The officers witnessed either a moving or traffic violation.
They initiated a stop.
The party involved refused to stop.
They followed either policy, experience, training, or knowledge to initiate a chase then a PIT
PIT led to apprehension AND finding a significant ‘distribution level’ amount of a controlled substance.
—
Those are facts.
You don’t have anywhere that you can argue ‘people in danger’ because the article doesn’t* say ‘people were put on danger’. You can’t argue about ‘people’s lives being in danger’ because you DO NOT KNOW if any were. Or if this department even has a history of endangering people’s lives in chases.
What you can, and have done, I’d say that your opinion is that ‘chases are bad’ because ‘people’s lives can be in danger’ without the context of the situation because you don’t have it. Regardless of your aside argument in parenthesis that I’ve even mentioned that I have opinions for, as well, but aren’t supported by current law.
When a person tries to leave on a bike for instance, that is still considered a chase, even if its not very far from the initial point of the cop trying to detain the person. This stop at a Texas campus is an example.
Student was pulled over for lack of lights biking at night.
Yes. And from the article you, as the OP to this entire discussion, have linked. This one at least, based on the facts presented in your chosen article, has proven to provide the police with the argument and justification for police chases being both safe and beneficial to enforcing the law.
And that is my entire argument. You. Chose. The. Wrong. Article. to make a “Police Bad” argument.
Did you look at the pictures or did you put together your argument for ‘opposite of ‘safe’’ from your own predisposed opinion? Let me say it again for you, the article and the pictures DO NOT SAY UNSAFE OR RISK TO LIVES OF BYSTANDERS in any capacity.
Anything you attribute to that is of your own making and therefor biased and in no capacity fact based.
—
Please stop. We’ve already addressed every argument you have as OP for this specific case.
What you should do is abandon this case and instead start a new post that has evidence and fact based reporting about your broader concern, which you’ve defined as ‘all chases are bad because they put undue risk on everyone and property’. Or however you wanted to word it… and then start your righteous debate there.
Edit: Hell, in that case… I might learn something from you and even agree with you if you provided evidence based reasoning behind your argument. But, this horse is dead and you aren’t going to convince me that this case does anything other than support the police’s argument for increased chase policies.
From what we can tell;
The officers witnessed either a moving or traffic violation.
They initiated a stop.
The party involved refused to stop.
They followed either policy, experience, training, or knowledge to initiate a chase then a PIT
PIT led to apprehension AND finding a significant ‘distribution level’ amount of a controlled substance.
—
Those are facts.
You don’t have anywhere that you can argue ‘people in danger’ because the article doesn’t* say ‘people were put on danger’. You can’t argue about ‘people’s lives being in danger’ because you DO NOT KNOW if any were. Or if this department even has a history of endangering people’s lives in chases.
What you can, and have done, I’d say that your opinion is that ‘chases are bad’ because ‘people’s lives can be in danger’ without the context of the situation because you don’t have it. Regardless of your aside argument in parenthesis that I’ve even mentioned that I have opinions for, as well, but aren’t supported by current law.
The officer was in danger. So was the public. Either you’re arguing in bad faith or you’re stone dumb.
The officer crashed his car into a traffic suspect. Period.
You are not listening to me nor did you read the article. Therefor, all I can assume is that you are a troll.
I’m not listening to you because you sound like an idiot.
There are safe police chases?
When a person tries to leave on a bike for instance, that is still considered a chase, even if its not very far from the initial point of the cop trying to detain the person. This stop at a Texas campus is an example.
Student was pulled over for lack of lights biking at night.
Yes. And from the article you, as the OP to this entire discussion, have linked. This one at least, based on the facts presented in your chosen article, has proven to provide the police with the argument and justification for police chases being both safe and beneficial to enforcing the law.
And that is my entire argument. You. Chose. The. Wrong. Article. to make a “Police Bad” argument.
This chase ended with a PIT-maneuver and a crash, which seems the opposite of ‘safe’.
Did you look at the pictures or did you put together your argument for ‘opposite of ‘safe’’ from your own predisposed opinion? Let me say it again for you, the article and the pictures DO NOT SAY UNSAFE OR RISK TO LIVES OF BYSTANDERS in any capacity.
Anything you attribute to that is of your own making and therefor biased and in no capacity fact based.
—
Please stop. We’ve already addressed every argument you have as OP for this specific case.
What you should do is abandon this case and instead start a new post that has evidence and fact based reporting about your broader concern, which you’ve defined as ‘all chases are bad because they put undue risk on everyone and property’. Or however you wanted to word it… and then start your righteous debate there.
Edit: Hell, in that case… I might learn something from you and even agree with you if you provided evidence based reasoning behind your argument. But, this horse is dead and you aren’t going to convince me that this case does anything other than support the police’s argument for increased chase policies.