High-speed pursuits banned in WA

[jpd80]

LINK to Ninemsn

Western Australia's 5800 police officers have been issued with a union directive banning high speed pursuits.

The Sunday Times says the union took action in frustration at disciplinary action taken against officers, who have been accused of driving too fast in pursuits.

The paper says the union is particularly irate about the use of automatic vehicle locators (AVLs) in police cars to build a case against the officers. The union argues the locators are inaccurate at recording speed.

Police Commissioner Karl O'Callaghan called the union action irresponsible and urged officers to do their jobs. He's called an urgent meeting with the union for Monday to discuss the issue.

"I don't think this action is satisfactory at all and I think potentially it could lead to some level of anarchy if it becomes a common approach to high-speed pursuits," he said.

Union president Russell Armstrong said the directive had been issued because "inaccurate information" from AVLs in police cars had led to disciplinary action against several police officers. AVLs are not certified speed detectors.

In WA, every police car is fitted with an AVL, a device operated by a global-positioning system, which provides information about the car's location and speed to the Police Operations Centre.

Interesting development, when officers starts being disciplined for inappropriate chases
then there's no wondering why the union doesn't want members being exposed to further action.
Maybe WA police should start following their own rules and using use proper speed detectors.

[GTP owner]

If you believe the mantra that speed kills, then this is a logical conclusion. Not only will the crim be putting lives at risk, but so will the coppers doing the chasing. If they "wiped off five" how many lives will be saved???? So I think that while they believe their own rubbish about the irresponsisbility and outright danger associated with exceeding the speed limit, then they must not exceed it themselves. (ps. this also applies to all emergency service vehicles).

[bungarra]

Chalk one up for the bad guys!! But like GTP Owner said, goes along with the safety mantra.

[chevypower]

Originally Posted by GTP owner

If you believe the mantra that speed kills, then this is a logical conclusion. Not only will the crim be putting lives at risk, but so will the coppers doing the chasing. If they "wiped off five" how many lives will be saved???? So I think that while they believe their own rubbish about the irresponsisbility and outright danger associated with exceeding the speed limit, then they must not exceed it themselves. (ps. this also applies to all emergency service vehicles).

I don't have a problem with emergency vehicles going above the speed limit, though a few years ago, here in the winter, I saw an ambulance with sirens and lights on, overtook me at night, on very slick ice, then continued way too fast for the conditions. I just knew he was going to slide off the road. That was confirmed when I caught up to him after he slid off the embankment. He had to wait there for a capable tow truck, and who knows what happened to the patients. Usually I don't care if they go a little over the limit, if the conditions are right, and they exercise caution.

[shedcoupe]

Don't wanna be a hijacker but, OT - you can drink and drive in WA, get sprung, and still have a license ! Repeatedly !!!
When I came over here I noticed utes with an 'E' plate like a 'P' plate and thought they were carrying explosives or something, but no, 'E' is for 'extraordinary license' which is given to you to drive to and from work so that the kiddies don't starve to death.
And you can mess up again and get another one. That's just wrong.
Strange ways in the west - like a watered-down NT.

[bigsta]

agree toatally with chevy

speed is relative to the conditions at hand, the vehicle and the experience of the driver.

Speed does not kill inexperience and fatigue do!

[2011G6E]

Who on earth could support such a rediculous idea?!

For christs sake, what do people think will happen to the crime rates and car theft if a crook knows all they have to do is drive fast and the police have to let them go?
If a bad guy drives the other way even just doing the speed limit, how are police supposed to catch him? If you can't go fast to catch up, how can you set up roadblocks ahead...or are they dangerous as well to the poor gentle little criminals?

In this case they're talking about police getting into trouble for going fast chasing criminals...isn't that what they're supposed to damn well do? There have been suggestions before that police shouldn't chase criminals because they shouldn't pay with thier life for stealing a car if they crash. Why do we have to do things to make it safer for criminals? It's like the stupid requests to take guns away from armoured car guards. Who'd take a job where you drive a huge truck full of cash and you have no way of defending yourself? Trucks would be knocked over once or twice a week.

[fpv_gt]

Originally Posted by shedcoupe

Don't wanna be a hijacker but, OT - you can drink and drive in WA, get sprung, and still have a license ! Repeatedly !!!
When I came over here I noticed utes with an 'E' plate like a 'P' plate and thought they were carrying explosives or something, but no, 'E' is for 'extraordinary license' which is given to you to drive to and from work so that the kiddies don't starve to death.
And you can mess up again and get another one. That's just wrong.
Strange ways in the west - like a watered-down NT.

