Stop the carnage

116 comments on “Stop the carnage ”

• Comments are now closed

1. higherstandard 1

   7 January 2011 at 10:38 am

   Nah he killed himself in a stolen car after driving it at high speed into a power pole.

   Dumb kid out of control and complete disregard for consequences for himself and his family.
   • Bright Red 1.1

     7 January 2011 at 10:57 am

     he was speeding because he was being chased.

     being dumb or being a criminal doesn’t mean you deserve to die.

     if you can’t consider the human cost, consider the fiscal cost of all these crashes resulting from chases – hospital bills, clean up, repairs.
   • Colonial Viper 1.2

     7 January 2011 at 11:04 am

     Dumb kid out of control and complete disregard for consequences

     Frak your stock is dropping quick mate.

     Your comment here is exactly why the adults in the scenario (i.e. the police) need to adapt their behaviour. Because an inexperienced child with a narrow view of life and its consequences made the wrong call.

     But yeah, feel free to not advocate the protection of our youngest, most inexperienced, but potentially highest future earning citizens.
     • higherstandard 1.2.1

       7 January 2011 at 1:11 pm

       You seem to be under the misapprehension I would give the slightest fuck what you think loota,

       The person to blame for this incident is the driver and his accomplice who were in town thieving in a stolen car, did they deserve to die, absolutely not.

       But we have a retarded culture in this country where you kids drive too fast and recklessly and whether or not police are present slaughtering themselves and others in the process. I can’t see how the solution to this behaviour is a policy that would stipulate the police never pursue a speeding driver.

       What’s needed is a change of attitude by our youth and repercussions for this type of behaviour beyond the ability of these youths to rack up tens of thousands in fines before any action is taken. You no doubt won’t like my authoritarian rX for change which would involve a combination of a compulsory stint in the armed forces for the offenders, raising the driving age, restricting the power of cars and mobile car crushers.
       • Colonial Viper 1.2.1.1

         7 January 2011 at 1:42 pm

         The person to blame for this incident is the driver and his accomplice who were in town thieving in a stolen car, did they deserve to die, absolutely not.

         Blame the immature, inexperienced children who became the final victims, is that the theme? The highly trained professional adults managing the situation – they don’t need to alter their approach, according to you?

         You no doubt won’t like my authoritarian rX for change which would involve a combination of a compulsory stint in the armed forces for the offenders, raising the driving age, restricting the power of cars and mobile car crushers.

         Hey dude, *great* suggestions I think should be seriously considered.

         But won’t do these children any good if they have been *killed* before your initiatives can be investigated though, right?

         For the record, I’m not interested in changing what you think one little bit, so feel free to keep dissing these kids (“dumb”, “out of control”, etc) to enable your justification of the tragic end results.
         • Rex Widerstrom 1.2.1.1.1

           7 January 2011 at 8:09 pm

           The highly trained professional adults managing the situation

           Bloody hell, you either don’t get out much or you’re very young, CV.

           Earlier this wek I was sitting in the sandwich bar near the court where the cops come for lunch (the lawyers sit across the road in the cafes where they can quaff Shiraz with their lunch and gawd help the clients who appear in the afternoon 😉 )

           In walked two of them and it was only when I realised they were looking at me strangely that I realised I’d been staring at the male of the pair. Now I know the old adage about coppers looking younger as one grows older but I swear this one wasn’t yet shaving. He certainly couldn’t have been out of his late teens.

           He wasn’t paired with a gnarled old officer but with a female who was, I estimate, mid to late twenties.

           Being Australia, both had whopping great guns on their hips. It was the sight of a young man who looked like he ought to have been running about with a Super Soaker instead carrying a Glock which had made me stare. Of course they also had tazers, batons, pepper spray and all the other toys.

           There is no way either of these officers – and certainly not the male of the pair – had the experience, of life or of police work, sufficient to confidently entrust them with a deadly weapon. And a car, after all, can be deadly in inexperienced hands – whether fleeing or chasing.

           And, human nature being what it is, there’s no way I – or almost anyone else – would have accorded him the slightest of respect had he ordered me to do, or not do, something. It looked entirely possible that his voice hadn’t broken.

           Certainly police need to take on young recruits. But they need to spend a long time in the company of older, more experienced officers before they’re let loose alone on the public. Unfortunately our politicians ensure this doesn’t happen – by demanding police act as a revenue gathering arm of government; by equating raw police numbers, rather than retention of experienced officers, with success; by insisting uniformed police do a lot of paperwork; and so on.

           And as for “highly trained”… if it hasn’t shown in NZ, Google the TV series “Recruits”. It’s apparent that, unless you opt to drop out, there is no way to fail Police College these days.
           • Colonial Viper 1.2.1.1.1.1

             7 January 2011 at 8:30 pm

             Hmmmm perhaps I overstated the case a tad. Thanks Rex.
   • lprent 1.3

     7 January 2011 at 11:05 am

     Yeah and the police ‘broke off 20 seconds earlier’. Gee where have I heard that frigging bullshit before? That’s right – the last time we discussed this.

     The police have already been told by the IPCA that their current policies don’t work, they just kill people both their target and others. Even an idiot deserves to grow up enough to learn not to be one.

     The police are total fuckwits on this matter. They are also clearly lying when they repeat the same excuse each time. It is hard to maintain any semblance of respect for a profession that appears to attract repeat lying offenders.
     • jcuknz 1.3.1

       7 January 2011 at 11:36 am

       I agree that the bit about breaking off pursuit is FBS.
       I feel sorry for the parents and freinds of the lad but since I guess there are a hundred thousand of these kids and only twenty over the last twelve months and a few days have been chased by police and not stopped but killed themselves by their foolish actions …
       I have absolutely no criticism of the Police for doing their job, and sympathy to them for the unpleasant job of clearing up the mess these young fools create.
       Apart from the collateral damage this is one less idiot on the roads to cause a problem to the thousands of relatively responsible drivers on the roads.
       I am quite sure that it is the result of our society in letting these kids having control, through inadequate locking/immobilisation, of cars capable of doing 180K and selling them the games, and showing on TV the car races which train them to tailgate and take foolish risks.
       From that last para I think is the answer but like all changes it takes generations because anybody who drives sees foolish driving by all ages.
       • Armchair Critic 1.3.1.1

         7 January 2011 at 12:10 pm

         I have absolutely no criticism of the Police for doing their job
         A few years ago I’d have agreed wholeheartedly.
         These days I reckon that if the police doing their job results in someone, anyone, dying, then they need to work out how to do their job better. Irrespective of how stupid the dead person was. I ask the question – could the police have acted differently, so that the death did not occur? After all, their job is to protect life (first and foremost) and property.
         When it comes to deaths after high-speed chases, I reckon the answer to my question is “yes, they probably could.”
         There are a whole lot of things the police could to do reduce the numbers of high-speed pursuit deaths. You’ve identified a number of them in your comment. I agree that the more passive options like better driver training/licencing, restrictions on the availability of high-performance cars and cultural changes away from the diet of crap TV and video games will be effective, long term.
         Short term, the police need to find a more effective way of apprehending fleeing drivers, one that doesn’t involve people dying.
     • Colonial Viper 1.3.2

       7 January 2011 at 11:36 am

       higherstandard seems to represent the Right Wing attitude that if you can find some grounds (any grounds) to look down upon somebody, you can then justify not lifting a finger to improve the situation.

