http://www2.wspa.com/spa/news/local/article/mayors_memo_may_handcuff_police_officers/26918



The police response time possibly just got longer...

Wow, what an idiot. That mayor has just about created the perfect city for criminals to opperate in. No chases? What is she thinking? Glad I don't live there.

What, criminals are going to adhere to a code of conduct, only commit one crime between arrests?

So a BG who is fleet afoot and can outrun the police has free reign? Well, no, I guess he doesn't have to even be faster than the police, just walk away and there will be no pursuit? Makes no sense in concept, practice, or even in English.

There's costs and benefits to "no chase" policies, and to any others. I'm in favor of letting experienced, service-oriented LEOs make such decisions -- long discussion required as to why -- but we don't have nearly as many of those around as I'd like.

I would agree (I admit I don't know what all the benefits are to 'no-chase' policies are) but I'm of the mindset we should let the LEOs make that determination, not the city Mayor...

My son is a LEO in the St. Louis area. He was driving by a golf course after midnight last week in an area where they had been having some burglaries. Saw some kids, coasted past and shut down. When he confronted them, they ran, he chased. He came to a short brick wall and stepped up to go over, his foot slipped, driving his shin into wall. He didn't break anything but wasn't able to walk well enough that the doctor would certify him for active duty. This is a situation where I could see (but not necessarily agree with) that those in charge could make a no chase decision based on the cost to the department in lost man hours, additional overtime, etc.

Depends on the LEOs, I think. I don't think that it's a great idea for a bunch of young, over-adrenalized MPD cops to make a decision to chase. But maybe that's because I help pay the bills when they screw up. Which is often.

To me, a no-chase rule is a cop-out. You're not addressing the problem. If LEOs are not making the correct decisions in a high-stress, adrenalized situation, then it's due to inadequate training. People fall back on their level of training under stress, correct? "Solving" that problem by prohibiting chasing criminals simply absolves you of having to train your officers. It's like a zero tolerance rule on school campuses. It takes any logical decision-making out of the process. You're telling your people that they aren't capable of making tough decisions, so decisions are no longer required.

Or inadequate selection for that decision.

Cops are not fungible. Different people tend to make different kinds of decisions, well, differently. A good 20-year veteran cop who has been around the block is going to tend to make different decisions, in some cases, than a good, aggressive young guy who is trying to make his bones.

Happens in a lot of areas.

If you can't chase with a car, you can always chase with a bullet. Perhaps the towns new slogan is "We don't have time to chase you, so we'll just shoot you instead".

I think it'd be great if folks who would be tempted to take off when stopped believe that, but I'm not sure that there's a way without having a lot of inappropriate shots being fired. You got one?

Some very thoughtful folks involved in law enforcement have given a lot of thought to chase policies; I don't think that they've come up with a good policy answer, because any policy has lots of tradeoffs, and the tradeoffs aren't pretty.

someone should suggest to her that maybe they don't need to patrol at all then, and can just hold "please turn yourselves in day" at the jail and see how that works out! what an idiot!

I do understand that there are many factors that play into whether a chase should be done or not, but on the whole I feel that society will be better off if the bad guys are actually caught and removed from society when they are causing problems (unfortunately, our current system doesn't often remove them for very long!) It's clearly an area where training needs to adequate, and also an area where more experienced officers should be able to help make decisions.

That single item is, I believe, one of the biggest problems facing America today. If you don't give people adequate penalties for their crimes it won't deter them. You can't lock them up for 6 months of a 3 year sentence and let them sit around with TV, a gym, Internet access, etc. and call that punishment. Bad food, solitary cells, long sentences, and nothing beyond the basics they need to live... that's what jail should be. Sit there and think about what you did.

BB

Unfortunately, to her, it's all about the money. The City had to pay out some Work Comp claims and she's pissed.

Law Enforcement is not a money maker for government. There is no return on investment. She needs to suck it up and let the Chief make his own policy decisions. Of course, I am sure that the town is small enough that every decision is political....