Very true. It is bizare.

Goody 2 shoes worried about poor johnny dieing in car crash. Coppers getting blamed everytime.

[bungarra]

It all stems from a couple of indigenous Australians getting clocked by WAPOL doing 30km/h over the speed limit. The officers turned their car around and went into pursuit mode. The officers stopped at a red light and the stolen car continued on eventually crashing a killing one person in the stolen vehicle.

The mother of the deceased claimed "he was a good boy who got mixed up with the wrong people and I don't blame the Police, but they should have used an unmarked car to follow them"

1. He was not a good boy, he was a thief, his choice no one elses
2. You shouldn't blame the Police, they were acting within the law.
3. How much more panicked would they become if they were being followed by an unmarked commodore or falcon? A guy got of a speeding charge because of being followed by an unmarked car for too long.

Time certain peopl in the community accept responsibility.

[shedcoupe]

My concern with the 'gloves-off' 'gently-gently' PC approach is that if times get much tougher in terms of criminal behaviour, then society will jump to support fascist / draconian controls, whereas if a more realistic approach to law enforcement had been adopted much earlier, then it wouldn't be necessary to swing too far the other way.
Yes, it is awful when some poor innocent person(s) get T-boned in a chase, but the alternative is worse imho.

[phillyc]

The Police Union is sticking up for their workers and so they should.

Banning the chases is an unfortunate course of action. As much as anything I just think it is an ambit / bargaining strategy to stop the use of AVL to persecute WA Officers.

Most likely, the 'original stated intention' by the bureaucrats that got the AVL's in the cars was to have it for determining police resource locations for emergencies. Not some punitive procedural adherance device.

Good on the cops for taking a stand. It will be the general public that cops (no pun intended) this mandatory satelite tracking next if the do-gooders get their way.

This is one for the memory banks then. The Police Union say this satelite technology is innacurate at tracking vehicle speed in certain circumstances.

[Dave3911]

Whilst I am normally pretty pro-police, I disagree with the WA Police Union's position here whole heartedly. AVL is not inaccurate at all, it can give an accurate location at any given time. Record that data. Compare distance over time. You get speed. It's pretty simple, and as with most things simple - they are usually some of the most accurate. At the end of the day, all 'speed' is is a measure of distance over a unit of time. If you can accurately record both, you accurately get speed. Time is easy to record. AVL gives an accurate location. Get more than one location, you have distance. Easy.

Trying to argue that the speed ascertained from AVL data is inaccurate because it's not a "certified speed detector" is just legal spin. Certified or not, it's accurate. Police disciplinary hearings (just as any other job where you get in trouble) are not courts of law... as such some of the ridiculous rules of evidence that have lead to some ridiculous outcomes from the courts don't apply.

Coppers love to have their cake and eat it too. When a crook get's off a charge on a technicality - it's a miscarriage of Justice and an example of the "System" failing. When a copper gets off on a technicality - he's innocent. No questions asked.

This is just another example of this ridiculous mindset. Some coppers have gotten in trouble for inaccurately reporting their speed & have been caught out after the fact. Now the police union get's all shirty that they have been caught out and tells everyone else not to chase because some of their colleagues are throbs who don't do the right thing so their supervising Sgt doesn't abandon the pursuit? Great logic there.

They should be standing up and making sure their members are doing the right thing in the first place - not trying to cover up for them.

[jpd80]

The whole premise of the ban is because officers are apparently going too fast according to
some GPS tracker that may or may not be accurate, this cat fight shouldn't be done in public.

At the very least, any decisions on pursuits and regulations should remain confidential,
what's the point of telling potential criminals how far the police will go before breaking off pursuit.

Get a helicopter after someone fleeing and pepper the thing with bullets, send a message...
shoot a few of these little scoobies dead and let the rest think about fleeing then...

[The G6ET Spot]

Originally Posted by phillyc

This is one for the memory banks then. The Police Union say this satelite technology is innacurate at tracking vehicle speed in certain circumstances.

yet they have no qualms about using radar that a lot of the time they don't use to the manufacturers specifications.

They get no sympathy from me.

[Ben73]

So when a cop stops chasing a criminal, does the criminal immediately slow down to the speed limit and obey all laws?
I doubt it.

They will still be shitting themselves and continue driving at a high rate of speed to get as far from the cops as possible.

So whats better. A Criminal alone doing 150 down the road towards a red light.