       Or even more perversely, justify or accept the doing of things to make it even worse for that person, even if you will not personally benefit from it one material iota.

       Its the same innate pleasure one gets when stomping a fresh pair of Doc Martins down on the head of someone lying in the gutter. Sheer joy to feel the bone crunching beneath your heel, the resulting soft grinding wetness, and knowing in your heart that they deserved every bit of it for being who they were.

       I have absolutely no criticism of the Police for doing their job, and sympathy to them for the unpleasant job of clearing up the mess these young fools create.

       Apart from the collateral damage this is one less idiot on the roads to cause a problem

       Yeah, you sorta made my point jcuknz, thanks.
       • higherstandard 1.3.2.1

         7 January 2011 at 1:13 pm

         Does that mean you represent the leftwing attitude of being a complete fuckwad ?

         Or are all these labels such as leftwing, rightwing, socialist, capitalist etc just the last refuge of the prejudiced, lazy and ill informed.
         • Colonial Viper 1.3.2.1.1

           7 January 2011 at 1:32 pm

           lolz buddy, inexperienced immature children making bad judgement calls leading to their deaths and you are happy with highly trained professional adults participating in those scenarios to keep it up, no questions asked.

           All I did was call you on it. In fact let me remind you what you said about the suggestion that the police need to use better strategies to try and reduce these deaths:

           Nah he killed himself in a stolen car after driving it at high speed into a power pole.

           Dumb kid out of control and complete disregard for consequences for himself and his family.

           So once you look down on this young person as a “dumb kid” who is “out of control” and has a “complete disregard” for himself and his family, its OK to forget about making these situations safer and less lethal.

           Good on ya.
           • higherstandard 1.3.2.1.1.1

             7 January 2011 at 3:02 pm

             So in your opinion he was not a dumb kid out of control with a complete disregard for the consequences……… hmmmm OK then.
             • Colonial Viper …

               7 January 2011 at 3:12 pm

               Yeah in the final anlaysis he probably was.

               But then again I’m not using that as an excuse to stop making these situations safer and less lethal for children.
               • higherstandard …

                 7 January 2011 at 3:18 pm

                 But you are using it as an excuse to apportion the blame for him stealing a car, failing to stop for the police and driving into a power pole firmly at the foot of the police involved.
     • Rex Widerstrom 1.3.3

       7 January 2011 at 8:17 pm

       The police are total fuckwits on this matter

       And not just the police:

       Yet despite the deaths and negative publicity, about three-quarters (72 per cent) of 794 Dominion Post readers questioned in a readers’ survey said they felt even more strongly that police should chase fleeing drivers. Only 15 per cent said they should not.

       If the police are fuckwits (and they are), what does that say about 72 percent of the population?

       Some days I feel like giving up. This is one of these days.
   • the pink postman 1.4

     7 January 2011 at 2:14 pm

     I hope you live up to your name HS. You must have been a saint as a kid. Nobody is saying well done! to these silly stupid kids ,but they are young teenagers who think they are untouchable. When I was a kid in war time London I did some real ,stupid things and risked my life taking chances .How ever we never had cars and no chance of pinching one. Bloody good job because Im sure I would have chanced my lot with my mates . Im afraid today the opportunity to take a chance and a dare is wide open. Surely the police with modern radio and N/T can catch these little buggers with- out killing them .I just wonder what Saint H/S would have done behind the wheel at 15 when a cop sounds the siren ? Im sure I would have gone like hell and laughed all the way.No chance of being killed or killing some one ,I was fifteen and danger proof.
     • higherstandard 1.4.1

       7 January 2011 at 3:04 pm

       “I just wonder what Saint H/S would have done behind the wheel at 15 when a cop sounds the siren ?”

       It happened to me a couple of times – in each instance I stopped and got a fine which was deserved.
       • Colonial Viper 1.4.1.1

         7 January 2011 at 3:10 pm

         Damn lucky you didn’t have a foolish mate in the drivers seat who decided to take off like a scalded cat and therefore initiate a police chase. Would’ve put everyone’s lives at risk.
         • higherstandard 1.4.1.1.1

           7 January 2011 at 3:22 pm

           I tended not to associate with persons involved in grand theft auto and who although were full of bluster about the “pigs” had enough sense to have respect for authority underneath that bluster – a large portion of today’s youth is way more out of control and has no idea about consequences take a look at the number of youths violently attacking police over the last few months/years.
           • Rex Widerstrom 1.4.1.1.1.1

             7 January 2011 at 8:28 pm

             I tended not to associate with persons involved in grand theft auto

             Me neither. But one evening a friend arrived to collect me to go to the movies with a friend of his whom I’d never met before. After checking the new arrival appeared sober, I happily hopped into what was obviously a company car (as it had a well-known soda firm’s logos all over it).

             Turned out this clown had stolen it. Neither I nor my friend had a clue.

             Luckily for me the police (who hadn’t had much trouble spotting the car!) followed in an unmarked car, waited till we stopped and then pounced on us. Took me a few hours to convince them I had no idea it was a stolen vehicle, after which they kindly kicked me out onto the pavement at 3 am with no way getting home.

             But they didn’t contribute to killing me. And the soda company got it’s car back in one piece. Neither happy outcome occurred in this or the 20 other cases we’re talking about. The question is, why not?

             And the question for you and the others advocating chasing is, which outcome is best for all concerned?
     • Deborah Kean 1.4.2

       7 January 2011 at 11:44 pm

       Exactly, PP! My nephew Andy, “No brain, no pain” as my sister once said, watching him scone himself for the umpteenth time – was one of these 15, 16, 17 etc and danger proof kids. By some miracle, when he drove an SUV off a mountain in Nelson, and was air-lifted to Welly hospital, he survived…
       Then he met the woman who is now his wife, and at 24 and 25 years old, they have two children. Andy has given up his potentially lethal job for a less dangerous one. He could have been and nearly was, a statistic – he was one of these “dumb, out-of-control” kids, but by the grace of God, he got the chance to grow up.
       In 13 years’ time, Andy’s son could be doing the same asinine things – it’s almost guaranteed with the parents he’s got. I hope young C., is also lucky.
       But it should not depend on luck and miracles!
       The boy killed was a child, who deserved the chance Andy had, to grow up.
       Deb
   • Deadly_NZ 1.5

     7 January 2011 at 6:26 pm

     Just another shining example of Sue Bradfords anti smacking law. Parents are NOT allowed to chastise their children. Tell a child off these days and get a mouth full of abuse, and there is nothing you can do about it so yes the children are out of control, BUT no one can do anything about it as the youth court just slaps them on the wrist with a wet feather and tells them not to do it again. And as for CYPS a more useless politicaly correct bunch of shirkers I have ever had to deal with, all they want to do is talk and have meetings, but do anything positive yeah right. until something drastic goes wrong and then there’s a whole lot of hand wringing and buck passing. AND No One takes responsibility for the disaster that is our youth today.
     • millsy 1.5.1

       7 January 2011 at 9:18 pm

       So you think its OK for a parent to bash the hell out of the child with a jug cord?

