Chance to have another go at the POPO

[Ixion]

That's a very good point. It has a major effect on the stats.

Say I am tootling along somewhat illegally, and Officer Bumblebee spots me, but has to turn round and wait for a gap etc etc , so that I am a couple of kilometres away before he gets after me. He belts up the road with his lights and siren on , whilst I am still tootling along oblivious to the fact that he's trying to catch me (let's assume he's a mufti). But, when I do see him behind me, I immediately pull over and stop. Which is pretty much the story with 99% of cases, I imagine.

Now, is that a pursuit?

Because if it is , the 99% figure quoted somewhere (by TGW I think) is sort of meaningless. What one would like to know is how many actual *chases*, ie where the naughty person is actually running, end up in tears.

[miloking]

That's a very good point. It has a major effect on the stats.

Say I am tootling along somewhat illegally, and Officer Bumblebee spots me, but has to turn round and wait for a gap etc etc , so that I am a couple of kilometres away before he gets after me. He belts up the road with his lights and siren on , whilst I am still tootling along oblivious to the fact that he's trying to catch me (let's assume he's a mufti). But, when I do see him behind me, I immediately pull over and stop. Which is pretty much the story with 99% of cases, I imagine.

Now, is that a pursuit?

Because if it is , the 99% figure quoted somewhere (by TGW I think) is sort of meaningless. What one would like to know is how many actual *chases*, ie where the naughty person is actually running, end up in tears.

i thought its not considered pursuit until driver is made aware without any doubt that he is being signaled to stop..so in theory up until mr.bumblebee catches up with you its not a pursuit.

However if you notice in the news article it lists Mr.Brown's "accident" as a victim of police pursuit...and we all know that it couldnt have been one until the mystery ute was aware of being signaled to stop. But i guess its sounds better that way..."victim of pursuit" vs "victim of police stupidity"... and speaking of stupidity, kind of wonder how is that "investigation" coming along there Mr.Tooman

[Ixion]

Eh? What news article. I assumed that the OP was about this one .

No Mr Brown and no ute.

[miloking]

Eh? What news article. I assumed that the OP was about this one .

No Mr Brown and no ute.

I didnt read the nzherald one, there was a clone of that article on stuff...and at the bottom they had listed last years pursuit accidents that cost lives...and one of them was Mr.Brown, and several others including few where innocent people died that were not the "runners"...mostly passengers etc.
but yeah... probably just media labeling things as it suits them.

[onearmedbandit]

Actually, I'm going to campaign the government on fitting 'remote-kill' devices to all road vehicles. I'm going to do this tomorrow. I don't care whether it saves lives or not, but it will end threads like this one.

[The Stranger:Me]

Actually, I'm going to campaign the government on fitting 'remote-kill' devices to all road vehicles. I'm going to do this tomorrow. I don't care whether it saves lives or not, but it will end threads like this one.

While you're at it can you do something about the waving, oil, chain lube and "please help me cause I'm too stoopid to decide which bike I want" threads.

[miloking]

While you're at it can you do something about the waving, oil, chain lube and "please help me cause I'm too stoopid to decide which bike I want" threads.

i dont mind the oil/chain lube threads but those "getting my full what bike to get" are killing me too

[Genestho]

What is a "pursuit" ? Is it when an officer turns his lights on and pulls a car over, or is it when he is involved in a high-speed extended chase?

Steve

I found the following definition/ info in a report - "Pursuits the case for change"> link - dated 05, it's got some good info including a study and data from pg 44 regarding fatal pursuits from '96 to 2002

"Neither the Crimes Act nor the Land Transport Act defines the word “pursuit”. "


“A pursuit exists when the driver of a motor vehicle knowing that they are being
signalled by a police officer to stop, fails to stop, takes deliberate action to escape
apprehension and Police commence action to pursue the escaping vehicle.”

"The key ingredients of a pursuit are the intention by one party to flee or
try to escape and the intention by another party to pursue and apprehend."

Looking at the original 04 - 07 police pursuit summary I posted previously..it shows:

"Maximum pursuit speeds spanned a wide range, from 15 to 230 km/hr; however, fewer than 2 percent were under 50km/hr.

-Less than 1 percent were over 200km/hr.
- 51.9% of cases maximum speeds were between 75 and 125km/hr
- 34.4% were reported to have been between 125 and 175 km/hr.
- 29.9% - The largest single category was 100-124km/hr
- 22% percent at 75-99/hr"

That's a very good point. It has a major effect on the stats.

What one would like to know is how many actual *chases*, ie where the naughty person is actually running, end up in tears.

Indeed, from the original quote and link I posted - should've have been bolded also:

(So, from 04-07, there were 6000 recorded "pursuits")

"In the 63 cases where crashes occurred, 106 people in offending vehicles were reported to have been seriously injured.

Fatalities to those in offender vehicles accounted for 0.2 percent of all pursuit outcomes (10 crashes in which 12 people in offender vehicles were killed).

There were no police officer fatalities from pursuits and only one reported injury crash, involving 3 police officers.

Similarly, no other road users or pedestrians were killed during these pursuits, although 14 people not involved in the event were reported as seriously injured."
(Apologies for the rather large post!)

[davereid]

I would be absolutely wild if a police pursuit resulted in the death or injury of an innocent member of my family.

But I think a failure to pursue would result in an even greater rate of run-offs, resulting in even more risk for me and other innocent people.

What has changed over the years ?

