Side effects of limiting police action - people wont stop to get pulled over.

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Zorba

Lifer
Oct 22, 1999
15,244
10,817
136
We could take away their drivers license for 10 years, on a first-offense no matter what. No "work-permit" BS and no slack whatsoever.

You get caught driving even once it becomes mandatory lifetime license revocation.

AND then a hefty fine on top of the above.
Taking a DL does nothing. Take and sell the car. The problem is even in high speed chase states the suspect usually gets off pretty easy.
 

HomerJS

Lifer
Feb 6, 2002
36,730
28,908
136
I suspect all the shootings of unarmed black men for traffic stops is contributing
 
  • Like
Reactions: Zorba

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
50,422
14,336
136
WA state passed that law because high speed police chases were getting innocent bystanders killed. Oregon passed a similar law 2 decades ago after some Clackamas county sheriff deputies killed an entire innocent family in a high speed chase over a minor offense, and we haven't suffered for it.
It should also be noted that many WA police depts are intentionally over-complying with the law and refusing to chase even when legally allowed to. This is similar to the work slowdowns the corrupt and politicized police unions in Seattle and Portland have been engaging in the last 2 years, refusing to enforce the law so that they can blame the crime wave on the whole defund thing and shakedown the taxpayers for even more exorbitant salaries and pensions.
 
Last edited:

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
50,422
14,336
136
I suspect all the shootings of unarmed black men for traffic stops is contributing
The Pierce county, WA (Tacoma) sheriff tried to swat his newspaper carrier because he was black.

 

HomerJS

Lifer
Feb 6, 2002
36,730
28,908
136
The Pierce county, WA (Tacoma) sheriff tried to swat his newspaper carrier because he was black.


I assume the OP is still dumbfounded why black people don’t trust the police
 

Gardener

Senior member
Nov 22, 1999
765
547
136
In WA state, between June 2020 and June 2021, 11 people died in police chases (30 killed since 2015, mostly bystanders). Since the law passed in June '21 there has been only a single chase fatality. The legislation was passed with bi-partisan support, with the support of the Washington State Washington Fraternal Order of Police (WAFOP).

The law states, a peace officer may not engage in a vehicular pursuit, unless:

(a) There is probable cause to believe that a person in the vehicle has committed or is committing a violent offense or sex offense, as those terms are defined in RCW 9.94A.030;

(b) The pursuit is necessary for the purpose of identifying or apprehending the person;

(c) Under the circumstances, the safety risks of failing to apprehend or identify the person are considered to be greater than the safety risks associated with the vehicular pursuit

(d) The officer has received authorization to engage in the pursuit from a supervising officer; and

(e) There is supervisory control of the pursuit, and the supervisor considers relevant factors affecting public safety, such as whether there are minors present in the vehicle.


(The same bill outlawed firing weapons at moving vehicles, and the use of choke-holds)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vic

mikeymikec

Lifer
May 19, 2011
18,600
11,288
136
@blackangst1

Did you not think that the text you quoted was a little odd?

OP said:
Critics have pointed to lawmakers’ passage of Washington House Bill 1054 last year that banned high-speed pursuits except in a few very specific circumstances, KLCC reported.
The legislation was passed in reaction to the death of George Floyd in the custody of the Minneapolis police but now some state residents are questioning the wisdom of the restrictive policing policies.

Because as soon as I read that, I recalled that George Floyd's death had nothing to do with a high-speed chase. But it's an interesting narrative to spin for a pro-police news source though isn't it, the implication that the bill was somehow a vindictive move against the police, so obviously vindictive because the measures it rolls in are completely irrelevant to the George Floyd case.

Then of course I went and looked up the bill in question (the substitute bill that is), and it starts off extremely relevant to the George Floyd case, referring to the prohibition of choke-holds and neck restraints. I don't know about you, but a quick scan-read of this bill suggests a whole slew of common-sense measures that it seems sad/hilarious that the police department would actually need telling that these things are wrong. There's also a ban on the PD getting "military equipment" including rocket launchers, grenade launchers, missiles, armed helicopters, etc.