       Typical negative angry old man, getting your jollies of whacking the crap out of innocent young kids?

       Why dont you piss off to http://www.iamairghtwingchristianwhogetssexualpleasurefromjugcordingykid.com
       • Deadly_NZ 1.5.1.1

         7 January 2011 at 10:20 pm

         Really you cant even tell a teen off with out the Fuck off from them and obviously you have not brought up children so maybe you should go and get your jollies on the obscene web site you have just advertised

         FUCK OFF!
         • millsy 1.5.1.1.1

           7 January 2011 at 10:24 pm

           Why dont you fuck off you nasty old git. Think youre so big by abusing and bashing young people. I suppose you want to string them up from tree branches too. Tell me, do you use the jog cord on your kids, do you enjoy it, Ill tell you, Ill kick the shit out of you if I see you, and Ill burn that fucking bible in front of your face.

           I suppose you want to recriminalise homosexuality and sterilize solo mothers too.

           Fucking intolerat redneck tosser.
           • millsy 1.5.1.1.1.1

             7 January 2011 at 10:26 pm

             Perhaps if you stop talking to teens like they are crap, perhaps they wont tell you to fuck off, but oh no you have to out the fucking boot into them EVERY DAY.

             No wonder teens are killing themselves all the time, they are hated by old gits like you.

             Hope you drop dead, your nothing but a moralistic wanker, stick your morals up your ass.
             • Deadly_NZ …

               7 January 2011 at 10:58 pm

               Shit what rock did this cretin crawl out from under?

               Okay so maybe I made a mistake in grammer and used the wrong word. BUT that does not pardon you for the verbal abuse that you obviously think is what passes for free and open discussion. And the threat of physical violence just lets me know that you are just a mindless THUG. And that any chance of having a decent discussion with you is about as likely as you learning to be nice and polite — NONE.

               so let me have a look at your petty insults, and i will try to answer them one at a time, I’ll type slowly so you can keep up and I promise not to use too many big words.

               git? Git is a free & open source, distributed version control system designed to handle everything from small to very large projects with speed and efficiency.
               Bible ?? Nope don’t read it.
               Redneck?? An absolute absence of sophistication (yeah sometimes).
               Nasty?? Nope my kids love me.
               Old? Not really.
               wanker/Tosser ? Nope I have a partner .
               Moralistic? Nope i even go to the nude beach and watch Porno with my partner.
               Why would I want to recriminalise homosexuals or steralise Solo Mothers? They, and yes, even you have rights. Them I like. You i don’t
               Intolerant? Nope I even put up with fuckwits like you.
               • millsy …

                 7 January 2011 at 11:08 pm

                 You do however, think that is acceptable to belt children with items found in the kitchen or toolshed.

                 That means, no matter how left wing you claim to me, I will always see you as a nasty evil redneck.
   • Deborah Kean 1.6

     7 January 2011 at 11:09 pm

     How utterly callous of you! He was being chased by some Keystone Kops having a testosterone buzz..
     Deb
2. Blighty 2

   7 January 2011 at 11:02 am

   hear’s a chilling comparison:

   http://wdmzpub01.stats.govt.nz/wds/TableViewer/tableView.aspx

   2009/10 – murders with firearms: 7
   2009/10 – murders with stabbing/cutting weapon: 17
   2009/10 – murders with bare hands, body: 19

   Past twelve months deaths from police chases: 20
   • Colonial Viper 2.1

     7 January 2011 at 11:07 am

     Yep. And suicides outnumber all road deaths in this country by a good margin.

     Our society faces a few issues here.
     • ZeeBop 2.1.1

       7 January 2011 at 5:19 pm

       .
       Raise the petrol levies until the problem stops.
       • Deadly_NZ 2.1.1.1

         7 January 2011 at 6:35 pm

         Oh joy penalise the whole driving community for a couple of out of control kids.

         and I suppose you will be willing to pay the extra every time an idiot runs from the cops…

         Fail try again
         • millsy 2.1.1.1.1

           7 January 2011 at 10:34 pm

           I suppose your solution is to bring back lynching. Been to pick your white hood up from the drycleaners yet?

           Bet you loved it when Bruce Emery killed that kid? Another nasty young person killed. Bet you would have loved to stick the knife in there and twist it.
3. deemac 3

   7 January 2011 at 11:58 am

   what happened to raising the driving age? 15 is too young to drive. Penalties for bad driving are laughable in NZ. Plus it is too cheap to get old, unsafe cars.
   The police are damned if they do, damned if they don’t; if they fail to stop a speeding idiot who then kills himself or someone else, they have failed in their duty to public safety.
   • Colonial Viper 3.1

     7 January 2011 at 12:11 pm

     Plus it is too cheap to get old, unsafe cars.

     Could buy a 1994 Subaru WRX, puts out around 160kW, does 0-100 just on 6 seconds, outruns the Porsches and V8 falcons of the day without blinking.

     Just $6750 ono.
     • Draco T Bastard 3.1.1

       7 January 2011 at 1:41 pm

       I think you’ll find that getting on the road in a “dangerous” car is far cheaper than that. Some in that search are less than $2000 and match the specs you specified.
4. prism 4

   7 January 2011 at 12:01 pm

   As soon as you express a negative opinion in company about police chasing suspects ending in death or destruction, people look at you startled – What! let the miscreants get away with it? The police can’t do that and also the fleeing driver might kill someone. Shrug. TINA.

