Police car chases

[Cunobelin]

The person failing to stop would pay, American laws confuse me.

The problem lies in the fact that the Police deliberately fry the car.

The owner loses the car because it is damaged beyond repair, and because it was a deliberate act the insurance does not cover
The driver will not be insured, but then again - they did nothing to damage the vehicle
The Police will end up footing the bill


It happens here already with weird insurance anomalies.

Girl I worked with in London had a guy with a knife get in her car at lights. She deliberately drove into the back of a builders minibus, they got out to see what was happening and grabbed the guy

However as she had deliberately damaged the car she was not covered!

[philg]

As usual our cousins across the pond have come up with an answer

Catching criminals in some US states became easier after police forces there started to use GPS bullets in 2013.
GPS has helped police in the US cut down on car chases
Chasing culprits who had escaped in a car used to be a dangerous business but with one press of a button a bullet inside the car is launched that attaches itself to the car in front without the driver even knowing.

The police can then call off the chase and track the vehicle using the GPS data, waiting patiently to see where the trail takes them.

[thirdcrank]

Apart from the inordinate expense, an obvious solution is the use of a helicopter. The problem then is that with all the technological advances known to man - thermal imaging, infra red imaging, zoom lenses, searchlights and whatever - the crew can only observe and report. A fugitive driver with half a brain, and many are very bright, experienced and generally highly-motivated to escape, knows that the main risk of being caught or identified later comes through their connection with the vehicle. So there's a tendency to dump it and run off. Depending on the circumstances, they may torch the vehicle first to destroy forensic evidence. Abandoning a vehicle under a bridge, in a basement car park etc means that a helicopter crew know where they last saw the vehicle and where it presumably remains but they can't be sure where the driver is, especially if the area is fairly busy with other people. Suspects don't necessarily run off across open country, but tend to dodge into buildings eg blocks of flats where they are beyond observation. All this means that the chances of an arrest followed by a conviction are improved if the surface level police arrive PDQ.

[TonyR]

In rural areas I'd just deploy an attack helicopter, people would then only flee the police if they were really, really naughty.

Send in the drones!

[661-Pete]

On the subject of an owner's duty to immobilise vehicles, AFAIK, this was a requirement during the war to prevent motor vehicles falling intop enemy hands. It's long overdue for revival, although to be fair, fewer vehicles are stolen by tampering these days: if somebody really wants a car, they'll just mug the driver, or screw their house.

By 'screw' do you mean burgle? I have to admit - I don't keep my car keys in a secure place when I'm at home - perhaps I ought to, or perhaps I ought to carry them around with me. My previous car had a 'PIN' number which you had to key in each time you started the engine. An ingenious idea, but a nuisance whenever I had to leave the car at a garage. But I think that was a one-off idea. With my present car, anyone who has the key can take the car...

[Vorpal]

http://nakedsecurity.sophos.com/2014/02 ... fies-cars/

[Edwards]

On the subject of an owner's duty to immobilise vehicles, AFAIK, this was a requirement during the war to prevent motor vehicles falling intop enemy hands. It's long overdue for revival, although to be fair, fewer vehicles are stolen by tampering these days: if somebody really wants a car, they'll just mug the driver, or screw their house.

By 'screw' do you mean burgle? I have to admit - I don't keep my car keys in a secure place when I'm at home - perhaps I ought to, or perhaps I ought to carry them around with me. My previous car had a 'PIN' number which you had to key in each time you started the engine. An ingenious idea, but a nuisance whenever I had to leave the car at a garage. But I think that was a one-off idea. With my present car, anyone who has the key can take the car...

There is a problem with the nasty's not getting the keys, they can beat them out of you or the PIN. Me I just leave the keys where even the most stupid burglar can find them easily.
No car is worth it, the police in some circumstances do a controlled forced hard stop (ram) some vehicles. I assume the cost is claimed as costs against the criminal. When found guilty of failing to stop.

[Vorpal]

In the US the issue was that if the Police fired the electronics of a car then they became responsible and would have to replace the car because it was a deliberate act

I don't think that's true. There is a common law in the USA that police have sovereign immunity. That is, they are not liable for damage that they cause in the course of their duties. Many states and municipalities have local laws that define specific responsibility. California is known to give police almost complete immunity in pursuit situations. But most other places require that the responsible government (usually local) pay damages for some circumstances. Collateral damage is the most likely to be covered.

Of course, if the police are found to be negligent, or have acted improperly, the responsible government has to pay damages.

[thirdcrank]

By 'screw' do you mean burgle? I have to admit - I don't keep my car keys in a secure place when I'm at home - perhaps I ought to, or perhaps I ought to carry them around with me. My previous car had a 'PIN' number which you had to key in each time you started the engine. An ingenious idea, but a nuisance whenever I had to leave the car at a garage. But I think that was a one-off idea. With my present car, anyone who has the key can take the car...

I did mean burgle.

I've also heard all sorts of tales about things like fishing rods being used to steal car keys through letter boxes. Bearing in mind that some insurance companies won't pay out for the theft of a car if the keys haven't been kept securely, I fancy that some of these reports will be from people who have done silly things like leaving the car on the drive or outside a shop with the engine running. One of my neighbour's son's bought a new Mini a while back (05 reg) and an unsuccessful attempt was made to break into their house within a couple of days of his getting the car. The police suggested that it was an attempt to get the car keys. My point is that improved in-vehicle security will lead to would-be thieves looking for a different security weakness. In some of the more affluent areas there seems to be a good trade in motorised gates and garage doors which you can open from the safety of your car before driving in.

Nothing's totally safe. Human technological ingenuity can been defeated by more of the same. If somebody is sufficiently ruthless, if they need a PIN they'll threaten the holder with violence, or even take their family hostage. Fortunately, this type of extreme action is rare because the usual way to find the weak link in decent security is to move further down the street to somewhere where they are less careful.

And while I've been typing Edwards has covered the same ground but with a different approach.