed as a result of the pursuit.

It's all well and good saying that it would then be the fault of the person doing the runner, but it certainly doesn't bring that innocent person back.

This is why I feel the police need to take a very close look at the way they conduct their pursuits.

**CookMySock** · 21st June 2010, 09:57

Originally Posted by marty

and if they don't have a driver's licence?

further, my experience is that once they have an unpayable amount of fines (say over $1000 worth) they no longer care, as the writing is on the wall. increasing driving age to 18, roadside removal of licence if breached or offended against, or removal of the car if they have no licence, would go a long way to reducing problems.

Agreed. I wouldn't loan my car to an unlicensed driver with a "history."

My kids are do-gooders in comparison to what you're talking about, so thats out of my league.

Steve

**ynot slow** · 21st June 2010, 10:07

Originally Posted by DangerousBastard

What they don't get, is how they are at risk. All kids think they are invulnerable - it's just how they are wired.

Steve

True,and how often at a party do you see kids sitting listening in awe at older folks driving/riding exploits of years gone by,when the mk3 zephyr would just do the ton,the bsa similar,all the while the person hopped into the car pissed and drove home,knowing unless they did a stupid act the cops couldn't pull them up for dic.I know my uncle only got pulled up for dic 30yrs ago as he went down a newly made 1 way street the wrong way lol.

Times have changed but now the kids have cars capable of 2000km plus,with power steering,power disc brakes,airbags etc,all aids not available 25-30yrs ago,and the plethora of front wheel drive cars.The old escort,cortina etc was fun to try handbrakes,sliding etc in a paddock,also same with the dirt bikes we had on farms.

**Ixion** · 21st June 2010, 11:18

Persoanlly, I'm really conflicted on this.

On the one hand, I figure that having a "no pursuit" policy is an invitation for dangerous or drunk drivers to think "I can get away with it, if a cop tries to stop me , I'll just run, and they can't chase me". Not to mention the real bad buggers with warrants out, or a car loaded with drugs or firearms. And, the reason that the cops have noticed the vehicle in the first place , is maybe because of dodgy driving. So just leaving it alone may be dangerous to the general public anyway.

But on the other hand , pursuits do seem to have a habit of ending in tears. That's not a question of blame , just practical reality. Is chasing going to cause more grief overall than letting someone 'get away with it ' ? . Bearing in mind, we can say that a driver who gets killed running 'deserves it', but often completely innocent people end up getting caught up in the action and killed or injured. I dunno.

I don't see the "get the rego, send a ticket" as being much help. It's pretty easy to have an untraceable number plate (or stolen plate/vehicle) , and people who are going to be all legit in that respect probably aren't the ones who are going to run anyway.

And there are already extra penalties for 'failing to stop'.

I do think that probably the introduction of demerits and the 28 day license suspension thing for 140kph has made running a lot more attractive.

When I was young , very few vehicles could sustain more than 150 kph for any length of time.If they could get there at all, few could. So a speed dangerous charge wasn't likely to be an issue. No demerits, no licence suspension, it made sense to stop and cop the fine.

But now it's real easy to find yourself north of 140kph, maybe without even intending to. So , if you're looking at suspension anyway, or if you're on 80 or 90 demerits, then running seems a lot more attractive.

And of course, we only hear of the ones that fail. A hell of a lot of the time, it works.

The old story , that legislators have wrestled with (or should wrestle with) since Mr Draco's epic fail. Increase the penalties for anything, and you make evasion more attractive.

I do note that those who crash often seem to be very bad drivers/riders. Or maybe pissed/stoned. And oddly, many of the crashes are NOT high speed ones (eg, < 200kph) . Often the pursued driver seems to lose it at relatively low speeds.

**Hiflyer** · 21st June 2010, 11:24

Originally Posted by DangerousBastard

Adults must learn that kids aren't going to get it.

Obviously neither are the adults

**duckonin** · 21st June 2010, 11:38

Originally Posted by ynot slow

True,and how often at a party do you see kids sitting listening in awe at older folks driving/riding exploits of years gone by,when the mk3 zephyr would just do the ton,the bsa similar,all the while the person hopped into the car pissed and drove home,knowing unless they did a stupid act the cops couldn't pull them up for dic.I know my uncle only got pulled up for dic 30yrs ago as he went down a newly made 1 way street the wrong way lol.