Or the same criminal still doing 150 towards the red light but with a cop behind them with the siren blaring and flashing lights everywhere.
At least if the cop is there, the other drivers at the intersection will be more aware earlier there is a situation.

[Till_Lind]

Never thought I'd say this, but good on that union (but then it is the police union).

[flappist]

Originally Posted by Ben73

So when a cop stops chasing a criminal, does the criminal immediately slow down to the speed limit and obey all laws?
I doubt it.

They will still be shitting themselves and continue driving at a high rate of speed to get as far from the cops as possible.

So whats better. A Criminal alone doing 150 down the road towards a red light.

Or the same criminal still doing 150 towards the red light but with a cop behind them with the siren blaring and flashing lights everywhere.
At least if the cop is there, the other drivers at the intersection will be more aware earlier there is a situation.

Well Ben, actually the most common situation is that the person being chased DOES slow down again.

It is interesting that you use the "sudszyesqe" mentality that the person being chased must be a CRIMINAL.

A rather large percentage of those being chased have no idea that they are actually being chased at all. (and I do have many first hand examples of this)

e.g.

Driving at 120 out in woop woop.
Unmarked car going other way, puts on lights too late.
It is hilly double lines so he cannot do a U turn safely for about 1 or 2 km.
He does his U turn and takes off, by this time is at least 5 km behind.

Scenario 1)
Copper does 140km/h, the maximum legal speed he can do.
It will take him at least 15 minutes to catch up (5km @ 20km/hr) by which time they are at least 30km down the road. So this chase car has been doing this "extremely dangerous" speed for all this time for what......a $300 ticket.

Scenario 1a) The chasee spotted the copper and winds up to 130. Now it takes 30 minutes to catch up and it is over 50km down the road.

Scenario 2)
Copper goes full tilt, 200km/h.
It still takes him about 4 minutes and he covers about 10km at this, as we are told by EVERY expert, suicidal speed endangering every other road user for what....oh thats right a $300 speeding ticket.

Scenario 2a) chasee winds up and all those numbers are extended.

Win at all costs is a VERY dangerous mindset.

If Osama bin Laden was cornered in a school full of kids would it be ok to gas the school knowing that maybe, just maybe a couple of kids would be killed?

The end does not always justify the means and NOTHING goes faster than a radio......

[Ben73]

Originally Posted by flappist

Well Ben, actually the most common situation is that the person being chased DOES slow down again.

It is interesting that you use the "sudszyesqe" mentality that the person being chased must be a CRIMINAL.

A rather large percentage of those being chased have no idea that they are actually being chased at all. (and I do have many first hand examples of this)

e.g.

Driving at 120 out in woop woop.
Unmarked car going other way, puts on lights too late.
It is hilly double lines so he cannot do a U turn safely for about 1 or 2 km.
He does his U turn and takes off, by this time is at least 5 km behind.

Scenario 1)
Copper does 140km/h, the maximum legal speed he can do.
It will take him at least 15 minutes to catch up (5km @ 20km/hr) by which time they are at least 30km down the road. So this chase car has been doing this "extremely dangerous" speed for all this time for what......a $300 ticket.

Scenario 1a) The chasee spotted the copper and winds up to 130. Now it takes 30 minutes to catch up and it is over 50km down the road.

Scenario 2)
Copper goes full tilt, 200km/h.
It still takes him about 4 minutes and he covers about 10km at this, as we are told by EVERY expert, suicidal speed endangering every other road user for what....oh thats right a $300 speeding ticket.

Scenario 2a) chasee winds up and all those numbers are extended.

Win at all costs is a VERY dangerous mindset.

If Osama bin Laden was cornered in a school full of kids would it be ok to gas the school knowing that maybe, just maybe a couple of kids would be killed?

The end does not always justify the means and NOTHING goes faster than a radio......

Well that is all well and good. But I was referring to an actual criminal in a stolen car that just robbed a store at gun point while carrying drugs in their pocket and has the cops on their tail. If the cop stops chasing them they probably will get away with the crime.

Not someone who is breaking the speed limit by 10-20kmh

[GTP owner]

Originally Posted by Ben73

Well that is all well and good. But I was referring to an actual criminal in a stolen car that just robbed a store at gun point while carrying drugs in their pocket and has the cops on their tail. If the cop stops chasing them they probably will get away with the crime.

