I haven't read it since it came out in 2006, but suffice it to say that the Los Angeles area has vastly more police chases per capita than the rest of the United States, and therefore if something like this was going to happen it's statistically unsurprising that it happened near LA.
From that article: "In 2004, California led the nation with 7,321 pursuits, and the majority of them-5,596-took place in L.A. County". Google cites approximately 10 million population for LA County and 38 million for California, so if my math is right that's roughly 56 car chases per 100,000 population in LA County versus 6 per 100,000 in the rest of the state. (Population figures are 2011 for LA County, 2012 for California, versus 2004 for the chase stats, but it should be pretty close.)
That doesn't answer why the police chase, because obviously it's done far less elsewhere, though it does happen. In Austin, Texas, my wife was overtaken on the highway by a car being chased by the police, and in order to avoid getting rear-ended by the chasee who was going very fast she side-swiped the vehicle next to her and substantial damage was done. Some day if that criminal strikes it rich she's theoretically got victim's compensation due to her. We're not holding our breath. They ended up catching the guy on foot after he exited the highway.
> That doesn't answer why the police chase, because obviously it's done far less elsewhere, though it does happen.
From the article:
> The L.A. freeways are its public stage, its Colosseum. Pursuits are L.A.'s ultimate reality show,
I'm not some scholar on Los Angeles, but it really seems to be part of the culture there to watch car chases, and I wouldn't be at all surprised if there is positive feedback encouraging criminals to get their 15 minutes of fame.
After all, if you've just held up a 7-11 or something and you didn't get away cleanly, why not have a little fun before you get thrown in jail, possibly for the rest of your life ?
While that may play some role, I'd argue that LA being a massive sprawl has more to do with it. Simply identifying the car and "silently following it until it stops" may not be so easy, at least not without a helicopter.
> That doesn't answer why the police chase, because obviously it's done far less elsewhere, though it does happen.
I'd suggest trying to correlate average vehicular speed with frequency of car chases. My guess is that certain cities are built for high-speed car transit and thus lend themselves towards this kind of thing.
Because it's more fun for them if they chase. Really, very rarely should it make sense for cops to endanger countless civilian lives to catch a criminal.
It very rarely does make sense for police to endanger bystanders with high-speed chases, which is why most departments heavily restrict them. Friends of mine whose parents are officers have always told me their parents were more or less forbidden from ever initiating pursuit.
You can search for "[name of city] police general order pursuit", or some variant thereof, to get the policy for your local district.
Most cities do not allow cops to conduct high speed chases in populated areas. But it happens and innocent people die, because the cops are on a righteous mission and shall not be deterred.
I watched a 25 year old woman die on the pavement at 16th and Dolores in San Francisco, hit by a car running a red light, being chased by cops. Apparently the car had been reported stolen.
Not a worthy mission, in my opinion.
Note: of course it's the chasee's fault. But cops know exactly what happens in these situations, and cannot be excused.
If you're a patrolman then a car chase is probably one of the more exciting things you'll do, and it's a scenario that comes to mind when you first think of "this is what police do". In reality, you probably spend a lot of time checking mundane things, pulling people over (perhaps to meet a quota), and lots of paperwork and bureaucracy.
Even if it is scary, I think it's possible that some officers won't back down from a chase. And this involved a chase of someone believed to be a public menace.
(Sorry, not justifying the actual chase. Just pointing out that it's not strange that it occurred, given the status quo there)
Depending on the offense, there are reasons to do it. If there are not officers immediately behind the perps wherever they stop, they can quite easily disperse into the city or go into a building and take innocents hostage. I don't think the other hypotheses offered in this thread(15 minutes of fame, it's LA's reality show, etc) have quite so much to do with it, especially when you consider how vast LA is.
I think that having them disperse is the whole point of not chasing them. As far as taking hostages, I just don't think what you suggest makes any sense. The ONLY way I would consider taking hostages for any reason and making a stand against the police force would be if I had no other choice.. ie. the police won't stop chasing me.
There has got to be a better way. Here in AZ they have limited this due to accidents and death of innocent bystanders. Maybe there is a way to pin the car and catch them more silently, with all the tech we have maybe the cops can get some sort of GPS/trackable weapon. Of course they have to be close enough or have it already installed. Either that or a better notification system where vehicles may be so people in that area are on the lookout and the road clears almost like the O.J. chase.
yeah, why the police bothers trying arresting criminal...
can't they stay in their office eating donuts ?
...
They risk their lives to keep yours safe.
And on the other side you have criminals. And you ask why police chase them and not why they ran away ???
Seriously ?
