News 
 Opinion 
 Editorial 
 General 
 No easy solution to the dilemma of police pursuits 

No easy solution to the dilemma of police pursuits

15 Jan, 2012 11:01 PM
There has been a large amount of debate on the issue of police pursuits lately. This is not an issue that ever goes away but simply resurfaces every time there is a fatality.

The call by one Ballarat resident who witnessed at close quarters a pursuit late last week has again cast up the spectre of innocent people being hurt or killed.

It has also brought an element of local drama to a tough dilemma faced by police across the country.

For the community, there is a disturbing and visceral sense of alarm when these same pursuits go roaring through the streets in which we live.

There have been many sound arguments opposing the value of these pursuits, particularly when they evaluate what can be gained in terms of captured stolen cars or criminals and the potential cost to the community.

The United States once again highlights a grim example of where we as a community do not want to go. Analysis by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration showed there was a staggering 2654 fatal crashes with 3146 fatalities over a nine-year study period last decade.

If that doesn’t seem like a lot, it is almost three-quarters of the death count for US service personnel from the Iraq conflict.

Even more concerning is that in this same period, 1088 of the fatalities were not in the fleeing vehicle and may have been innocent victims.

The conclusion of this report is that most of these pursuits occurred at high speed, at night and involved fleeing drivers with prior convictions.

In the badlands of the United States this raises the spectre of desperadoes which no level of force will deter. But as acting Victoria Police Commissioner Keiran Walshe pointed out, to adopt a blanket policy of abandoning all pursuits is to admit defeat to criminals and give the green light to anybody that dares break the speed limit. This could result in an even more anarchic Mad Max safety scenario.

The commissioner was at pains to detail some of the complexities of chase scenarios and the time pressures with which these decisions often need to be made.

If there is a middle ground to this difficult issue it must lie in the sophistication and expediency with which these pursuits are made, not in letting dangerous drivers go.

To minimise the risks it will then come down to the effectiveness of the rules and systems and perhaps, most importantly, ensuring there are resources to make them happen.

Print
Increase Text Size
Decrease Text Size

comments


Date: Newest first | Oldest first
The debate over police pursuits is wrong. Somehow the police have become the villians in this. The person fleeing is obviously in serious breach of the law. Taking police on a high speed pursuit should result in a manditory jail sentence of endangering lives. This is the ridiculous logic of the debate: Criminal is not at fault for driving at high speed because they were only speeding because they were fleeing the police who were chasing them to detain them for committing the initial crime. No wonder our society is a joke and unsafe.
Posted by My thoughts, 16/01/2012 9:35:39 AM, on The Ballarat Courier
just because a crash occurs while police are attempting to intercept the vehicle, (for the safety of other road users), it does not mean that the person driving the stolen car, or leaving a crime scene, or just out being an idiot for the sake of it, was not going to have a crash anyway. Then people would be asking "Where were the police, why didn't they stop this person?"

Can't win, these people in blue....


Posted by jaynie, 17/01/2012 12:52:01 PM, on The Ballarat Courier
When the people in Blue put themselves above the law they shouldn't win. I don't have the opinion of what ever it takes, because if that philosophy were to be adopted by the police then the police would be empowered to arrest and search without warrants, use disproportionate physical response to restrain or apprehend, and ultimately they would endanger the lives of the innocent. I only have 500 letters to play with here so I cannot expand anymore, I hope that readers understand and get the broad drift of what I am saying.
Posted by Clint, 18/01/2012 11:47:47 AM, on The Ballarat Courier
Point is Clint, the police were NOT acting outside the law. They were trying to apprehend someone who WAS. There are perameters that have been set for pursuits, and they are strictly adhered to. You want laws enforced or not? Or just sit back and let anarchy rule? As for arrst and search powers, you need a little more research to sound like you know what you're ralking about.
Posted by jaynie, 18/01/2012 1:06:42 PM, on The Ballarat Courier
@Clint. The police are not acting outside the law, they are enforcing it. The law provides specific power to the police, above that of average citizens, to protect society. Carrying a hand gun is illegal for the rest of society except the police and a few who are granted permission under the law. Should we ban police from carrying pistols as well? Should acts of war be seen as murder? Some people are granted actions outside the social norm in order to protect the rest of society. The law says they have this power. Police pursuit is one of them.
Posted by My thoughts, 18/01/2012 10:09:39 PM, on The Ballarat Courier
To Janynie, I suspect that we are arguing on the same side here. As soldier, when we go on operations we are bound by rules of engement. If we step outside those rules in combat we are held to account at all levels, by international governments, human rights commissions, the United Nations etc. Policing is no different, and I don't know what your experiences are with police but I have been around well and truly long enough to have seen police overstep the bounds of the law over the years. 99% of police are well intentioned and honest people. The rules are there to keep the other 1% honest.
Posted by Clint, 19/01/2012 7:10:30 AM, on The Ballarat Courier
And the rules are followed Clint, and all involved are accountable for that. What allegedly happened years ago, with the corrupt 1% you mention, is the reason these protocols are in place and enforced. Its just a pity these good men and women get blasted for trying to protect the community from idiots. There has been no suggestion that the officers involved were acting outside the law. FYI, police dont need a warrant to arrest someone if they are suspected of committing a serious crime, nor to search them if they have suspicion of a crime.
Posted by jaynie, 22/01/2012 9:49:09 AM, on The Ballarat Courier

post a comment


Screen name  *
Email address  *
Remember me?
Comment  *
 
We invite and encourage our readers to post comments. Comments are moderated and will appear as soon as our editor has approved them. When posting comments you agree to be bound by our Terms and Conditions.

Most popular articles


Her Majesty's NIE
 
Loreto College NIE


The Courier







Weather brought to you by:

Weatherzone

Front Page

Current Issue
Privacy Policy | Conditions of Use | Advertising Terms | Copyright © 2012. Fairfax Media.
 SEND...
 SAVE...
 SHARE...