A few Ctrl+F attempts finally hit upon a relevant keyword to this news article ('vehicle'), and again it seems like common-sense measures to me. What precisely do you have a problem with?

Back to the article quickly, I thought their use of statistics was rather weasel-like, quoting what appears to be a figure for the entirety of the state to suggest a rise, then a figure for what appears to be a subset of the state to suggest what the figure used to be.
 

Gardener

Senior member
Nov 22, 1999
765
547
136
The Pierce county, WA (Tacoma) sheriff tried to swat his newspaper carrier because he was black.


Troyer was caught harassing the carrier, judge slapped him with bail on July 1. The trial should be happening now. He's still refusing to resign,

Pierce County Sheriff Ed Troyer must post $100,000 bail after violating a court order barring contact with a newspaper carrier following their high-profile confrontation last year, a Kitsap County judge ruled Friday.
 

pmv

Lifer
May 30, 2008
13,636
8,522
136
Same controversy happens over here. My impression is it's an argument that keeps coming up - whether cops should chase ne'er-do-wells. The arguments against it are obvious - it not only puts the suspected crim at risk, but also everyone else in the vicinity, that either they, or the police, might crash into.

The really fraught argument was always over the rule that said they could't chase a moped or motorcyclist if the pursued wasn't wearing a helmet (because of the danger of them coming off and suffering a fatal head-injury). So a scrofulous outlaw youth on a moped just had to take their helmet off and the cops had to let them go!
 

Greenman

Lifer
Oct 15, 1999
20,938
5,561
136
highway patrol should mail tickets like the toll roads do. no need to pull people over for regular speeding.

cops wouldn't get to hassle minorities for driving while black tho
Horrible idea. You then have to go to court if the ticket was mistakenly issued or there we're mitigating circumstances. I'd much rather discuss it with the officer at the scene and avoid a day wasted in traffic court.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
85,632
50,853
136
Horrible idea. You then have to go to court if the ticket was mistakenly issued or there we're mitigating circumstances. I'd much rather discuss it with the officer at the scene and avoid a day wasted in traffic court.
Yes, better to just have dedicated and unarmed traffic police. You don't need a gun to write a speeding ticket.

From the articles stats say that 11 people were killed in high speed police chases in the year before the law went into effect and who knows how many injured. I think to justify that you would need to show a pretty strong public safety case.
 

thilanliyan

Lifer
Jun 21, 2005
11,944
2,175
126
Horrible idea. You then have to go to court if the ticket was mistakenly issued or there we're mitigating circumstances. I'd much rather discuss it with the officer at the scene and avoid a day wasted in traffic court.
You actually get off from tickets by "discussing" it? That's some mighty privilege you have there.
Generally, the cop assumes he/she is correct, and if you question them they'll probably slap another fine on you lol.

I'm in Canada, so I don't generally have to worry about being shot by cops (despite being coloured), but I would still not try to argue with a cop.
 

Greenman

Lifer
Oct 15, 1999
20,938
5,561
136
You actually get off from tickets by "discussing" it? That's some mighty privilege you have there.
Generally, the cop assumes he/she is correct, and if you question them they'll probably slap another fine on you lol.

I'm in Canada, so I don't generally have to worry about being shot by cops (despite being coloured), but I would still not try to argue with a cop.
It has nothing with arguing. Piss the cop off and he's writing the ticket. Be calm, be honest, and explain the situation without any slant or BS.
The last time I was pulled over was for doing 81 in a fifty five zone. I explained to the officer that my truck had never traveled at that speed, and that his radar gun was obviously defective. The officer accepted my story and sent me on my way.
At the time I was in heavy traffic following a loaded box van. It's possible that I was traveling at 56mph, 81 was unattainable under the conditions at that time.

It's been my experience that most police respond well to honesty. When I'm in the wrong I freely admit it and offer an explanation for my actions. That explanation was "I wasn't paying attention" twice. Both times I was released with a warning.
 