Not someone who is breaking the speed limit by 10-20kmh

That is the mantra that everyone bleats about, but Flappy has it right. Most high speed incidents are for reasons other than chasing the crims. It's often the chasing down speedsters doing 120km/h - in order to catch them they need to be doing 200km/h if they were going in the opposite direction. I find it incredibly hypocritical that in order to slow someone down doing 120, they need to go 200! If speed kills, then they have endangered lives in that pursuit. If you don't accept that, then you have a flaw in your logic box.

Also, when they are chasing the crims, the gloves do not come off - they have to radio back to base to get approval for a high speed pursuit. They are also given an indication of appropriate speeds. When they are exceeding those speeds they are instructed to pull back and slow down.

The most important bit that most people forget is that it is very hard to outrun the radio

[flappist]

Originally Posted by Ben73

Well that is all well and good. But I was referring to an actual criminal in a stolen car that just robbed a store at gun point while carrying drugs in their pocket and has the cops on their tail. If the cop stops chasing them they probably will get away with the crime.

Not someone who is breaking the speed limit by 10-20kmh

Yes and that is a whole different situation.

It is unlikely that the coppers would stop and would actually use other resources such as air etc.

The trick is realising that the world is not black and white and TV and movies are fiction.
Any crim with half a brain would not speed away from a crime as it would draw attention. (and the clever crims are the ones who do not get caught).

[Franco Cozzo]

Originally Posted by flappist

NOTHING goes faster than a radio......

Light does

[2011G6E]

Originally Posted by fpv_gt

Very true. It is bizare.

Goody 2 shoes worried about poor johnny dieing in car crash. Coppers getting blamed everytime.

Really? A special plate for repeat drink drivers over there? Never heard that before...amazing!
As for thieves dying in a high speed pursuit, I have one word: "good".

There is an old cliche about "we can't let the criminals know they've won"...but if you ban chases...for whatever reason...then they have won, and I would bet my lefty that high speed getaways in whatever hot car they could steal will become the norm, if they know police can't chase them.

Radio waves are just a part of the light spectrum, and do travel at the speed of light.

[Dave3911]

Originally Posted by flappist

Well Ben, actually the most common situation is that the person being chased DOES slow down again.

It is interesting that you use the "sudszyesqe" mentality that the person being chased must be a CRIMINAL.

A rather large percentage of those being chased have no idea that they are actually being chased at all. (and I do have many first hand examples of this)

e.g.

Driving at 120 out in woop woop.
Unmarked car going other way, puts on lights too late.
It is hilly double lines so he cannot do a U turn safely for about 1 or 2 km.
He does his U turn and takes off, by this time is at least 5 km behind.

Scenario 1)
Copper does 140km/h, the maximum legal speed he can do.
It will take him at least 15 minutes to catch up (5km @ 20km/hr) by which time they are at least 30km down the road. So this chase car has been doing this "extremely dangerous" speed for all this time for what......a $300 ticket.

Scenario 1a) The chasee spotted the copper and winds up to 130. Now it takes 30 minutes to catch up and it is over 50km down the road.

Scenario 2)
Copper goes full tilt, 200km/h.
It still takes him about 4 minutes and he covers about 10km at this, as we are told by EVERY expert, suicidal speed endangering every other road user for what....oh thats right a $300 speeding ticket.

Scenario 2a) chasee winds up and all those numbers are extended.

Win at all costs is a VERY dangerous mindset.

If Osama bin Laden was cornered in a school full of kids would it be ok to gas the school knowing that maybe, just maybe a couple of kids would be killed?

The end does not always justify the means and NOTHING goes faster than a radio......

Couple of things.

1. In no state of Australia would the scenario you describe be categorised as as a police pursuit. No pursuit controller. No formality. No debrief. No report. No backup units. Likely no radio transmissions at all. It is simply a long intercept. Different guidelines and totally different to what is being discussed here.

2. There is no "legal" speed cap that police have to adhere to (in any state that I'm aware of). Some state police force's do impose policy-based maximum's, but these are not law. As a general rule the law allows them to break the limit as long as it is 'reasonable' to the circumstances.

Using Vicpol as an example, the Road Rules in Victoria set no maximum - but within the organisation they use a Gold, Silver, Bronze and White colour coded system for driver's and vehicles. They may drive at the "highest" level the vehicle allows or the highest level the driver's training allows, if in a vehicle of higher classification.

Gold = Open Limit
Silver = 150
Bronze = 120
White = Speed Limit Only.

HWP vehicles(incl. Motorcycles) and driver's are all Gold. All general police are certified Silver with Standard police sedans, van's and wagons all Silver. Everything else (4WDs, Brawler Vans etc.) generally bronze. Only large, generally non-emergency response vehicles are white (IE. Booze busses, Comms Vans etc.). Only non-operational staff, or coppers yet to complete their emergency driving course are classified as "White". (There is no 'bronze' clasification for drivers, only vehicles).

