A few comments on this whole thing. The report referenced has some issues. It was pulled down for a period of time earlier this year when some of the data was called into question and then reposted with a lower number (https://www.thecentersquare.com/washington/article_e8449832-a410-11ed-9463-e79bfd8391ce.html). Even if we take the report at its word now if you look at the data I don't know how you can justify these restrictions. First the 75% reduction is going from 12 to 3 so this isn't really a glaring problem that the legislature seems to make it but beyond that the reduction is from the driver and passengers being pursued. So big shock when they run from the police and the police don't pursue they are fine. What is more interesting is that innocent bystander deaths increased from 2 to 3, a whopping 33%.

So in line TS's other policies favoring criminal apparently they are completely ok with more innocent bystanders getting killed by reckless assholes. This doesn't take into account they family that was killed by a DUI driver earlier this year in Sunnyside (https://www.yakimaherald.com/news/local/troopers-say-suspect-in-sunnyside-crash-that-killed-2-children-wasnt-stopped-earlier-because-of/article_4f184fde-b87c-11ed-8cfc-ffe9397ccb35.html) so if we add those 2 kids to the list innocent bystanders deaths are now up 60%. Great job there.

In looking at the report further there is no racial data, so the hang wringing over minority communities somehow being disproportionally impacted has no data to back it up. This is all just based on feel good virtue signaling and the result is more deaths of innocent bystanders and a massive spike in auto thefts. We're now 3rd in the nation for auto thefts but I'm sure that's just a coincidence (https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/data/auto-thefts-up-73-in-seattle-since-start-of-the-pandemic) and btw who do you think is getting their car stolen most often. Hint: It's not the 1%.

Normal people despise the "fleeing criminals should just be allowed to do so" type laws, and the desperate "But it could hurt Black people, Indigenous people, people of color, and uh...people with disabilities!" is just so laughable, but I encourage them to keep pushing laws like this - there's definitely an ideology here where criminals are the real victims and any sort of response is harmful, and proposals like this really serve to expose it.

It's hard to overestimate how this issue has got the morons worked up. My crazy sister-in-law's crazy Puyallup church (the one with the gun fetish) has a few LEO's that go there, and they regularly speak to the congregation about how "King Inslee & The Liberal Democrats" have tied their hands.

@1: Comparing the years immediately before and immediately after the change is worse than worthless, because it both ignores whatever trend preceded the change, and encourages erroneous assignment of cause and effect.

Looking just at deaths due directly to active pursuits, we see the number peaked at five (!) in 2019, then trended downward, reaching three over each of the last two years. So, the number of direct deaths was already trending downward when the law was passed, after which nothing changed. As this year’s data is not yet complete, and can’t yet contain the summer driving season (when the total number of deaths due to vehicles increases), we have absolutely no idea what effect the law might have had.

@3: Your sister-in-laws's birthday is coming up soon. Try to be gracious and pick out something nice for her. Zolucky has some good deals.

@3: Given how small the numbers are, the large amount of attention given to this issue by the legislature seems unwarranted as well. Obviously one death is too many, but we all should know to pull over and stop when we see lights and hear sirens. Choosing not to do so is itself a recklessly provocative act on the part of a driver, and I’m unsure what the legislature can do about it.