   Actually youngsters have pinched cars for joyriding for yonks, and in the past they wouldn’t have been pursued regularly in this aggressive manner. There is a numbers culture in the police I think that says we must meet such and such a target. I don’t think the target used is one that leads to a more peaceful, happy, law-abiding society. But it could lead to a situation where police are armed on a regular basis.
5. Name 5

   7 January 2011 at 12:05 pm

   I fully agree with Zetetic. Arrest by the police should be purely voluntary. The moment you indicate an unwillingness to be apprehended – by putting your foot down on the accelerator or drawing a gun or knife – the police should back off and allow you to go about your business however unlawful, dangerous or simply stupid. The police should limit their attention only to the mildly inattentive and perfectly sober motorist exceeding the speed-limit by 5kph who can be guaranteed to pull over as soon as they hear a police siren.
   • Armchair Critic 5.1

     7 January 2011 at 12:16 pm

     The police should limit their attention only to the mildly inattentive and perfectly sober motorist exceeding the speed-limit by 5kph who can be guaranteed to pull over as soon as they hear a police siren.
     Because the police don’t do this at all, at present. All those highway patrol car drivers spend days and weeks looking for the most extreme idiots to chase, and they leave everyone else alone.
     /sarcasm.
     You are a fucking moron.
6. RedLogix 6

   7 January 2011 at 12:08 pm

   Been said before… when I was a kid we never would have dreamed of trying to outrun the cops. For a start the cars we had were too slow… but mainly because it wasn’t on the tele showing brain-dead idiots overseas doing it for our entertainment.

   What you tolerate on the tele you have to tolerate in the streets 5-10 yrs later.
7. Policy Parrot 7

   7 January 2011 at 12:44 pm

   The police are damned if they do, damned if they don’t; if they fail to stop a speeding idiot who then kills himself or someone else, they have failed in their duty to public safety.

   Absolutely. There are too many people on the left who still view all police through anarchic, anti-authoritarian eyes, because of historical events. About the only thing left of the neanderthal culture that used to be present in the police is some of the early 80s holdovers and a small proportion that is unfortunately present throughout general society.

   If you are unfortunate enough to be one of those illegally arrested or under false pretences, then sure. But to say that police are responsible for these deaths is to spare the offender/fleeor from responsibility.
   • Colonial Viper 7.1

     7 January 2011 at 2:39 pm

     But to say that police are responsible for these deaths is to spare the offender/fleeor from responsibility.

     The young perps definitely need to be held responsible for their actions. But in terms of who is responsible for controlling the safety situation on the street as it develops in real time – its not the young’uns is it.

     The scenario is complicated by the fact that the police also need to fulfil another objective – apprehending them and getting some answers.
     • infused 7.1.1

       7 January 2011 at 3:42 pm

       Yes it is. They are the ones making the bad choices.
       • Colonial Viper 7.1.1.1

         7 January 2011 at 10:46 pm

         You’re saying that the teenagers making the bad choices are responsible for controlling the safety of the resulting traffic situation?

         How will you make that work?
8. Treetop 8

   7 January 2011 at 1:06 pm

   When a driver is being reckless, (driving dangerously) and the police pursue that person it appears that the reckless person has a high probablity of PANICKING. The likelyhood of a crash increases.

   The dilemma for the police is were they not to pursue the reckless driver and a member of the public is killed, the police may be considered as being negligent.

   Which senario has the greatest odds of life being taken?

   The argument that the public should not run from the police is unrealistic to have because it is an option for some. The police place themselves in a position where they could kill a random person who was not driving recklessly or even a pedestrian.

   I have the view that there are some very sick policies within the police. As like with sexual offending by police officers, (policy change is being addressed far to slowly) police pursuits are being handled the same way. No sound or logical reasoning, no consistency and lies are being told by officers to cover up for their self or their colleague.

   Having quotas is a sick policy, this needs to be replaced by sound targeting. There is a difference between a speeding driver and a driver being pursued by the police and there needs to be sound procedure for both.
9. fabregas4 9

   7 January 2011 at 2:33 pm

   Everything is about policy – even the 15 year olds dieing on the road (not because of but as part of ) Police chases.

   It tires me to repeat this stuff but – if we develop a country that creates kids who drive so fast and won’t stop for the police then we are all to blame. Not the police, not the kid, not his family – all of us – we make our country and all that happens within it.
   • Colonial Viper 9.1

     7 January 2011 at 2:40 pm

     ^ +1

     Its about values, caring and ethics first. Policy, legislation and regulation are very weak and ineffective substitutes if those are absent or corroded.
     • fabregas4 9.1.1

       7 January 2011 at 3:02 pm

       I would argue that policy decisions lead to either increased or decreased values, ethics and caring. Think about NZ post Rogernomics, post ‘Greed is Good’ type of policy do you think those most important things listed have increased or decreased? I am sure that NZ was by far a more caring, and ethical society pre neo liberal reforms.
10. Graeme 10

    7 January 2011 at 2:57 pm

    it is a tragedy that the young man is dead, how ever it was his choice to be out doing what he was. if he was doing what most other fifteen year olds were doing at that time of the night, eg at hom in bed asleep instead of being out stealing cars to impress what ever gang it was he was trying to get into, he would still be with us today. as it stands i see one less gang banging shit head to be dealt with by society later on in life.

    i am glad he did not take out any one other than himself. to blame the police for doing their jobs, eg protecting property for the loss of this young mans life is really shooting below the belt. the police were doing what they are charged by us as society to do, protect property, it is sad the young man made bad desicions that have resulted in the loss of his life, but they were his desicions.
    • Armchair Critic 10.1

      7 January 2011 at 3:04 pm

      to blame the police for doing their jobs, eg protecting property for the loss of this young mans life is really shooting below the belt. My emphasis.
      Prioritising property over life is always wrong, Graeme.
      • higherstandard 10.1.1

        7 January 2011 at 3:14 pm

        yeah what are the police thinking trying to apprehend someone in a stolen car speeding.

        Let’s just disband the police force that’ll stop kids wrapping themselves around power poles, stealing and speeding quick fast.
        • fabregas4 10.1.1.1

          7 January 2011 at 3:20 pm

          Or work out a better way, a method that has seen 20 deaths obviously needs review.
        • logie97 10.1.1.2

          7 January 2011 at 3:24 pm

          The road safety message is that “Speed Kills”
          Yep the pursuits are sure reinforcing it.

          The question to ask is when does the speeding start – before or after the lights start flashing?
          • higherstandard 10.1.1.2.1

            7 January 2011 at 3:30 pm

            The road safety message is also ‘don’t drink and drive’ yet countless fuckwits continue to get behind the wheel after boozing.
            • fabregas4 10.1.1.2.1.1

              7 January 2011 at 3:34 pm

              Chase them until the crash and die! One less drunk on the road!
              • higherstandard …

                7 January 2011 at 3:37 pm

                Yeah just let them go cause no one ever died, maimed or killed someone else from drunk driving while not being pursued by the police.
                • logie97 …

                  7 January 2011 at 3:49 pm

                  The police are not being questioned about drink driving.
                  The police are being questioned about the methods of pursuits.
                  Others here are commenting on raising driving ages and every other side issue. (For one most of the car conversions will be done by unlicensed drivers).