Times have changed but now the kids have cars capable of 2000km plus,with power steering,power disc brakes,airbags etc,all aids not available 25-30yrs ago,and the plethora of front wheel drive cars.The old escort,cortina etc was fun to try handbrakes,sliding etc in a paddock,also same with the dirt bikes we had on farms.

Good post, the first bit is 100% kids have ears,yep...

**onearmedbandit** · 21st June 2010, 11:49

Install remote 'cut-off' switches in all vehicles, including motorcycles. Any sign of failing to stop, the car/bike is killed. Sure, it invades personal liberties. Sure it targets everyone, including the law abiding citizens who would never run. Sure a motorcycle that instantly loses power may drop. But no one will ever do a runner again. There's your answer.

Note - I don't agree with this, and I fear the day legislation like this is introduced. But this is the only way you will eliminate 'runners'.

**Ixion** · 21st June 2010, 11:52

I didn't vote BTW. I think the issues are far more complex than a simple point-the-finger blame assignment.

**onearmedbandit** · 21st June 2010, 12:07

I did. I boiled it down to the basics. Which are (in my eyes), police doing their job to protect the public, driver fails to pull over (chooses to ignore the laws required of them). Police persue said driver (could be anything from a little old lady who had an extra brandy at her friends to a child rapist with a boot load of 7yr olds). Driver fails to stop, crashes and dies. How can the police be to blame for that? Should they just have got his rego plate and waited until he disposed of the bodies and hope he opens his mail, or still lives at that address? Should the police have backed off until they received an evaluation of the driver?

Or should the driver just have pulled over when requested?

As much as we don't like certain road laws. As much as we think some police are arseholes. As much as we talk shit onlne about what wankers the police are but wouldn't say boo to their faces (does this sound like someone you know of?). As much as we think the laws don't apply to us, they do. You break them, that's your choice. But be prepared for the police to do their job, which is apprehending those that pose a risk to the general public. Sure, in an ideal world pursuits would always end with the criminal with his swagbag and mask apprehended and no one else involved/injured/killed. But in an ideal world there would have been no criminal in the first place...

**neels** · 21st June 2010, 12:46

It's a problem that will never be solved, regardless of policy, penalties etc. At least this time they didn't take anybody else with them.

It sounds like calling this one a chase is stretching the description, more a case of the police turned on the lights and u-turned to chase, the driver took off and the police arrived at the accident scene to clean up the mess. It's pretty hard to blame the police for the dead one driving way too fast and crashing their car just because they did their job and attempted to stop someone driving erratically. There's a big difference between being right on the bumper of the car when it crashes, and being 800m away and not even seeing it happen.

And as previously posted, it's easy to do scary fast speeds in a modern car which is all good until you abruptly run out of talent. When I was a foolish young driver my cortina could do 100mph, but you damn well knew you were doing it and wouldn't have dreamed of trying to run from the cops in the thing, now 160kph is no big deal.

**Ixion** · 21st June 2010, 13:09

Originally Posted by StuffToday

The Government is hinting at tougher penalties for fleeing drivers

Like, tougher than going dead ? Let's try Logic 101 shall we

At present : If you're good you get away. Score. If not, you crash and die.
But, lots of people think the odds are good enough to chance it

Proposed: Tougher penalties. If they catch you. But if you're good you get way.Score. If not, you crash and die. So, why will people think ithat "tougher penalties" will make it not worth it?

I despair of the intellectucal capabilities of our illustrious leaders.

**onearmedbandit** · 21st June 2010, 13:13

Agreed 100%. Tougher penalties are not the answer. Education won't work either. Back to my remote shut-down device. That'll work.

**jahrasti** · 21st June 2010, 13:15

Originally Posted by Ixion

Like, tougher than going dead ? Let's try Logic 101 shall we

At present : If you're good you get away. Score. If not, you crash and die.
But, lots of people think the odds are good enough to chance it

Proposed: Tougher penalties. If they catch you. But if you're good you get way.Score. If not, you crash and die. So, why will people think ithat "tougher penalties" will make it not worth it?

I despair of the intellectucal capabilities of our illustrious leaders.

So thats it is it? You get away or you crash and die.

I despair of the intellectucal capabilities of our illustrious posters!