Law enforcement activity as entertainment started when COPS first aired in the early 1990s. Now we have Live PD, Police Women of Dallas, PD Cam… Every time there is a law enforcement pursuit it seems if there is a news helicopter in the area, it is not only filming the pursuit for the news, they are doing live broadcasts to TV as well as the web.
The public now sees pursuits as entertainment rather than bringing a suspect to justice. The public views it as a game of cat and mouse. All the while, no one watches the pursuit thinking about the danger posed to the public as well as all of those involved. No one stops to think about why is the suspect being chased in the first place.
Law enforcement has taken the stance of not using the name of active shooters as much as possible, to not give them the attention they desire.
Why can we not do the same for pursuits? Why air them? Why allow people to experience “the thrill” of them? All we are doing is promoting a deadly activity.
During this “entertainment”, I am willing to bet there is zero talk of the risks to the public or to anyone involved.
Let’s stop glorifying pursuits.
According to Las Vegas Now (see image above), the attraction allows people to participate in a simulated vehicle pursuit just a few miles from the Las Vegas Strip. Image courtesy of Police Chase Las Vegas. PursuitSAFETY expresses its condemnation of this type of entertainment that encourages people to commit a crime that kills and injures innocent bystanders and police officers every day.
Every week we see the stories—reports of innocent bystanders killed as a result of law enforcement pursuits. These stories recall our own pain when loved ones were killed in this way; yet we read them to their end. Someone must bear witness. We also try to keep track of trends in pursuit operations—and the frequency of pursuit-related deaths, still holding steady at about one per day. In the absence of federally mandated reporting of pursuit-related fatalities, we rely on news reports to track this. We know that the pursuit-related circumstances of some traffic deaths are never reported. So we appreciate reporters who make the connection clear.Still, most stories leave other facts fuzzy, hindering our ability—and that of family members of those killed—to assess what happened. We get it; reporters work under deadline pressure. Reporters must also respect their sources, so they politely accept the information law enforcement offers. And a reporter who pushes too hard, or wrinkles the brow while searching for a penetrating angle, may appear to law enforcement as an adversary, rather than a representative of the fourth estate just doing their job. We suggest that reporters ask a few key questions every time a pursuit-related death or injury occurs. Answers to the questions below will reveal a great deal about the way a particular agency responded to a too frequent event—the driver who refused to stop for police:
1. What Was the Reason for the Pursuit?
This question is critical. What crime was the fleeing driver suspected of committing?
The reporter need not spell out his reason for asking this question, but the answer he gets will allow readers to consider a problem central to all pursuits:
Did the suspected crime threaten public safety to such a degree that a pursuit—itself a threat to public safety—was justified? At times, both law enforcement and the public seem to apply a retroactive reason for pursuing. The driver drove recklessly and caused a crash; isn’t this proof that the driver threatened public safety? Yet in fact, many fleeing drivers only become reckless because they are pursued. Consider the most common crime suspected of fleeing drivers: possession of a stolen vehicle. A person who hot-wired a car he found unlocked did not use violence to make the theft. He hopes to drive away unobserved, retaining his prize. If pursued, he counts on his driving skills to elude police, but will not worry about crashing a vehicle he did not pay for. He does not expect to collide with another car, killing its occupants. He is reckless and self-deluded, but he is not a violent threat to the public before he flees. Others who flee often include drivers suspected of minor traffic violations. If they have a history of such violations, they may fear that the next citation will cost them their drivers’ license or result in a steep fine they cannot pay. If they are teens who took the parents’ car keys without permission—a group included in those suspected of car theft—they fear punishment at home. Sometimes the driver who flees is out of prison on probation. Being stopped by police, he fears, will send him back to lock-up. Fleeing drivers act on impulse, hoping to avoid an encounter with law enforcement that they think will ruin or complicate their futures. They exhibit terrible judgment; but prior to their flight they do not threaten others. The reporter need not ask the police spokesman to weigh the suspected crime against the risks inherent in pursuit. If the reporter gets an explanation of the reason for the pursuit, the reader can weigh the risk taken.
2. How Much Time Elapsed During the Pursuit?
Most stories report the approximate time of the collision. Many stories also report the approximate time a call requiring police response came in, or the time that a patrol officer observed suspicious behavior. But to really understand what happened, a reporter needs to ask:At what exact time did the pursuit begin? At what exact time did the collision occur? Most pursuit-related crashesoccur in the first two minutes. If a supervisor judges the pursuit too risky, he should call it off in a matter of seconds.
3. What was the Route of the Pursuit?
and: How Many Miles Did it Cover?
Readers who are told the distance the pursuit covered and the time that elapsed during the pursuit can then calculate the average speeds of the fleeing and pursuing vehicles.Asking this question also allows readers to assess other hazards beside high speed.
What were the cross streets during the pursuit? Where were the stop signs and stoplights? Did the route cross major intersections? Did it traverse residential or schools zones, where children might be walking or playing?
How heavy was the traffic likely to have been on the roads traveled? The three numbered questions above cover the basic facts. If reporters covering pursuit deaths always sought answers to these questions, the public could much more easily assess whether particular operations seem justified. They might also begin to understand the hazards pursuits pose, and they could start to ponder the problems law enforcement faces when setting policy for this operation:Which is more important—catching suspects, or following procedures that protect public safety?Or, must such a choice necessarily be made? Are there safer ways to track and apprehend suspects, by taking action either before they begin to drive or after they come to a stop?A reporter willing to probe more deeply—perhaps in follow-up coverage of the collision—might ask about other issues:
Whether the Pursuit was Conducted in Accordance with Standard Law Enforcement Procedures
Was the pursuing officer communicating with a supervisor during the pursuit?Was more than one patrol car involved?Did a supervisor authorize the pursuit and the involvement of officers who joined the pursuit after it began?
