quote:

Originally posted by Johnny 3eagles:
That is a multiple time daily occurrence in Arkansas. On YouTube, search LRHN and Arkansas State Police. ASP officers are PIT MASTERS . Seems here in Arkansas everyone decides to Felony Flee. ASP will PIT everything up to and including Box Trucks.

Well done Sir!

I used to live right there and almost hit a cow on the way to work one morning, I guess it decided to lay on the nice warm road. That was a nice controlled bump to bring him to a stop.

quote:

Seems here in Arkansas everyone decides to Felony Flee

I learned many years ago, "you can't outrun Motorola".

quote:

Originally posted by gw3971:

quote:

But my first police car was a Chevy Caprice police package and it would snug down to the road at high speed. It drove like a Cadillac in pursuits.

Yeah, the Caprice was awesome. I got my Caprice up to 137 in a pursuit. It handled better over 100 mph. Loved that car!

Camaro B4C.

Good for that Deputy! “Silly goose” made me chuckle a bit!

In Massachusetts the pursuit would be over before it began, supervisor would call it off, way too much liability and even though the driver is at fault the cop and department would be liable for any damages.

That was impressive driving by the officer. He must be a natural driver. They exist and he's probably one of them. Good on that guy. Stupid teenager.

They don’t mess around down here. They will yeet your butt off the road regularly.

A question for the LEO's here; what percentage of agencies prohibit a pursuit like this?

Example, car passes by, over 100 mph, no known crimes or other felonies have occurred that make this vehicle or it's occupant a suspect and the only reason for pursuit is the speeding.

I remember reading a while back that these types of pursuits started being forbidden by some agencies, but I have no idea how widespread that became.

When I first started hearing about agency policies that prohibit high speed chases (even ones at much slower speeds than 140 mph), my first reaction was disgust that it would be possible to get away with breaking the law by breaking the law even more dangerously—i.e., fleeing at high speed.

But as I’ve given more study and thought to use of force issues, and even some of the discussion by gun owners, though, my attitude has changed. I still don’t like the idea of letting someone go free if he’s just good enough at running away, but I also don’t like the idea of policy being based on gut reactions.

Law enforcement officers and other armed individuals are (or should be) cautioned that they are responsible for every shot they fire. Although it’s rare for bystanders or other innocent parties to be hit when someone like an LEO is defending himself with gunfire, when it does, and even when no one is actually injured, many gun owners will be quick to point out that one of the many gun safety rules is to be aware of what’s beyond the target. Is it okay to endanger uninvolved parties by driving at very high speeds though congested areas to make arrests for what are usually some sort of traffic violation, but we shouldn’t respond to direct deadly threats if we’re not certain that our return fire won’t endanger someone else?

There are of course differences between those two types of situations, but the differences are specific; they are not different in the general sense that they endanger people who shouldn’t be endangered.

I’m actually much more tolerant of the idea of police officers’ shooting to defend themselves or others without being able to be certain that no one else is endangered because of the practical fact that very often it’s simply impossible to do otherwise. And of course the crime that the officer is attempting to stop is almost always far more serious in a self-defense situation than in a vehicle pursuit.

I will never be in a position to decide policy about high speed pursuits, and so my opinion doesn’t matter, but I can understand why policies that restrict them exist.

quote:

Originally posted by Beanhead:
They don’t mess around down here. They will yeet your butt off the road regularly.

GA has ZERO chill, especially the Department of Public Safety which I find hilariously ironic.

I've seen several of these AR chases, they seem incredibly dangerous for the preliminary charges that are contemplated. Routinely at 100, 120, 140+ and on divided non-interstates or two lane roads.

Wrecks at those speeds are going to be catastrophic for some poor soul pulling out, over a crest or in the yard of a home suddenly filled with car debris.

That's just a basic newish 3 series, nothing crazy fast, so I'm not surprised a cruiser could catch up while doing 140.

I don’t know if it’s typical, but I saw this bitch’n Camaro around mile marker 73 on I-75 in Georgia today:

About a mile before that was an even cooler ghost Camaro, but I couldn’t read whose it was.

quote:

Originally posted by holdem:
A question for the LEO's here; what percentage of agencies prohibit a pursuit like this?

Example, car passes by, over 100 mph, no known crimes or other felonies have occurred that make this vehicle or it's occupant a suspect and the only reason for pursuit is the speeding.

I remember reading a while back that these types of pursuits started being forbidden by some agencies, but I have no idea how widespread that became.

Not just department policy, we got us state law prohibiting it here in the socialist paradise of WA.

And of course all the little dirtbags know it, so what we usually get is: light up a car for speed or whatever, and they just hit the gas and drive into the oncoming lane. That makes their driving “reckless”, so we then turn off our lights and watch them drive off into the sunset in their (probably) stolen car.

And people wonder why the crime rate is climbing.

Bill R

Meanwhile in Oregon: Teen arrested for going 176 MPH. unreal.

https://www.koin.com/local/was...ving-176-mph-on-i-5/

quote:

Originally posted by trapper189:
I don’t know if it’s typical, but I saw this bitch’n Camaro around mile marker 73 on I-75 in Georgia today:

About a mile before that was an even cooler ghost Camaro, but I couldn’t read whose it was.

We have a few Camaro patrol cars in the Houston area.
I recall when I was in college hearing that a SW Houston PD had a couple street racing confiscations that had been put into patrol duty.
1 was supposedly a hopped up Subaru STI

Orange County Sheriff (FL) is having a confiscated Challenger Demon painted up...

Most of those vehicles don't have tires on them that can withstand those speeds for any length of time.

Having a tire blow at 70MPH on the freeway is one thing. Losing one at 170+ is a whole different challenge.