Police chase survey

[candor]

Responses fro m general public sought
http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/NSLLQ5J

At above link is a survey trying to find out why Kiwi muppets flee Police, and what options to stop the related trauma are favored by the Public at this stage. Should be quick to do. It's for SUPP (Stop Unnecessary Police Pursuits) - the Kiwi version of Voices Against Unnecessary Police Pursuits - which is being set up with help of Candy Priano (whose teen daughter was an innocent victim in 2001) and her massive campaign group, which is US law enforcement advised.

We're presenting on NZs situation to U.S. Voices next conference, which presentation this local survey on causes and supported penalties may help to shape. Incidentally shoot them is not in the multi choice options, but a comments section is with this idea looking popular... though not many votes are in as its new.

We really want it to reflect the general public view without bias to special interests.

As Police have their own surveys already on this, we ask that ONLY those Police who've been in chases with bad outcomes OF SERIOUS INJURY OR DEATH, or those family members of Police who've actually been physically hurt in chases participate.
Thanks to anyone taking the time.

[Clean_up]

So only police can do the survey? Or anyone can do, just if you're a police officer only do it if you've been in a chase that's gone arse up?

[candor]

No everyone over 10 ie who might be tall enough to drive/ride can - but we want Police and their family not to, not unless they or their family fit the criteria of having suffered chase harm.
Otherwise the survey could just end up biased by some Policey type view (whatever that might be).

[Motu]

So you want it biased anti policey? Good plan - come here because we are all so anti police.

Looking at the survey,there doesn't seem to be much option for increasing police chases,and for harsher penalties when they do catch them.It's all soft options...give them a cuddle and tell them don't be a naughty boy.They need to stop the runners,not stop the chases.

[candor]

Doh - getting MOST responses from cops which can easily happen if they decide to sabo destroys the aim for it to be a public survey. I note Police Assn surveys dont consult the public. Those whose opinions are likely significant and well considered are ones who've seen shit happen, and they ARE asked to participate - even though this may still bias the survey somewhat... given their views may be more emotive one way or another than other cops.

If you think getting most responses from the public will bias it anti policey that doesn't say much of your view of the public !

There are many options for harsher penalties - look again after researching the status quo of penalties. Currently 1/4 of runners get no added penalty - we have options there right up to the toughest anyone in the debat has suggested - jail (we put typical times seen in harsher countries) . Also when people kill they usually only get some low level sentence under reckles or drunk charges and only occasionally manslaughter. We've put the option there of delivering the max sentence only under the first charges or a manslaughter charge mandatory for repeat offenders... soft options or the toughest politically feasible (as we thought)?

[Motu]

And cops don't see shit happen?

I'd like to see runners better educated on running.If you and your car can't get away from a pimply faced young cop in a Commodore,then your driving and the vehicle need improving.Driver training,and focus on car handing,not looks.The problem is these dickheads can't do a runner,they always crash.

[phill-k]

Doh - getting MOST responses from cops which can easily happen if they decide to sabo destroys the aim for it to be a public survey. I note Police Assn surveys dont consult the public. Those whose opinions are likely significant and well considered are ones who've seen shit happen, and they ARE asked to participate - even though this may still bias the survey somewhat... given their views may be more emotive one way or another than other cops.

If you think getting most responses from the public will bias it anti policey that doesn't say much of your view of the public !

There are many options for harsher penalties - look again after researching the status quo of penalties. Currently 1/4 of runners get no added penalty - we have options there right up to the toughest anyone in the debat has suggested - jail (we put typical times seen in harsher countries) . Also when people kill they usually only get some low level sentence under reckles or drunk charges and only occasionally manslaughter. We've put the option there of delivering the max sentence only under the first charges or a manslaughter charge mandatory for repeat offenders... soft options or the toughest politically feasible (as we thought)?

I attempted to complete your survey but your questions are either designed to attract a specific bias toward more namby pamby pc management of a problem that can be answered simply by much tougher penalties such as prison time and confiscation of the vehicle involved regardless of who owns it, until we accept that some NZer's will always treat our laws and and society with contempt, and whilst our judiciary hand out minimal sentences, this problem will only grow worse. Unfortunately if you drive on or use our roads you are at risk of dieing as a result of someone breaking the law. Whether that be a drunk, someone being careless, or someone evading the law.
Our NZ Police are not reckless by and large, I'm sure if you were to average out the km's they do as a ratio of the accidents they have it will be well under the national average, and no I'm not a police officer nor am I particularly fond of some of their roading policies but unfortunately they must design their policing around the lowest common denominator, and in NZ's case as is often demonstrated that's not very high, a case in point the last lowlife to die after being told to stop by the police.

Your survey I believe will not represent the true attitudes of Mr & Mrs NZ, on the one hand you ask police not to complete it but wish those that have been the unfortunate victims of these offenders to express their bias, but you don't offer those victims the possibility of the death penalty, if you had I'm sure they would understandably vote for that, as barbaric as it is, the same as instructing the Police not to pursue naughty drivers is barbaric as well.