                  Keystone Cop mentality from the RWNJ’s
        • Armchair Critic 10.1.1.3

          7 January 2011 at 3:33 pm

          yeah what are the police thinking hugely increasing the risk of someone losing their life while trying to apprehend someone in a stolen car speeding recover a few thousand bucks worth of property. Unsuccessfully, as it turned out.
          FIFY
          Let’s just disband the police force that’ll stop kids wrapping themselves around power poles, stealing and speeding quick fast.
          Yeah, that’s exactly what I meant to say – NOT.
          The police should have apprehended this kid, of course, but in a manner that was less likely to result in his death, or the deaths of others. Tough task, sure, but not impossible.
          Did you mean to say that the penalty for car theft should be death? If I was as good at misinterpretation as you are then that’s what I’d think.
          • higherstandard 10.1.1.3.1

            7 January 2011 at 3:40 pm

            You were the one who accused the police of ‘prioritising property over life.’

            This infers the police actively sought this kids death which is frankly absurd.
            • Armchair Critic 10.1.1.3.1.1

              7 January 2011 at 3:52 pm

              Fuck, that’s a long bow to draw, hs.
              Graeme suggested the police had prioritised property over life in comment 10.
              I replied the principle of prioritising property over life is wrong in comment 10.1.
              You’ve done little to rebut the assertion I made – if you agree with Graeme that property is more of a priority than life then please have the courage to say so.
              In terms of the frankly absurd I think the closest is what you said in comment 10.1.1 where you advocate disbanding the police. I’m hoping you said it in jest, or some kind of drug-induced haze. The rest of your comments on this thread are way below your best too, sometimes on other threads you have made sense.
    • fabregas4 10.2

      7 January 2011 at 3:11 pm

      But he was 15 years old Graeme. Not even an adult. Not old enough to make informed reasonable decisions. Most probably he didn’t ‘decide’ anything. He was a kid doing something stupid, very stupid. That is all. Yes the police have a job to do, I support them, but lets not forget what is most important here. A kid has died because he stole a car. Bloody hell Hotchin ruined heaps of lives and stole a lot of money yet he is on holiday (albeit hopefully a not too great one’ on the Gold Coast). Perspective is required here. If it is ok to suggest as you do that this is ‘one less gang banging shit head’ then lets be happy for all people who make mistakes to die – Millie Holmes P user dies from overdose – this ok? What about that kid who drunk himself to death – ok by you?

      Man Graeme if you have or have kids remember that ‘there but for the grace of god go you’. On the basis of your post you are a big unfeeling turd but good luck to you and yours and your perfect selves.
    • logie97 10.3

      7 January 2011 at 3:27 pm

      Seems the property in this case wasn’t protected either… written off.
    • Deborah Kean 10.4

      8 January 2011 at 12:42 am

      So by you, property is more important than people? That’s just sick…
      Deb
      captcha expenses – exactly.
11. blimpy 11

    7 January 2011 at 3:04 pm

    So what you are saying in essence is that if a drunk teenager was running round town with a shotgun that the police should just leave them too it as trying to apprehend them could end in tragedy…
    • fabregas4 11.1

      7 January 2011 at 3:33 pm

      I think this is a great example. In the past police would have shot someone doing this – now they might use a Tazer – no one has to die. The Police have done their job, kid then suffers the consequences but has the chance to make changes to her life.
    • Blighty 11.2

      7 January 2011 at 3:35 pm

      no, blimpy, no-one’s saying ‘leave them to it’. we’re saying surely there is a better way than the current methods that are killing so many.
    • Treetop 11.3

      7 January 2011 at 4:04 pm

      Speeding, being pursued by the police, being over the alcohol limit when driving, having a gun or a knife or a hostage all have the capacity to take or endanger a life/lives. Every senario requires a police decision to be made which gives the best outcome.
12. logie97 12

    7 January 2011 at 3:18 pm

    Beats me that with today’s surveillance methods, the pursued could not have been apprehended in other ways. Presumably, until the police initiated a chase, there must have been a few events.
    Car reported stolen.
    Instructions given to look out for it.
    There are cameras everywhere in this city.
    When the police make a positive identification they report back to headquarters who activate monitoring, but the police cars are not engaged.
    (What happened to unmarked cars?)
    All this time, the joy riders are still in cruise mode and they will want to stop for refreshments, a leak or return home at some stage and one assumes at this stage their crime is car conversion.
    It is also probably safe to assume that most of these crimes are done by youths from certain suburbs in the city and are probably known to the law anyway.
13. Graeme 13

    7 January 2011 at 3:33 pm

    i have kids. they were at home tucked up in bed, where they are every night.

    the cops were doing there jobs, protecting property. the young man made the choice to run from the consequences of his actions. the cops did not make him smoke the weed and drink the booze or steal the car or run when asked to stop.

    yep, he was only a child but he was playing in an adults world, he rolled the dice of life and his number came up….sorry about him. to blame the police is bogus, and a cop out.

    as for me being an unfeeling shit head or what ever it was, far from it. one less gang banging parasitical drain on society suits me, it frees up resources for thse in genuine need., thats assuming he was a gang banger (wannabe) but dollars to donuts he was.
    • kinto 13.1

      8 January 2011 at 12:02 pm

      If Police Officers or Police Dogs get killed on duty, too bad, it’s self defence.
14. infused 14

    7 January 2011 at 3:39 pm

    If you run from the cops, tough shit. They are killing themselves. Raise the driving age if they are not ‘mature’ enough.
15. blimpy 15

    7 January 2011 at 3:45 pm

    Tazers can still kill you and the police arnt trying to ram them off the road they are just following them. If you have a no chase policy then why would anyone not run from the police?

    Actions = Consequences … a 15 year old knows this even stupid ones. No one deserves to die but if you do stupid things you increase the risk.

    Also raising driving age etc has nothing to do with this type of situation. You cant legislate for people who have no regard for the law.

    If a burglar broke into my house and my dog bite them you would probably say it was my dogs fault and that it should have had a better policy for when burglar break in…
    • Deadly_NZ 15.1

      7 January 2011 at 6:59 pm

      If you get burgled at least your dog could bite em. Because the cops WON’T come to you, and if you on your way to police station to complain odds are you’ll get pulled by a revenue gatherer sitting on the side of the road.

      This has happened to me.
16. the pink postman 16

    7 January 2011 at 4:15 pm

    Having read the comments above it seems as we had a lot of people who were lovely little darlings .Little saints who never had a mad rush to the head. Well they seem to be in the majority. So why have we so many crooks and white collars con men robbing elderly people of their savings.
    The fact is most of the revenges above forget just what they were like when they were 15 .
17. M 17

    7 January 2011 at 4:22 pm

    Do the police still have the equipment that punctures tyres?

    I know police resources are stretched but wouldn’t it be better if officers in another car near the driver’s intended direction could lay out such implements – I realise this would impossible in smaller areas.