1) Higher penalties create a motive to flee.
When I was younger, I seldom stopped for the Traffic Department until I had "had a go". But I never tried to get away at 10/10ths of my ability, because the penalties were not that serious. I was unlikely to lose my license/vehicle etc on the side of the road if caught. It was never going to happen that if caught my car would be confiscated, or crushed. And the fine was never that high that it was beyond reasonable reach. So I would "have a go", but would soon stop if it got dangerous.

2) The affordable car is now fast and reliable.
Many 20 year old cars with only minor tweaking are now a match for the standard police car. The runner has become popular because it is so often successful.

3) We spend 18 years telling young kids they are special, and they can't be disciplined, hurt or made to feel threatened. They believe it.

4) All young people know they wont crash.

[Patrick]

Kids are kids, mate. They don't think. If the fuzz are going to chase them then they are going to run - it's 50% fun and 50% "it will never happen to me."

Adults must learn that kids aren't going to get it. You can't fix this. You have to find another way.

I blame these kids parents - for not smacking them up side of ear at a young age....

I don't get it - if the pigs have their rego plate then why not post the ticket to them in the mail? So fucking what if they don't to pull him over - build a fucking bridge.

Coz the address changed 5 houses ago, coz the car is stolen, coz the driver is drunk/being a dickhead/disqualified or all of these, coz the ticket means nothing.... just a few ideas.....

If chasing them down is going to be a disaster then why do it, other than just on principle? I'd hazard a guess there is far more likely to be a horrific outcome in the chase-down then if they just let them go.

Just so long as its a disaster only to the lawbreaker. That would be sweet.

Why not apply legislation to fix it? Take the drink-driving situation for example - a driver refuses to supply a blood sample and faces a far more hefty fine than if they had just taken the hit. Why not have an "evading police" charge, where a vehicle clearly attempts to evade police then they face a far more hefty fine than if they just had stopped. Surely it's not hard to run a camera in the patrol unit? Why not just triple the fine for "failing to stop"? That will make them think.

Yer what? The penalty is the same. The outcome is the same. They don't even have to pay analysts fees or doctors fees if they refuse outright. They actually win.... As for the camera idea, now that is a great idea.. Next thing you know, those cops in the States will be doing that.... hang on.... what??? They have already had them for over 30 years???? What is NZ's excuse for not having them then??????????????????
Steve

The kids who do a runner are thick idiots,probably in the slllllowwww class at school(if they went)but get this the only things they read and take in is when the police inspector says basically if speeds get too fast for the area the cops will abandone said chase,so these dipshits know go hard the cops will cancel the pursuit.

And most of these dipshits have no job,have $15000 fines and if caught get 3mths jail if community work hasn't been done satisfactory,(usually fines wiped at $100hr/community work)so they bleat about losing their car,tough shit losers.I have a $120 fine due in next 3 weeks or so,hmmm 1 hour community service please.

Make that 10 minutes community work for that $120 - time off for good behaviour................

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.

You should see the policy. Viewed and reviewed, compulsory training for all...., The vast majority do stop..... just the oxygen thieves don't, and that is the problem......

$10000 and 3 months in jail... i believe? is that correct...

Maximum. No one gets maximums.............. or anywhere near a maximum............... Convicted and Discharged was the norm, so that really taught them........................ NOT!!!!!!

The only change was on 1 Dec 2009, when the law changed for Failing to Stop. There is now a mandatory additional disqualification added, to be on top of ANY disqualification imposed for any other charge.

Your logic is excellent if every pursuit resulted in a death I guess.

So long as it is the oxygen thief.... that would be good.

We could learn alot from the USA. Over there they have several means to pursuits and catching crims.

The PITT maneouvre? Had it here, and the bosses said, "nah, it scratches the paint so you had better stop that....." And they shoot em over there....... Hey! There is a fix.....

........ chase should be withdrawn and helicopter or backup collected ahead. Business as usual then.....? Except there is only the one copper chopper in NZ. And Auckland has that.....

in usa they use road spikes, so do we.....helicopters, so do we.... but only in Auckland......cars as weapons and forcing cars off roads, so DID we..... up until 1997..... and guns.(Yep.... got them too.... but not really allowed to use them...... They seem to be affective, and not kill too many bystanders either..........................

Perhaps popo here should use more of the Eagle helicopter instead of pushing young dumb ass drivers.

Perhaps people should see just how often the helecopter is used for pursuits, armed robberies, burglars on, whatever you like, in a city of over a million, 24/7.... only in Auckland though....... One chopper can only be used in one place at one time. Pursuits go off all too often....... in different parts, at the same time.... at times......

i thought its not considered pursuit until driver is made aware without any doubt that he is being signaled to stop..so in theory up until mr.bumblebee catches up with you its not a pursuit.

Correct......

However if you notice in the news article it lists Mr.Brown's "accident" as a victim of police pursuit...and we all know that it couldnt have been one until the mystery ute was aware of being signaled to stop. But i guess its sounds better that way..."victim of pursuit" vs "victim of police stupidity"... and speaking of stupidity, kind of wonder how is that "investigation" coming along there Mr.Tooman

Surprised the media didn't use that as a headline......

On Closeup, they mentioned that Mr Oxygen Thief was already disqualified. An independant witness was saying how bad his dickhead driving was already and that the crash was done and dusted before the cops pulled into view.......

NO loss.

And according to the cross his dipshit mates have put up for him, he has a Fucking Tiny Penis apparently......