giujohn
 
Reply Sun 12 Apr, 2015 05:17 pm
I see a lot of hand wringing and gnashing of teeth over the mistakes made by police recently where fleeing/fighting suspects have died. And while it is easy to blame police (and yes, they were wrong, but no, its not racism) what % of blame befalls the suspect who runs or fights the police?
Police are required to make split second decisions involving life and death, usually under extreme stress, and NO ONE is perfect all the time. Mistakes WILL happen.
The suspect increases his chance of dieing by not complying with the arrest. We had an old saying on the police department..."You cant out run the radio." , but still they try. Stupid, stupid stupid.
It seems to me all would be better served by instituting a mandatory 7 year sentence (no plea barganing) for anyone who flees/resists, and a 15 year sentence when done with violence or endangers others.
Yes, I know those who'll say murder is against the law and people still kill. The upside is here is, there will be less criminals back on the street quickly than without the law and they will definately think twice about running when they do get out. Also, some may even take pause before deciding to run in the first place. After all, if murder werent against the law, there would be a lot more dead people.
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Question • Score: 0 • Views: 1,150 • Replies: 5
No top replies

 
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Sun 12 Apr, 2015 07:57 pm
@giujohn,
The state can not allow citizens to refuse to comply with police orders under most circumstances, but the penalty should not be summary death. It is particularly offensive when the police know who the fleeing citizen is, in most cases they should be rounded up later and extra time should be tacked on to their penalty for fleeing. When our state police have rules of engagement that look a like the US Military rules during at hot war when dealing with enemy combatants we clearly have a big problem.

But here is the thing, our officers ARE generally following the rules that they have been given. If we dont like the action then the thing to do would be to ring up their bosses the politicians and ask them WTF!. Condemning the cops is rarely the right move.
roger
 
  1  
Reply Sun 12 Apr, 2015 08:45 pm
@giujohn,
Well, what was the suspect fleeing? Possibly a broken brake light? If that's the case, I can't see the public hazard. Like, maybe he will drive with a broken brake light again?
giujohn
 
  1  
Reply Mon 13 Apr, 2015 02:03 pm
@roger,
Quote:
Well, what was the suspect fleeing? Possibly a broken brake light?

The police do not chase for minor traffic violations...the person was "stopped" for the tail light but was fleeing from a warrant.
0 Replies
 
giujohn
 
  1  
Reply Mon 13 Apr, 2015 02:08 pm
@hawkeye10,
Quote:
The state can not allow citizens to refuse to comply with police orders under most circumstances, but the penalty should not be summary death. It is particularly offensive when the police know who the fleeing citizen is, in most cases they should be rounded up later and extra time should be tacked on to their penalty for fleeing. When our state police have rules of engagement that look a like the US Military rules during at hot war when dealing with enemy combatants we clearly have a big problem.

But here is the thing, our officers ARE generally following the rules that they have been given. If we dont like the action then the thing to do would be to ring up their bosses the politicians and ask them WTF!. Condemning the cops is rarely the right move.


Hawk:
The "penalty" is not death. The death is the result of either a mistake or an escalation and is the fault of the subject who flees/resists.
"Rounding up later" could open the agency to lawsuit if the subject goes on to hurt or kill someone in the interim. And since there is no such thing as a crystal ball...
0 Replies
 
Owsi68
 
  1  
Reply Tue 17 May, 2016 01:21 am
@giujohn,
I thought "fleeing" was considered "resisting" in the legal world. And I thought one could be brought up on a charge of Resisting and that this charge is independent of other charges - a charge that carries a sentence and can be used alone or as an add-on to other charges. So even if a law officer asks you to stop to get directions to Dunkin Donuts, if you take off running you are then and there guilty of "fleeing." Doesn't matter if you are innocent of everything, anything else ... you are getting a penalty. But I have no idea what the penalty is for fleeing and I admittedly have no idea if my perceptions of the legal system are correct to begin with.

I believe the act of fleeing a law officer should be a crime you can be found guilty of even if you have done nothing else illegal in your entire life. I completely agree that fleeing a law official can reasonably result in all kinds of bad stuff because we humans are imperfect and emotional animals. We therefore need to send s strong message to avoid the actions that will create the scenario in the first place.

I think that if you flee a law official, for those convicted of something else, "fleeing" gets you a minimum of an additional 30% of all sentences combined but no less than 6 months. If you are convicted of fleeing and nothing else then a mandatory minimum of 2 months incarceration seems like a good place to start. But maybe 2 months is too harsh for someone who has never spent even one day in incarceration. The objective of any punishment should be to reform, not break, the offender and that can be a tricky affair.
0 Replies
 
 

 
  1. Forums
  2. » RUNNING FROM THE POLICE/RESISTING ARREST
Copyright © 2018 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 08/20/2018 at 06:28:30