    I think it is better to let the driver go and catch up with them later than have some poor innocent person taken out possibly even the pursuing officers themselves if they happen to make an error in judgment while chasing said offender.

    The police really have to be like Caesar’s wife, above reproach but with the Rickard’s scandal plus other cover-ups like the Thomas case they don’t do themselves any favours. My eldest refers to the police as pigs and he is always corrected because as they can be annoying to some and not always the best behaved who you gonna call when you have someone threatening you or your property?

    Culture change in a male-dominated “industry” will always take a long time just as attitudes towards rape will take generations to change. A friend has a theory about the police being a certain personality type, the “right man” in that they are never wrong about anything, have almost an attitude of divine right to exercise their “authority” in any way they see fit at any time and are never to be questioned – I think this theory has some merit.
    • McFlock 17.1

      7 January 2011 at 9:16 pm

      I’m wondering whether the full light/siren pursuit is an issue, creating a stress reaction in someone who is already a dick, possibly drunk, and maybe driving at speeds beyond their ability.

      And even if they call off the pursuit, the driver is still lacking fine motor control and possibly sensory distortion (including depth perception) for 20 mins until the adrenaline runs out.

      So if current practise is to follow close with lights and siren, maybe follow at a distance low-key until an advance roadblock can be prepared? And police vehicle cameras so the driver might be identified without pursuit and arrested the next day? And if backup isn’t in the area, maybe a graduated pursuit system ratcheting up, rather than trying to ratchet down when the driver is pumped with adrenaline.
      • Treetop 17.1.1

        8 January 2011 at 10:54 am

        For sure blaring sirens would increase sensory perception, which would increase the likelyhood of panick and or fear and escalating adrenalin. The person being pursued is now so anxious and they either chose flight or fight.

        Silencing sirens will not happen as this will increase the risk of motorists and pedrestrians being endangered by a police pursuit.

        I know that the police had a vacancy for an organisational psychologist last year. They need to employ one just to look into the psychology of a person being pursued by the police and what physiologically occurs within the body of the pursuer.
18. Colonial Viper 18

    7 January 2011 at 8:00 pm

    Love the RWNJ’s justifying the continuing deaths of inexperienced, immature young people in these situations as possibly unfortunate but certainly unsurprising and acceptable.

    Thanks fellas, speaks volumes.
19. prism 19

    7 January 2011 at 10:07 pm

    Blame the miscreant, do nothing to improve policy for better outcomes, jump on a soapbox about how you always stopped when requested/ never exceeded the speed limit / were near-perfect when you were young. In other words the whole discussion is about why everybody is not a carbon copy of you, you RWNJ.

    No wonder we have chronically bad policies in most areas in NZ. The blame culture and the smartie culture is the one that rules so many mouths in any attempts at discussion, not a desire to look at a situation objectively and rationally. We won’t improve things until we get people who are not irrational themselves doing the thinking about others’ irrational behaviours. Much of what has already been said here by the ‘broken record’ brigade counts for fuck-all.
20. jcuknz 20

    7 January 2011 at 10:20 pm

    Thank you for the abuse and mis application of motives to me CV.
    But to add a positive note to this thread I wonder why in over sixty years of driving I have just one ticket for speeding, back in 1964 when I was given a false deadline by my boss, and he didn’t offer to pay my fine either … the [whatever you care to call him]. I also can count my parking tickets with just using the fingers of one hand … once.
    Why is this I wonder?
    One reason I like to think is that the driving indoctrination I received as a child from my guardian was of a careful responsible driver who obeyed the rules. so when I learnt to drive at 17 years basically all I had to learn was car handling. But such is the disrespect for ‘traffic cops’, and the common belief that getting a ticket is bad luck rather than foolish behaviour, that in addition to reasons I suggested earlier the adults in our society are in many cases teaching their children how not to behave responsibly on the road by simply not doing so themselves …as perhaps tonight’s crash story illustrates ….a witness told us they were not boy racers but older.

    So instead of criticising the police you guys and gals should buck your ideas up, RWNJ’s AND LWNJ’s.alike, and show a better example to your offspring.

    I can also add the comment the judge made to me “Its not the first time you have driven above the limits is it” and of course it wasn’t then or now. When I think about the situation I am glad that my son has survived past those dangerous years despite some bad examples from me.
    • Colonial Viper 20.1

      7 January 2011 at 10:53 pm

      Come now I did not abuse you nor did I miss apply what you said.

      Which was this:

      Apart from the collateral damage this is one less idiot on the roads to cause a problem

      I took this to mean – one more dead teenager, one less young idiot on the roads causing us problems, the rest of us are better off.

      Or did I misinterpret your message. I’m interested in whether or not you really believe this.

      Now I have no issue with what you said later about civil societal conditioning – or simply a modicum of respect – being a necessary part of staying safe and being part of a community. However, your point is moot when you can’t show a dead teenager a good example, teach them nor help them to learn more respect.

      Its basically a waste.
      • jcuknz 20.1.1

        8 January 2011 at 10:32 am

        Of course it is a waste. All the effort the community has put into birthing and raising that young man has gone for naught because we did it wrong. In the wild push for rights at the expense of responsibility. Making up more rules is not a solution, self-discipline in a free society is.
        • millsy 20.1.1.1

          8 January 2011 at 10:38 am

          ” In the wild push for rights at the expense of responsibility”

          God I hate it when people trot out that old chestnut, because you know its a ploy for old white men to enforce their draconian moral beliefs on the population, which includes but is not limited to:

          Ensuring young people are kept from speaking their mind and expressing themselves, and torturing and beating them if they dont comply

          Ensuring women stay in unhappy marriages

          Keeping gays in the closet

          Telling women what they can do with their bodies

          Pretty much banning sex unless before marriage

          Giving authority figures free range to overeach and misuse their powers
21. ianmac 21

    7 January 2011 at 11:26 pm

    I have come here a bit late. We have had this discussion before but no one has answered the question.
    A stolen car races through the town.
    The patrol car is nearby.
    Should the patrol car give chase?
    If not then what should happen next?
    Anyone out there?
    • McFlock 21.1

      8 January 2011 at 1:44 am

      Well, if we’re talking about a small town there could well be only one police vehicle to pursue. But there’d probably only be one or two roads out of town, and most 18-24yo I’ve chased (admittedly on foot, but there’s been a few) had one of three destinations in mind – the pubs, the burger bar, or home.

      So, if the car goes on an out of town road the police car can discretely follow at a distance, and radio the police in the next town to set up a spike strip (if they double back, a single road is probably a good place to put up lights, or a spike strip if enough warning, and herd them towards the other town’s units if the run). If they head towards the only open burger joint in town, there’s a good chance they’ll be caught in the carpark. And if they’re local, the police officer has probably already met them. The vehicle would probably be left largely intact if the police can patrol an expected dumping area and find the vehicle before they set it alight, so fingerprints (because most joyriders aren’t criminal masterminds) could probably ping them. Or one or two households on major routes might be enlisted to call up if they hear joyriders, giving a better tactical picture to the local officer.

