Who else has a "no pursuit" policy?

can't think of much else that irks me more than when I have to stop, turn my lights off, and wave to the subject who decided to say "F U" and flee.

Fear of liability is increasingly encouraging LE agencies to avoid anything that MIGHT result in a law suit.

My agency will allow us to chase. We do have a policy so there are things we won't chase for or will be terminated by a supervisor if we initiate a chase and don't terminate ourselves. But, we do a lot of pursuits.

The biggest city in my county won't chase for virtually anything. As a result, everyone runs. Of course, many of those same people who run are shocked when we chase....because the city won't. The supervisors in this city are so scared that they will almost always terminate a chase that is within their own policy. Also...same city....on the rare occasion that a pursuit is authorized, it's a guarantee that if you are in the chase you will get a writeup for something....even if it goes well

I'll probably get flamed for this...

As you already know, it's important not to take things personal... while I too used to get pissed about no-pursuit policies, I've come to realize they are a good thing overall. I no longer subscribe to the "they must be running for a good reason" as if they are a serious violent offender or wanted for serious violent offenses.

Some officers want to fanaticize that the person running from them is some kind of hardened criminal with outstanding warrants for violent felonies, that's rarely the case. Yet some of the younger criminals with minor offenses/warrants will hit double digits and smash into all kinds of shit over a minor amount of dope or suspended DL. I've seen it countless times as I'm sure you have.

If you really objectively look at it, it's not worth 1) putting YOURSELF at such elevated risk for what is most likely some chump charge(s); and 2) putting the public at risk for the same reasons. The numbers (ratio of minor offenders who flee to ratio of serious offenders discovered after the pursuit) simply don't support the elevated risks when pursuing the actual unknown for a minor violation observed (the reason for the stop). YMMV, but in all the years I've been in LE a significant amount of successful pursuits resulted in the offender running for minor reasons.

Now of course we all will gladly accept the risks of a pursuit when we know or reasonably know the offender is a violent criminal and/or wanted for serious/violent offenses.

We can only chase for aggravated felonies, and even then the pursuit can be called off if things get too hairy.  I have to agree with bow, the risks sometimes outweigh the rewards.  Violent felons present an imminent threat to public safety, but police shouldn't exacerbate that by putting cops and public lives in more danger if there's another way to find them.  Sometimes you can let them go and find them an hour later at their house.  Sometimes we need to chase them till the wheels fall off.

Sure, seeing a petty thief go splat into a barrier is fine by me.  Stupid games, stupid prizes and all that.  But when they wreck into another car full of people or cops get killed during the pursuit, we have to ask if it's worth it.

I personally believe we should chase everyone who runs no matter what. Having said that, in today's overly litigious society, police work will always result in some risk....risk to the officer and risk to the public. The public has clearly demonstrated that they don't like that risk and they do not want us to do risky shit. Our leaders reflect the wishes and desires of the public and public opinion is against us doing anything that puts anyone at risk.

From an administrator's perspective....We can go chase that bad guy and bad shit might happen. Or, we can not chase him.....Yes he'll victimize more people but that's not our problem....If we chase him and bad shit happens....that will be our problem.

I would like to see the punishment for running in a vehicle be brutal. Mandatory minimum of 5 years in prison and have to serve 100%. No plea bargains to drops that charge allowed. Run from a vehicle on foot....misdemeanor or felony based on circumstances....Run IN a vehicle....you are going to be brutalized by the criminal justice system. Make the punishment brutal and you'll see a reduction in people running in vehicles. If that law was to be passed, you would have to make a few examples but the word would get out quick.

If they are a shitty person today, they'll be a shitty person tomorrow.  It, for the most part, isn't worth the risks in return.

Thank you for all that you guys do.

Be safe out there.

As far as letting them go...you might not catch 'em that time, but like the previous poster stated, dumbass's are gonna dumbass. That asshole will be on your radar, and cross your path again.

(22 year volunteer FF, lots of times had the chance to stand next to the cruiser and troll the idiot in the back on your behalf )

This non-pursuit policy had been initiated in the DFW area decades ago by the then Arlington Police chief and then spread to other departments throughout the area. The problem I see with it is the possibility that someone who flees for a minor offense like a traffic violation might have other reasons for fleeing. Like having a kidnapping victim tied up in the trunk. Or the pedophile that has a kidnapped child and doesn't want to be stopped by police for a traffic violation. I'm fully expecting one of these non-pursuit, brief chases to end up with the vehicle being found later with a murder victim who had been killed after the chase and before the vehicle was eventually found.

It wasn't related to the non-pursuit policy, but, a few years after the policy was enacted a local Arlington girl was out riding bicycles (in daylight) with other kids and a male driving a black pick up truck grabbed the girl. Her body was found a day or two later. She had been sexually assaulted and her throat was cut. Her name was Amber Hagerman and they started the "Amber Alert" based on her death. I used to wonder what if that black pick up truck was spotted speeding by the local police (before the kids were able to find an adult to help them contact the police) and the driver fled with the police terminating the chase and letting the guy get away with Amber Hagerman, not knowing she was in his truck? That's why I have always been against this non-pursuit policy.