So a Gold Driver in a Silver car, can only drive at Silver level and vice versa a Silver Driver in a Gold Car can only drive at Silver.

[bungarra]

Originally Posted by flappist

Well Ben, actually the most common situation is that the person being chased DOES slow down again.

It is interesting that you use the "sudszyesqe" mentality that the person being chased must be a CRIMINAL.......

Well, if you can see the Blue and Reds on and hear the siren behind you, why else wouldn't you stop? Only if you were or had committed a criminal act.

Originally Posted by flappist

A rather large percentage of those being chased have no idea that they are actually being chased at all. (and I do have many first hand examples of this)

e.g.

Driving at 120 out in woop woop.
Unmarked car going other way, puts on lights too late.
It is hilly double lines so he cannot do a U turn safely for about 1 or 2 km.
He does his U turn and takes off, by this time is at least 5 km behind.

Scenario 1)
Copper does 140km/h, the maximum legal speed he can do.
It will take him at least 15 minutes to catch up (5km @ 20km/hr) by which time they are at least 30km down the road. So this chase car has been doing this "extremely dangerous" speed for all this time for what......a $300 ticket.

Scenario 1a) The chasee spotted the copper and winds up to 130. Now it takes 30 minutes to catch up and it is over 50km down the road.

Scenario 2)
Copper goes full tilt, 200km/h.
It still takes him about 4 minutes and he covers about 10km at this, as we are told by EVERY expert, suicidal speed endangering every other road user for what....oh thats right a $300 speeding ticket.

Scenario 2a) chasee winds up and all those numbers are extended.......

So you are speeding and breaking the law, by how much? 10km/h or 20km/h? You didn't say what speed zone, you could have been on a back road in a country area that is an 80km/h zone. So you break the law by up to 40km/h and you expect the copper top let you go?? Weird that.

I drive country every second week and have done so in many states, never have I seen a copper who if he has picked you up on radar hasn't flashed his headlights and put the lights on to let you know he has got you as he is heading towards you so you can pull over and he can turn around safely.

Originally Posted by flappist

Win at all costs is a VERY dangerous mindset.......

The mindset of every criminal attempting to escape police.

Originally Posted by flappist

If Osama bin Laden was cornered in a school full of kids would it be ok to gas the school knowing that maybe, just maybe a couple of kids would be killed?......

Pathetic comparison, as Australia doesn't use gas except CS which can be used around kids if you use the lower strength types, but I would expect the TRG and SAS to respond as fast as possible and preferably kill the terrorist threat.

Originally Posted by flappist

The end does not always justify the means and NOTHING goes faster than a radio......

except the round out of most modern firearms, which travel faster than the speed of sound.

[SEZ213]

Can fully understand why the police would do that - anyone remember Mully? The bogan who after police stopped chasing him killed three people (including a baby)?

When the public is so quick to point the finger at those who attempt to uphold our laws, these guys have to start looking after themselves.

Their own internal business is giving them a hard time about it...WTF?

If Joe/Joanne blogs in his/her souped up fully sick car (stolen or otherwise) wants to do 200k's and kill themselves, it's probably a god send - the police don't need to be held responsible for that, and the mentality will always be that if the police did chase them, it would be their fault - if they don't chase them, it will still be their fault.

Why should they have blood on their hands as a result of media beat ups suggesting they're to blame? Just as easy for them not to chase them in my opinion.

[Paull]

Originally Posted by Dave3911

Whilst I am normally pretty pro-police, I disagree with the WA Police Union's position here whole heartedly. AVL is not inaccurate at all, it can give an accurate location at any given time. Record that data. Compare distance over time. You get speed. It's pretty simple, and as with most things simple - they are usually some of the most accurate. At the end of the day, all 'speed' is is a measure of distance over a unit of time. If you can accurately record both, you accurately get speed. Time is easy to record. AVL gives an accurate location. Get more than one location, you have distance. Easy.

Trying to argue that the speed ascertained from AVL data is inaccurate because it's not a "certified speed detector" is just legal spin. Certified or not, it's accurate. Police disciplinary hearings (just as any other job where you get in trouble) are not courts of law... as such some of the ridiculous rules of evidence that have lead to some ridiculous outcomes from the courts don't apply.