      What you won’t get is an instant adrenaline rush so the panicking little buggers lose traction and drive into a kid’s bedroom.

      It’s not a dramatic alternative, possibly not the best alternative, but it is another option. It’s only a bloody car. If they spend an hour doing burnouts etc, then that’s enough time to get more police into the area and set up a planned roadblock and interception.

      If it’s an urban area, follow discretely to get a handle on where they’re going and set up other vehicles for a road block. And if they’re going at 120 instead of 180 because you’re not visibly chasing them, you’re colleagues have got a couple more moments to set up the spikes.

      Just a thought, if integrating urban CCTV into the chase and getting a few more police helicopters is completely out of the question. Even police UAVs.
22. Graeme 22

    8 January 2011 at 8:14 am

    I am a RWNJ?

    why? becayse i believe that any one playing in an adult world should live with what ever desicions they make either good or bad?

    the young fella rolled the dice of life and lost. it was his desicion not mine, not the police not the owner of the vehicle he was stealing at the time to draw attention to himself. it will be a sad state if the police should stop doing their job. it is time that fleeing the police became a serious offence. it is also time people stopped copping out and blaming the police. `
    • prism 22.1

      8 January 2011 at 10:17 am

      Graeme

      the young fella rolled the dice of life and lost

      Can you not find concern in your heart and goodwill for other people in society?
      Can you not think about the conflicting attitudes in society which I say are made irrationally by irrational people? For instance, playing on television footage of exciting police chases taken from other countries’ film. This is shown as an exciting spectacle not even from an educational or corrective viewpoint.

      You are uncaring about others’ wellbeing and whether our society facilitates this for everybody or does the opposite. when you allow your annoyance and emotions to bring a response like the above to a public blog, where some reasoned thought could be expected.
      • jcuknz 22.1.1

        8 January 2011 at 10:42 am

        How silly these bleeding hearts are .. somebody states a fact, in colourful terms I admit, and is accused of being uncaring … un-PC would be a legitimate comment but uncaring … that assumes too much..
        • prism 22.1.1.1

          8 January 2011 at 11:07 am

          Who’s got a bleeding heart jcuknz? Me? I don’t think so. I can be pretty direct and critical in my thinking and manage to upset numbers of rigid thinkers when I criticise their favourite fantasies and excuses. Whereas you got upset when I didn’t put the appellation Sir in front of Roger Douglas’ name. You have soft emotions which you spill out over irrelevant things I think.
          • Descendant Of Smith 22.1.1.1.1

            8 January 2011 at 11:46 am

            appellation “cur” in front of Roger Douglas

            Corrected spelling.
            • prism 22.1.1.1.1.1

              8 January 2011 at 10:59 pm

              DoS I like your style sir!
23. millsy 23

    8 January 2011 at 10:47 am

    the term ‘politically correct’ is one used by old redneck men who wish nothing more that keep an old order that was based on a 2000 year old bedtime story and required a strict heirachy enforced by torture, violence and ostracising those who are a bit different.

    They wish to ensure all young people are tortured if they step out of line and all women to be stripped of rights and made to be trapped in unhappy marriages.

    They also wish to being back the Southern pastime of lynching,
    • jcuknz 23.1

      8 January 2011 at 11:01 am

      Atta Boy Millsy! LOL 🙂
24. Chris73 24

    8 January 2011 at 11:35 am

    I apoligise for posting since I’ve been banned for a week but I just have to say this a way better site then red alert!

    Its so amusing and the language you’re allowed to get away with…EPIC!

    Big ups to the site 🙂
    • millsy 24.1

      8 January 2011 at 11:43 am

      “Its so amusing and the language you’re allowed to get away with…EPIC!”

      Not as permissive as KiwiBlog though….so I hear.

      I suppose it allows Farrar to paint himself as a moderate.
      • Chris73 24.1.1

        8 January 2011 at 11:50 am

        “Why dont you fuck off you nasty old git.”

        Seriously I don’t know of any other blogs where you can say stuff like that and get away with it (encouraged even) but I like it!

        Long may freedom of speech let rip!

        Oh yeah, if the drivers stopped (as they’re supposed to do) then they wouldn’t be killing themselves, I support the police 100% in this

        Its Darwinism at its finest
        • Adele 24.1.1.1

          8 January 2011 at 3:29 pm

          Teenaa koe, Chris73

          Darwinism at its finest would have nasty old gits no longer part of the gene pool.
          • jcuknz 24.1.1.1.1

            9 January 2011 at 8:46 am

            If they are ‘old’ it is unlikely they are contributing to the expanding population if you get my meaning. As often appropriate … the anti-spam word is ‘balls’ 🙂
25. Psycho Milt 25

    8 January 2011 at 12:08 pm

    For all that we can agree the current situation is unsatisfactory and some change in approach is needed to reduce the risk to the non-munter road user, this pretence that poor, unfortunate youths are being mercilessly chased to their deaths by fascist bullyboys is only going to invite ridicule from most people. Taxpayers generally do lack sympathy or empathy with people who think killing others is a small price to pay to evade a driving-while-disqualified charge, and that isn’t going to change anytime soon.

    It’s clear that we’ve got a worst-of-both-worlds situation at the moment, in which we require the Police to pursue and apprehend offenders, but impose various restrictions on the pursuit that effectively provide an escape route for offenders who are willing to up the stakes high enough. It’s the what-to-do-about-it part that actually requires some thought put into it, and that’s what seems to be lacking. From the left we’ve got recommendations that amount to letting the offenders carry on with whatever it is they were doing, which isn’t really very attractive, and from the right we’ve got recommendations that amount to upping the punishments to the point where failing to stop becomes a serious crime – which also isn’t very attractive.

    Basically, people who want the Police to change their policy are going to have to come up with an alternative that doesn’t amount to learning to live with low-level crime rather than doing something about it. Most people don’t want their society to just put up with low-level crime, and they certainly don’t want to pay police officers to ignore offending. Any suggestions?
    • Rex Widerstrom 25.1

      8 January 2011 at 12:52 pm

      I do… use unmarked cars (instead of just utilising them to ctach people doing 110 km/h on the motorway) to follow and track the offender (and helicopters with infrared cameras wouldn’t go amiss either).

      Intervene (pursue, block etc) only if his or her driving becomes a danger to others. Scroll back up and you’ll see it possibly means I’m alive rather than dead.

      Because eventually they will stop, even if it’s because they run out of fuel (though the police did chase the kid in the linked story, they actually caught him because he stopped).

      If you can’t or don’t want to wait for them to stop of their own accord, co-ordinate with other vehicles to use road spikes, a road block, etc. Pursue as the very last resort, not the first.