I used to get upset about it when I was a rookie

Experience has shown me time and time again risk is not worth reward for chasing people for most offenses.

Like I said... supporters of pursuit policies always throw out the "what if's"... and to further reiterate what nearly 20 years on the job has shown me, the vast majority of those who flee and cause serious property damage, personal injury, and even death, are minor offenders with ZERO concern for innocent citizens. In short, the juice (overall risk) is not worth the squeeze (end result).

Another good thing about pursuit polices, they protect cops from themselves... TRUST ME on this one. The ODMP page is littered with dead LEO's who over-drove their patrol cars.

I thought this was going to be a no-extradite rant.

Watching taillights in the distance is a personal affront and makes me feel less able than the violator I am after.

Then I realize they probably know the roads better than I do, I don't know where they are going to or what's waiting for me when we get there and it's just me and twenty of his friends, and it's not my fault we don't have a ghetto bird to assist.

I've never had to explain to a family why I let some murderer/raper/Bad Person go, so I never had that hanging over my head.

On the other hand

You are on point. You picked the right vehicle, the right person. You looked beyond the stop. The radio tells you to secure it. You *know* you've struck gold. Then she says ...but the jurisdiction refuses to extradite.

You are the dog that finally caught the car. The bumper is in your mouth. The felon with active warrants up there *knows* they are f-u-cked.

And now, you gotta walk up there and let them go.

My left arm is tingling, think I'm gonna go look at bewbs for awhile or something.

Our society is spineless.

I have no issue with not allowing pursuits for misdemeanors and traffic, for the already covered reasons of danger to the motoring public.

However the policy needs to account for situational differences, a blanket "Don't do it." is stupid. Chasing a stolen car through rush hour traffic in a school zone is a bad idea. Chasing the same car through an empty industrial park at 0330 is a different story.

If I were in charge fleeing in a vehicle would be considered a serious danger to the general public and the remedy would be a 2 officer car closing the distance and the passenger shooting the driver. But I'm not in charge.

Peter Parker did it, and his uncle died.

I took a day for violating our pursuit policy.

We can only pursuit for forcible felonies and there is so many rules on top of it which are super easy to violate that makes chasing people pointless.

NVM

This....my agency has a generous pursuit policy, but I generally won't chase nickel dime shit.

We still run em. We have a couple supervisors and watch commanders that will cancel them but for the most part we let them go. Especially if I start it/can make it up front with my 4 legged partner

If you run we chase. The mere act of fleeing in a vehicle is a felony in Texas IMO pursuits should be dealt with by deadly force[ when the public is not in the line of fire]. They are putting the public in danger and it should be ended immediately with the 12ga and .223. Society is way to forgiving of scumbags who run.

Nebraska has a state law that any damage to property or injury to a third party as the result of a police pursuit is the liability of the department.  So, chase a carjacker who wrecks the stolen car, the department pays.  Chase a drunk who runs over a little old lady crossing the street, PD pays.

It's even better, run from the police with your girlfriend in the passenger seat, get in a wreck and she dies, the PD pays her next of kin unless we can prove she encouraged you to run, participated in the offense you were being chased for, or otherwise benefited from avoiding arrest.

So you can imagine we don't really try to chase people if we can avoid it.

My first 10 years we chased for everything. I'd say 90% were for stolen cars. Ive been in some that were terrifying to look back on but were kinda fun when your young.

Then we went to a very strict no chase, which guys still broke all the time. My last 10 it would take an awful lot for me to chase. I cant remember one I jumped in on in my 2nd 1/2.

Its not worth it. Almost every crippled cop IOD Ive met was from a car chase or driving like an idiot. Like, lights and siren to a domestic or disturbance. Its not worth it.

We allow chases for a very limited range of offenses.  Back when I started a long time ago, you could chase them into the next area code just for looking at you funny.

It's not worth it.  Too many hurt cops, too many hurt bystanders, and too much broken stuff.  A baddie who fucks up today will fuck up tomorrow and he'll get his eventually.

We used to pursue for anything until our new Chief hug a thug said we can only pursuit if it's a felony.  Chief hug a thug got his wish until there's a domestic where the baby daddy's takes off as units were getting out on scene.  Since domestics are only misdemeanor,  the units just stood there and waved.  Best part is the officers got on the air saying actor fled and not pursuing because it's not a felony.  Few days later, Chief hug a thug sends out new order adding we can pursue if it's an act of violence.

This.
Almost every one of the dangerous chases we had where we caught the suspect they fled because they didn't have a license, it was suspended, or they were guys on bikes/atvs that just wanted to run for fun.

I want to work where you are. Better yet, Id like you as my boss, I think we would get along well