Policy Questions
What is the department’s policy concerning pursuits?Does policy specify the suspected crimes that justify the risk of pursuit?Does it require officers to terminate pursuit in certain situations—when speeds become too high, when traffic-controlled intersections are ahead, when traffic is heavy, when the fleeing driver turns into an area with likely pedestrian traffic, etc.?Must officers undergo training before engaging in pursuits? What training had the officers involved in this event been given?
The Expected Outcome
Very few drivers desperate enough to flee law enforcement will suddenly reconsider their action and pull over. So, what did the pursuing officer think he could do to cause the driver to stop? Had the department rehearsed procedures that are sometimes effective in stopping fleeing drivers? Some procedures used, such as placing tire deflation devices ahead of the speeding car, involve serious risk to officers. Departments deploying such tools should require officers to train at regular intervals in their use. Training should not only cover safe methods to place or throw the devices; it should teach officers in pursuing vehicles to avoid hitting the officer who throws it. Other methods, such as the PIT (pursuit intervention tactic) maneuver, involve risks to non-involved drivers. Officers should be carefully trained in when and how to use this tactic.If the department has not trained officers in ways to bring fleeing drivers to a halt, one must logically ask: what terminating event did the supervising officer expect to occur? In most cases, it will be a collision.Ellen Deitz Tucker is a writer and editor for an educational nonprofit. She has also written opinion pieces on law enforcement pursuits, after becoming aware of the problem they pose when her sister, Donna Deitz, was killed as an innocent bystander of a pursuit in Belmont, NC, in 2012. The opinions expressed here represent her own views, not those of her employer.
On Average, Errant Police Response Calls and Pursuits Take the Lives of At Least Three Innocent Civilians Every Week.
[National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, FBI.]
As a certified law enforcement instructor, I am always reviewing social media, videos, and other media trying to get information to use in training. Unfortunately, I see many posts by seasoned officers that are along the lines of “man, we can not be the police anymore.”
Officers like to drive fast. Many like the adrenaline and the excitement. We would be telling a lie if we said we did not like the rush. However, that rush causes the brain to cease cognitive thought and go into what I like to call “Lizard Brain.” This is when the brain relies on muscle memory and training. Due to the adrenaline and increased heart rate, you lose fine motor skills and your decision-making ability is significantly diminished. This is the entire thought process behind needing a trained supervisor not involved in the pursuit or a police response call as the person deciding to continue or not.
Police response calls involve the need for speed. Combine speeding with the diminished decision-making skills and the chances of an unfortunate conclusion to the response call is exceptionally high.
MP Brian Gleason w/his dad, Capt. Tom Gleason.
You see, I happen to know an officer whose son was an Army MP. He was killed when his partner decided to speed and essentially joy ride on a remote area of the base they were on at the time. The MP driving went too fast around a corner and rolled the car. The car caught fire, and my friend’s son burned up. Speed and bad decision making by the officer in charge of the vehicle killed my friend’s son. While not a pursuit, the effect of the speed, adrenaline (from the speed and excitement) and decision making was the same. Every time I see him, I can see the hurt in his eyes.
Every “hot” call has the same effect as a pursuit. The rush of adrenaline and excitement has the same result of lizard brain kicking in. This is the reason we teach combat breathing and stress management, to lower your heart rate to help you retain fine motor skills and cognitive thought.
Kelli and Jessica Uhl
I attended Below 100 training a year ago. During this training, I met Kim Schlau. She was the mother of three beautiful girls. The oldest, Jessica Uhl, was driving her middle sister, Kelli Uhl, home from an outing when Matt Mitchell, an Illinois State Trooper was on duty. Trooper Mitchell got dispatched to a wreck on the interstate while talking to his significant other about Thanksgiving shopping.
As noted, bad decisions come when the heart rate increases and the adrenaline dump begins. Trooper Mitchell keeps his significant other on the phone, driving over 100 MPH and is typing on his in-car computer all at the same time, trying to find the location of the wreck. Due to being distracted by the computer and the phone, he never hears that other emergency responders are already at the scene. Trooper Mitchell lost control of his cruiser, crossed the median and struck the car driven by Kim’s oldest daughter at over 100 MPH. The impact killed the sisters instantly. It took hours to identify them and to notify Kim about her daughters.
The same agency responsible for the deaths of her daughters had to inform Kim of their deaths. As Kim told this story in class, I could not help but break down when Kim told this story in class. I too had driven over 100 MPH going to a call (mine involved a gun pointed at a fellow deputy). It could have been me telling a family I killed their loved one.
Crash site caused by Trooper MitchellUhl sister’s car
Is that police response call or pursuit worth that risk?
I hope these stories will make you think twice about your decisions, but remember, there are thousands of similar stories. They impact the families of officers and law-abiding citizens.
While these two incidents were not pursuits, the elements of adrenaline, elevated heart rate, the increased risk of bad decision making were all present, the same as a during a pursuit. Unless there is an imminent threat to you, other officers, or the public, think long and hard about the risk vs. the reward.
Law enforcement activity as entertainment started when COPS first aired in the early 1990s. Now we have Live PD, Police Women of Dallas, PD Cam… Every time there is a law enforcement pursuit it seems if there is a news helicopter in the area, it is not only filming the pursuit for the news, they are doing live broadcasts to TV as well as the web.
Law enforcement has taken the stance of not using the name of active shooters as much as possible, to not give them the attention they desire.
