http://www.cnn.com/2011/CRIME/06/09/us.scotus.car.chases/index.html

Washington (CNN) -- They have become staples of many cable and broadcast television stations: high-speed, often dangerous police pursuits of fleeing motorists, videotaped and packaged into such shows as "World's Wildest Police Chases."

In an appeal that came to the Supreme Court, the issue was: When do such incidents cross over into the realm of "violent felonies" that could lead to increased jail time?

The justices, by a 6-3 vote Thursday, dismissed an appeal from an Indiana man who received an enhanced federal sentence because of prior serious offenses, one of which was for trying to escape in a vehicle.

Justice Anthony Kennedy said that while the federal law in question does not specifically mention dangerous car chases, they clearly are the kind of crime that deserves to be treated more seriously.

"Risk of violence is inherent to vehicle flight," Kennedy said. "It is well known that when offenders use motor vehicles as their means of escape they create serious potential risks of physical injury to others. Flight from a law enforcement officer invites, even demands, pursuit."

......rest of the article is an interesting read.....

 

I appreciate what Justice Kennedy is trying to say, but his point doesn't seem right to me.

Lots of states out here are telling the police -not- to pursue fleeing suspects. Get the plate number, go pick em up later, but don't go flying as 120 down surface streets: Civilians get hurt that way.

The risk of violence isn't inherent to vehicle flight, it's inherent to vehicle pursuit. Most folks, on or off bikes I think, would slow down and get back to something like normal driving if the officer pulled off and stopped chasing them. If the police have the plate number, it's easy enough to head to the house and collect the perp peacefully.

Not all pursuits can be called off; if someone robs a bank you're not going to just wait for later to try and find them. For your average person running from a speeding ticket, though, Justice Kennedy's reasoning seems to break down. This guy got chased for having no headlights.

In fact, it seems like speeding itself might fall under his analysis. I don't often agree with Justice Scalia, but he might have a point about the statute being void for vagueness.

 

Hmm interesting points on both sides - however....

this only matters if you get caught

 

Sorry Vegas, but I have to disagree with you here. The majority of police chases are kids in stolen cars. Getting a plate number does them no good at all. If they cannot catch the person in the car, they most likely do not makje an arrest at all. High speed chases are dangerous as hell for the person running, the police and people in the general vacinity. Within the last month or so there have been 3 such chases here in Madison where they do follow you no matter how fast you go. One ended with a crash that killed the driver.

 

In that respect then the driver had what's coming to them. **** em. I agree that in some cases pursuit is necesary.

 

This is true but there are other scenarios. Yes, that category of those who flee is correct, but, there is another even more important which are those that are wanted for outstanding warrants. Typically if someone is willing to take on an LEO and push above 120+ the reasons are normally very bad for the person fleeing. Many outstanding warrants for violent offenders are nabbed from chases.

 

I think we all agree that in some cases chasing is necessary. And stolen cars are one of those cases.

But, the guy in the article wasn't being chased on suspicion of having stolen a car, he just didn't have his headlights on. Nothing (in the article, anyway) suggests that he was otherwise driving recklessly until the pursuit began. If they'd just mailed him a ticket, everything probably would have been fine.

Although I'm sure police do chase kids who've stolen cars (and maybe even a lot of them) I don't know that most of the chases are because of that. I don't have any statistics, just stories that suggest a lot of people run for simple things like speeding tickets. No doubt chases are dangerous to everyone involved (even if just because they're in the area); that seems like more reason to change police policy such that they don't chase people unless there's a pressing need; I'd suggest stolen cars, bank robberies, kidnappings, etc should fall into the exception. Speeding tickets and headlights, not so much.

 

I don't know the exact legal parameters on this, but I do not know anyone who has ever had a ticket mailed to them from a cop who saw something wrong with their car (head light, tail light, etc) and proceeded to take down their plate for future citation. Every time, the cop has pulled the person over and then issued a ticket or work order for repair.

I always feel as though it's stupid to try and argue that the cop is in the wrong when they engage someone who refuses to pull over. As soon as you step on the gas to get away, YOU are the one who is posing a threat to anyone who might be injured/killed in the following pursuit. If the person had pulled over, there would be chase and no threat.

 

Vegas, far more often than not when a person flees it is NOT because they don't want a speeding ticket to deal with.

 

I bet between warrant evaders and kids in stolen cars you could make up 95% of the fleeing population. There was a guy just south of here a few weeks back that got clocked at nearly 210 MPH and he pulled over for the cop...