Police At Fault For Death Rate

[FatticusInch]

….and other rubbish.

https://news.sky.com/story/concerning-rise-in-people-dying-in-road-collisions-involving-police-watchdog-says-12706752

//According to the IOPC, 25 of the
people who died were the "driver
or passenger in the pursued
vehicle" and three people were
pedestrians who were "hit by the
pursued or suspect vehicle".
The average age of those who
died as either the driver or
passenger in a pursued or fleeing
vehicle was 27.//

So no fault apportioned to the fleeing drivers/passengers ‘making off’ when requested to stop whilst engaged in illegal or criminal activity then?

Righty-o!

[dave50]

Oh right then, don't pursue criminals, just let them get away? Ridiculous

[perseverer]

What the report actually said was
“It is concerning to note that this year has seen a rise in the number of fatalities from road traffic incidents, 39 deaths from 25 the previous year. Five incidents accounted for 12 of the deaths and a high proportion (85%) of the deaths were police pursuit-related. In the 13 deaths where the IOPC has concluded an investigation we found police officers acted appropriately, and in accordance with their training, policies and procedures."

So it didn't blame the police. Surely it would be wrong if they were not concerned about an increased number of death?

[FatticusInch]

Ok, fair enough, but the implication is that people are dying as a result of being chased.
Why weren’t the drivers and passengers being castigated for their reckless and dangerous behaviour?
Just because more idiots ‘went for it’ after being signalled to stop ought to be the overriding essence of the report, not that the Police did nothing more than their jobs.

[douglas9401]

" Surely it would be wrong if they were not concerned about an increased number of death?"

There, you see how easy it is to come to a wrong conclusion.

[TheChair]

"but the implication is that people are dying as a result of being chased".
Nope: that's not implied anywhere - you've simply inferred it so that you can make an angry comment.

[Peter Pedant]

and the gun deaths
some men are such damned fools they dont get out of the line of fire of the uniformed man with the gun

makes about as much sense as the secret mod thread

[Peter Pedant]

"but the implication is that people are dying as a result of being chased"

er would be OK as an inference if you could show that the majority shot were in cars.... which is the case innit?

[FatticusInch]

TheChair
//"but the implication is that people are dying as a result of being chased".
Nope: that's not implied anywhere - you've simply inferred it so that you can make an angry comment.//

So what caused them to crash? Icy patch? Oil on the road?
It would appear that being pursued by the Police was a factor in every single case, hence the report, no?

[sp1814]

FatticusInch


The report says:

The figures cover deaths of motorists, cyclists or pedestrians involving police pursuits on the roads, as well as those resulting when officers' vehicles have responded to emergency calls.

It doesn't say that these people were involved in the pursuit. Just that they died as a result of coming into contact with the pursuing vehicles.

These people weren't necessarily 'being chased' at all. The report doesn't conclude they were involved in chases.

[Spicerack]

Police may be given the power to shut your car down remotely soon.
The technology is here, I believe. Good or bad idea?
I don't like the sound of it but I'm open to persuasion.

[sp1814]

Spicerack

Cars would have to be fitted with a device to slow down or halt the engine and at the moment whilst the tech exists, drivers have to pay for it.

I have a tracker fitted to my car and if stolen am happy for the tracking firm to stop the car. Deferring the to the police...not sure...because this could be the first little step on the way to down a road many don't want to travel (see the last two paragraphs of this article):

https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2003/dec/21/transport.ukcrime

[jno]

the question of deaths during police chases is about cost/benefit analysis. (Alleged) criminals are caught, the public is reassured that something's being done by the police, and there are lots of satisfying neenaw noises that imply crime is being tackled.

But there's this downside of innocent people dying. Drivers may be disregarded as "innocents", though their passengers may be in a grey area. But other people having nothing to do with the chase or the original crime do from time to time die. Just how far is this worth it? How far would you think it was worth it if the person killed was a member of your own family?

[FatticusInch]

Sp1814
//It doesn't say that these people were involved in the pursuit. Just that they died as a result of coming into contact with the pursuing vehicles.//

I agree, I should have stipulated that I was referring to the 85% that were directly involved, not the innocent 3rd parties.