[candor]

I don't get you - prison time and car confiscation ARE in the options. And if you don't think these choices were tough enough there is a comments section to addd your own ideas.

[bogan]

After a breif look I also found it too biased to what you want to hear. The last sections, you can't put some options in block capitals and some not when it's multi choice. And I'm sorry, but I think anyone significant that you present the results to will take one look at the survey and biff em.

[candor]

Ah well if it is biased then I guess we can say this represents our supporters views of ways forward, though interestingly those who put the Q's together were quite anti the penalty options, seeing them as too hardline by far. So I thought we had it right..
not sure what you mean about block letters - it had some hiccups when we tried it but mostly slowness to register choices. Its free.

[davereid]

Its a catch 22 for police.

If they dont chase, then simply fleeing will become the routine way of dealing with the issue of a ticket.

On the other hand, I would hate to lose a loved family member to a chase, over something minor.

When we increased penalties for minor offences, added things like road side suspension of licence, and vehicle impoundment, we were asking for chases.

I generally dont speed, I try and obey the law by and large, acc fees excepted.

But I must admit, that if I were just giving the BMW a bit of extra snot to pass that smelly old sheep truck, and an oncoming police car turned its disco light on I would do the math.

If stopping guaranteed me road side licence suspension, and I was already rocking away from the police car at my 140 plus, and his 100 in the other direction, I can't put my hand on my heart and say I would not run.

And if density of traffic, proximity to a safe haven, and my local knowledge made me sure I would get away, then I would be very tempted.

[Kendog]

Responses fro m general public sought
http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/NSLLQ5J

At above link is a survey trying to find out why Kiwi muppets flee Police, and what options to stop the related trauma are favored by the Public at this stage.

Question 3 is two very different questions, why would they be combined into one question?

Can you explain Question 4, what is the relevance of my cultural background and my best contribution to society have to do with this survey?

Can you explain Question 8, what is the 'foreign model'?

Can you explain Question 9, why would the survey force a minimum of 5 suggested tougher penalties to stop people running. That makes the respondent have to agree to the suggested tougher penalties even if they don't.

Can you explain "worst kill rate per capita in the OECD predicament"

Thanks

[Toaster]

Responses fro m general public sought
http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/NSLLQ5J

At above link is a survey trying to find out why Kiwi muppets flee Police

Given that the police minister is a woman you could entitle it:

"Why do MUPPETS run from MISS PIGGY?"

[candor]

Question 3 is two very different questions, why would they be combined into one question?

Can you explain Question 4, what is the relevance of my cultural background and my best contribution to society have to do with this survey?

Can you explain Question 8, what is the 'foreign model'?

Can you explain Question 9, why would the survey force a minimum of 5 suggested tougher penalties to stop people running. That makes the respondent have to agree to the suggested tougher penalties even if they don't.

Can you explain "worst kill rate per capita in the OECD predicament"

Thanks

1. The Q about friends or family who were innocent getting hurt was accidentally omitted from an option list and if we went to add it back in then the survey claimed it would wipe all prior answers so it had to go elsewhere - the survey has a limit of 10 questions so we put it with the sex question as losing some sex info wasn't so bad.
2. To see if like sex etc cultures might have different biases to their answers, initiatives may not be one size fits all.
3. The best contrib to society question is both make for friendly tone and to see if many runners had actually gone on to better things. Yes I se the bias - we could have asked for peoples least proud actions too but is that polite lol?
4. Foreign model ='s penalties or policies etc as used overseas (these often have surprising sameness)
5. I think that was a flaw, but I think the option is there to opt out of the question and make ones view clear in comments instead (which some people have done)
6. this worst kill rate means that 5% of our toll is today chase related, that's 5% of a relatively high toll, when the next worst scenarios in other countries (usually with better tolls) are that up to 2% of their toll is chase related (Source Dr Alpert/pursuit watch). Before 2003 we were on a respectable wicket with 1-2 deaths a year on average the prior 7. But -19 chase deaths the last year out of about 4 million population - I challenge you to find a higher per capita rate in any OECD country.

Mmm I wasn't really wanting to debate on, it's done "to death" (no pun intended)

[PrincessBandit]

While I applaud the time and effort put into compiling those questions and scenarios I wondered, like others, what the relevance of some of the questions were e.g. societal contribution. I also wonder how many "offenders" would actually be bothered filling in the survey. Once again the old preaching-to-the-converted seems to prevail, although even then most of us here seem to favour allowing the police every tool available to apprehend offenders, including pursuit.

It bothers me that the over-riding aspect of your agenda is to do away with this. Catching someone red-handed is sometimes the best option, given that most offenders are well rehearsed liars with mates only too happy to provide false alibis.