For a lot of police hate, I can see, but why do people get upset about pursuits like this? I’m aware of the “property is insured and life can’t be” aspect.
But the other side of that coin of “do not pursue” is saying that the person wasn’t an inherent danger. It lifts blamme from a car thief stealing my single most valuable posession, to the police attempting to stop them, which is their job. A thief has unknown motives at the time of theft. A man running away cannot legally be shot (you have an uphill court case) because he is no longer a danger, but a car is a constant danger. We have a permit for it because it’s a 2,000 pound hunk of metal. Comparing a stolen car to an active shooter wouldn’t be a far off comparison, because you don’t know the motive for which it was stolen and if the perpetrator is retreating. These are two legal things to be proven. Furthering this, it means states will use more fucking cameras on highways watching us to ticket anyone 1mph over, under the guise of “watching for stolen cars”. Stealing groceries to survive is one thing, but stealing a car is pure “fuck the owner”. There’s no looking the other way because “they needed it”
I realize it’s a whataboutism, but I feel like there be an extreme outrage if a stolen car drove through a crowd and the cops had had the opportunity to pursue it a month beforehand but had been made not to. Can someone clarify how this doesnt become more common or possible under “no pursuits”. It’s not that I don’t feel bad for the families, losing their kids to some jagoff sucks, but want to understand the other side of this.