      Not perfect, but avoids the fact that when the red and blue lights go on, the offender gets an adrenalin rush, the “fight or flight” response kicks in, and they run.
      • Psycho Milt 25.1.1

        8 January 2011 at 1:23 pm

        But they didn’t contribute to killing me. And the soda company got it’s car back in one piece. Neither happy outcome occurred in this or the 20 other cases we’re talking about. The question is, why not?

        Perhaps because, in those cases, the munters weren’t driving a really obvious stolen car and weren’t seen by cops in an unmarked car.

        I notice in the linked article from your comment above that NSW has Skye’s law, named for a toddler killed by one of these fuckwits and imposing a 3-year jail term for causing a police pursuit, with 5 years for a repeat offence. Maybe we should emulate Aussie practices after all…
        • Colonial Viper 25.1.1.1

          8 January 2011 at 2:05 pm

          imposing a 3-year jail term for causing a police pursuit, with 5 years for a repeat offence. Maybe we should emulate Aussie practices after all…

          …after asking just one more question: what has been the practical effect of Skye’s Law on the number and outcome of police pursuits in NSW?
          • jcuknz 25.1.1.1.1

            9 January 2011 at 9:03 am

            I doubt if there has been any practical effect because the problem starts with the up-bringing of these young adults …. which makes them think that stealing a car is AOK and the rest follows from there. As for the suggestions about choppers and organised containment procedures … this assumes a much higher level of policing than we the taxpaper are prepared to pay … but some of us love a sob story about a poor kid that killed himself being foolish. I personally am more concerned and disturbed by the story of the kid who jumped into the hot pool … simply gastly … uurrgh!
26. ianmac 26

    8 January 2011 at 7:09 pm

    Psycho: “Basically, people who want the Police to change their policy are going to have to come up with an alternative that doesn’t amount to learning to live with low-level crime rather than doing something about it. Most people don’t want their society to just put up with low-level crime, and they certainly don’t want to pay police officers to ignore offending. Any suggestions?”
    My understanding too. The punish brigade or the Don't Pursue Brigade, have not answered the question of what do you do?
    We know in retrospect that the runner was a kid panicking or being stupid. But at the first moment it is just you or me or the vicar or an immature kid.
    So what should the patrol car do. "Excuse me sir. Are you a vicar, a Leftie or are you a stupid kid panicking? If you are the latter I will not chase you. If you are the former I will give you a nice ticket."
27. ZeeBop 27

    9 January 2011 at 10:00 am

    Petrol is sniffed. People who are around cars get effected by the vapor. Is it any
    wonder that they are stupidier and more reckless as a result? Parking attendants,
    petrol stations, mechanics, all should have routine blood checks as a part of their
    employment so the level of petrol in their systems isn’t helping to cause their behavior.

    Police do not know that the driver is 15! until he hits the street furniture at speed.
    Small men who look at a distance as children behing the wheel will benefit from
    a Police policy that says to back off when a young person is driving a car recklessly.

    Its youth culture, it comes and goes, it changes. Currently young people see
    cars as toys. So television should stop suggesting that cars are toys, getting
    Paul Henry off was a good start, banning Top gear, and having some racing
    stars discuss the dangers of driving and why messing with the suspension
    of your car and letting rip will kill innocent passers AND HAS!

    But this requires leadership, and the media just love a chase and a death
    story, a bit of finger wagging at someone else, when they are partly to blame
    for the childish man child cult of cars as toys.

    Cars are not toys, cars use petrol, petrol keeps our economy and food rolling
    in, and as petrol prices rise wasting petrol in making cars noisier and less
    efficient is actually bad for our economy, dmaging the roads, disturbing sleep,
    causing pipes and other wear and tear, and worse, bad for food prices. So I
    suspect as the general public get more fed up with the cost, just like the
    Police petrol bill, they will start getting anrgy at the real problem, petrol
    sniffing dopes in cars that are seen as toys by their drivers, extensions
    of their personality they really should not be advertizing.

    Youth culture will move on, it did in the past, it will again. In the case
    of car hoons it can not come too soon.
28. Rharn 28

    13 January 2011 at 11:11 am

    When you hear the siren and see the flashing lights in the rear view mirror ‘ya’ got two choices: stop or run. These are ‘your’ choices not the cops.
    • Colonial Viper 28.1

      13 January 2011 at 11:18 am

      And what happens then when the target vehicle chooses to take off through a suburban street at 120 km/h?

      Who makes the next choice?
    • Armchair Critic 28.2

      13 January 2011 at 11:28 am

      When you see a car being driven suspiciously, or in a dangerous manner you have two choices: turn on your siren and lights, or do something else that is less likely to cause the driver to flee.
      Only once you have made your choice and acted could the driver of the other vehicle have to decide whether to stop or run.
29. Rharn 29

    13 January 2011 at 11:33 am

    It’s got nothing to do with the ‘next’ choice CV but ‘all’ to do with the choice to …….stop or run. The law is pretty clear on what you are required to do if requested to stop by a police officer.

    There is simply no way you can blame other people for the personal decisions that you make.
    • Colonial Viper 29.1

      13 January 2011 at 11:40 am

      Thanks for ignoring the other players in the scenario Rharn. They too have choices and options you know.
      • Rharn 29.1.1

        13 January 2011 at 12:18 pm

        Yes they do………..like not doing their job. Now don’t think for one minute that I am a great fan of the Police. Most are OK but a few do have ‘macho’ problems and I for one have been on the receiving end of their sarcasm and innuendo. But the bottomline is stop or run that is the choice for both parties but the difference is that the law requires the public to stop when asked to do so. I you do a runner and get chased that is the result of your decision and the Police doing their job. The roads have enough crazy drivers out there as it is with dickheads driving with impunity knowing that if they get flashed they can boot it with no apprehension possible.
        Even if the police get the legit number plate they have to track down the driver.
        • Armchair Critic 29.1.1.1

          13 January 2011 at 1:07 pm

          Yes they do………..like not doing their job.
          Sure, but I don’t see anyone suggesting the police should not do their job. Don’t over-simplify. The suggestion is that the police should do their job differently.
          To put it clearly, an important part of the police’s role is to protect lives and property. Lives first, property second. When the police are part of a process that results in someone dying, anyone (dangerous drivers, other drivers, pedestrians, whoever) dying, they have failed to fulfil an important part of their role. When they do fail (as they inevitably will – policing is hard) they need to ask “could we have done something differently and avoided this death?”
          Rex, in 25.1 above, has a number of suggestions about what the police could do differently. I like them all and think pursuit with sirens and lights should be a last resort.
30. Rharn 30

    13 January 2011 at 12:01 pm

    And the question for you and the others advocating chasing is, which outcome is best for all concerned?

    There is no single answer to that question. It would depend on the circumstances of the offence and traffic flows, volume, road conditions etc.

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS