Restrictions on vehicular pursuit is only common sense and most departments across the country have had similar policies in place for decades.
It's a shame the WSP didn't make these policy changes years ago without needing legislation enacted.
There is no good reason to repeal or modify this law.
Forget the tv news, cops are going to the nut job churches and getting those bible-addled nitwits all worked up over how their “hands are tied” over the police reforms. Since they’re hearing it at their shitty churches, that means it’s Jesus approved.
@2 - perhaps but the header is a bit much, “cops want to endanger innocent lives”?
That’s just The Stranger, SwampThing dear. They’re overwrought.
Wouldn’t it be cool if we had an alt-weekly that would do investigative journalism? Go undercover to the places where they work to keep stupid people angry?
A post about the dangers of cops AND cars? That's what's known among Stranger writers as a "slam dunk."
I no longer stop for police. They can't chase me, so why would I stop and receive a ticket to pay, that others don't also have to pay.
So much for vision zero.
Taxes and fees (e.g. a ticket), to borrow from the late Justice Brandies, are the price of civilization. I am OK with that provided that everyone is contributing. I won't pay if there are no longer any attempts at mandatory payment.
Seventiesrocked dear, I have been pulled over by the police three times in my forty years of driving: once in Minneapolis (I still think it was because I had Iowa plates), once in Burien (which I totally deserved, because I flaked on a light), and once on 90 in Kittitas County, because the WSP in that county are all uniformly horrible people).
I guess my question is why are you apparently so prone to being pulled over? Although I do agree that in this day and age, with computers and such, cops should be pulling people over for anything other than erratic driving.
Christmas on a Cracker.... everything the police do is inherently dangerous.
They have a dangerous job and use dangerous tools to do the job. That is what we train and pay them to do.
Chasing criminal is part of that job. Does it entail risk to the public... yes indeed. So in the real world (not Seattle) but in the real world we measure the risk and consider the consequences.
Here we see the consequences.... criminals figure out very, very quickly they won't be caught and property, violent crimes', overdosing deaths, drug dealing, homicide ... ect. sky rocket.
Do these increased crimes warrant stopping the pursuit of criminals. Is it better to let the criminal go free and commit other offenses.... Including homicide. How many of the criminals who later commit murder would have been removed but for the fact we can't pursue them?
What do you say to the families of "innocent victims" killed or injured as a result of being unable to pursue that criminal... Is this the "tough love moment"... do we say "sorry"... and send the mother a nice note with flowers.
Where does that fit in the "equity of the equation"?
One could ask why pursue perpetrators even if they have done a violent act, say like raping a child in the city plaza and shooting bystanders? The police pursuit might endanger an innocent by stander!
You can play these games all day long.... but removing offenders is the police's job, protects the citizen and it does come with a risk. A risk which has not been fully or carefully considered in a broader perspecitve.
Citing property crime to justify statistically increasing the loss of innocent life is a beautiful summary of the police MO.
People over Property plz.
@9 Not really, I'm simply saying its part of the equation. You can't simply close your eyes and say there are not other consequences or factors which need to be weighed. If this was the singular issue and no others are involved then I would agree with you.
But it isn't the singular issue is it? The perps steal cars at gun point... sometimes they shoot and kill the innocent, sometimes they deal drugs and sell fentanyl which kills the user, sometimes they rob say gas stations... and shoot the employee.. etc. But for the fact they were let go... they keep "killing"...
It appears you are part of the "perfect life brigade", replete with rose colored glasses and see the world in the simple Simon terms..... Alas, that isn't how it works in the real world.
Just curious, what is your response to:
What do you say to the families of "innocent victims" killed or injured as a result of being unable to pursue that criminal... Is this the "tough love moment".
Would you smugly quip.... Sorry for your loss mam... but well its "people over property".... is that your reply to the grieving? Well?
@7, I am not prone to being pulled over.
The point remains, its no de facto voluntary. So nobody who doesn't want to be pulled over, should pull over. If our democracy has conferred a de facto individual right, not to be pulled over, you should exercise that right.
It's hardly equitable for some to voluntarily stop and pay, when others don't have to as well.
Don’t want to be involved in a cop car chase? Simple! Don’t drive a car!
seems to me all this could be avoided by:
a. not participating in the latest social media trends of stealing cars and ruining your life for likes
b. stopping the car when you see flashing lights
idk, pretty simple
Comments are closed.
Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.
Or you can
Forgot your password?