Coppers love to have their cake and eat it too. When a crook get's off a charge on a technicality - it's a miscarriage of Justice and an example of the "System" failing. When a copper gets off on a technicality - he's innocent. No questions asked.

This is just another example of this ridiculous mindset. Some coppers have gotten in trouble for inaccurately reporting their speed & have been caught out after the fact. Now the police union get's all shirty that they have been caught out and tells everyone else not to chase because some of their colleagues are throbs who don't do the right thing so their supervising Sgt doesn't abandon the pursuit? Great logic there.

They should be standing up and making sure their members are doing the right thing in the first place - not trying to cover up for them.

From what I have seen first hand, this most accurately represents the situation here, IMHO, that is.

Put more simply;
- an AVL no longer allows for false reporting of pursuit vehicle speed
- The police union should be ensuring that their members do the right thing so as to keep them out of trouble.

Well said Dave3911

[Road_Warrior]

There have been a couple of high profile cases here in Wait Awhile where the Police pursuit resulted in the death of the pursuee and in circumstances where the Police may not have had the authority from VKI to engage in the pursuit (and in one case, the pursuing driver wasn't qualified for pursuit work but gave chase anyway and the bad guy bought the farm). All these things are analysed by the Coroner and you can bet your bottom dollar that the usual media suspects are all over it like a 14yo boy with a Playboy.

No doubt about it, these ********* that steal cars are criminals regardless of whether they do a runner or not, and if a car or bike of mine was stolen I would expect the Police to do everything in their power to recover it and make the thief accountable, but the way the Police have gone about some chases in the past are diabolical - there is quite clearly a systemic failure somewhere along the line where a Police officer who does not have the qualifications to commence a pursuit is still able to and ignore the orders of VKI. This is the genesis of the current situation which has been exacerbated by media hysteria. However unfortunately the Police hierarchy have chosen to "shoot first ask questions later" with regard to investigating whether the officers acted appropriately or not and this has left a very sour taste in the mouths of those who are on the thin blue line. This sort of crap isn't isolated to pursuits either.

At the end of the day these things occur so infrequently the whole thing is a beatup - must be a slow news week.

[bungarra]

Originally Posted by jpd80

The whole premise of the ban is because officers are apparently going too fast according to
some GPS tracker that may or may not be accurate, this cat fight shouldn't be done in public.

At the very least, any decisions on pursuits and regulations should remain confidential,
what's the point of telling potential criminals how far the police will go before breaking off pursuit.

Get a helicopter after someone fleeing and pepper the thing with bullets, send a message...
shoot a few of these little scoobies dead and let the rest think about fleeing then...

The system that is currently used by WAPOL is not accurate, it has put some police vehicles in the Indian Ocean when they have been 35km's from the nearest ocean, one police panel van that was sitting at a police station was registered as doing in excess of 300km/h at the time, so yes the system has major faults. Police Officers and the Union have been asking for the system to be overhauled due to the technical issues, but both the supplier is arguing that i complys to 85% of the reuirements requested therefore is a Police problem.

[Gaz]

I support police chases as long as it's not done in a dangerous way. EG, 140 through a school zone at 3pm.

The case above in WA happened on a dual carriage way at 4am. The idiot crashed and ended the case there. In this situation and many others the police deserve the full support of the public.

I would be quite happy if we took the american approach and just rammed them off the road (if the situation suited, EG empty freeway etc). End the thing in 2 minutes rather than a 45 minute chase.

The old man, many years ago got dragged across the coals here for discharging his gun at a crim in a car hey were chasing. After they stopped him and he turned around and ran down his partner.

Seems like a suitable situation to have a shot at the *****.

[flappist]

Originally Posted by bungarra

Well, if you can see the Blue and Reds on and hear the siren behind you, why else wouldn't you stop? Only if you were or had committed a criminal act.




So you are speeding and breaking the law, by how much? 10km/h or 20km/h? You didn't say what speed zone, you could have been on a back road in a country area that is an 80km/h zone. So you break the law by up to 40km/h and you expect the copper top let you go?? Weird that.

I drive country every second week and have done so in many states, never have I seen a copper who if he has picked you up on radar hasn't flashed his headlights and put the lights on to let you know he has got you as he is heading towards you so you can pull over and he can turn around safely.



The mindset of every criminal attempting to escape police.



Pathetic comparison, as Australia doesn't use gas except CS which can be used around kids if you use the lower strength types, but I would expect the TRG and SAS to respond as fast as possible and preferably kill the terrorist threat.



except the round out of most modern firearms, which travel faster than the speed of sound.