Last edited:

HomerJS

Lifer
Feb 6, 2002
36,730
28,908
136
It has nothing with arguing. Piss the cop off and he's writing the ticket. Be calm, be honest, and explain the situation without any slant or BS.
The last time I was pulled over was for doing 81 in a fifty five zone. I explained to the officer that my truck had never traveled at that speed, and that his radar gun was obviously defective. The officer accepted my story and sent me on my way.
At the time I was in heavy traffic following a loaded box van. It's possible that I was traveling at 56mph, 81 was unattainable under the conditions at that time.
Really? That didn't help Philando Castilo

That didn't help this guy. He cooperated immediately and was shot for it.

Didn't help this young black male. The cops intentionally trying to goad him into taking some action to justify shooting

I could name a dozen others just from memory.
 

thilanliyan

Lifer
Jun 21, 2005
11,944
2,175
126
It has nothing with arguing. Piss the cop off and he's writing the ticket. Be calm, be honest, and explain the situation without any slant or BS.
The last time I was pulled over was for doing 81 in a fifty five zone. I explained to the officer that my truck had never traveled at that speed, and that his radar gun was obviously defective. The officer accepted my story and sent me on my way.
At the time I was in heavy traffic following a loaded box van. It's possible that I was traveling at 56mph, 81 was unattainable under the conditions at that time.

It's been my experience that most police respond well to honesty. When I'm in the wrong I freely admit it and offer an explanation for my actions. That explanation was "I wasn't paying attention" twice. Both times I was released with a warning.
Fair enough. I think maybe since you're an older person (if I'm not mistaken) they may be more lenient. To younger people I don't think cops are that lenient, even if they are calm.
 

Perknose

Forum Director & Omnipotent Overlord
Forum Director
Oct 9, 1999
46,568
9,934
146
We could take away their drivers license for 10 years, on a first-offense no matter what. No "work-permit" BS and no slack whatsoever.

You get caught driving even once it becomes mandatory lifetime license revocation.

AND then a hefty fine on top of the above.
What, no summary execution? o_O
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Captante

Paratus

Lifer
Jun 4, 2004
17,117
14,484
146
It has nothing with arguing. Piss the cop off and he's writing the ticket. Be calm, be honest, and explain the situation without any slant or BS.
The last time I was pulled over was for doing 81 in a fifty five zone. I explained to the officer that my truck had never traveled at that speed, and that his radar gun was obviously defective. The officer accepted my story and sent me on my way.
At the time I was in heavy traffic following a loaded box van. It's possible that I was traveling at 56mph, 81 was unattainable under the conditions at that time.

It's been my experience that most police respond well to honesty. When I'm in the wrong I freely admit it and offer an explanation for my actions. That explanation was "I wasn't paying attention" twice. Both times I was released with a warning.
Yup. I remember as a new 24 year old engineer driving early Monday mornings 5 hours from my home to a job-site in Arkansas to work 4 10's before driving home Thursday evening. One morning at about 3:30AM I got pulled over. I was doing the speed limit since I knew where every small town along the way was and where their speed zones started. The officer asked how fast I was going I told him I had slowed down from 65 to 55mph for the speed zone. He said he clocked me at 60mph. I was polite and he let me off with a warning after running my plates.

The next weekend when I got pulled over again and told I was going 5 over, I was polite and didn't get a ticket after he ran my plates.

The following weekend when the wind was gusting over 30mph I got pulled over because the officer was worried I was "falling asleep because the car was weaving" I was polite and didn't get a ticket after her ran my plates.

I'm sure it was my being polite while my being white and wearing decent clothes had no impact. I'm sure a minority would have been treated exactly the same. Just like I'm sure the cops radar detectors just happened to be reading fast and they weren't doing illegal pretextual stops.
 

Greenman

Lifer
Oct 15, 1999
20,938
5,561
136
Fair enough. I think maybe since you're an older person (if I'm not mistaken) they may be more lenient. To younger people I don't think cops are that lenient, even if they are calm.
Yup, near 65.
I treat everyone I meet with respect and kindness, often a little humor. Making friends is a little tougher than making enemy's, but far more rewarding.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Captante