This just happened by my house, my buddy was the paramedic on scene

Well as I mentioned she was a tweaked so naturally it was a early 2000's civic. This was a serious chase she easily could have killed a few people. It's a really busy intersection too. Lady was like ~23 and doing 80 with no tires on her front two wheels.

She probably would have lived if she wasn't driving a civic. I love these cars but they're built with fucking tin foil or something.
This is what mine looked like after some high school girl t boned me only going about 15mph. Nothing happened to her jetta and the civic got totalled. I just put a new fucking engine and brakes into it too. It was like brand new inside. We need to ban women from driving.

HOLY FUCKING SHIT!

I didn't know a 2000s civic could do 80 with front tires, let alone after going over 2 spike belts. civic=race car

...

Not quite 85 mph but still relevant.

youtube.com/watch?v=mWegXQ81TKw

lies
she was late to her hair and nails appointment

>My friend said the engine was basically sitting in her lap when he got there and that she had nice tits.
WHERES THE FUCKING PICTURES?

Serious lack of Literal Engine Porn

i hit a three with a twingo in the middle of the night
at around 50 mph and it only broke my legs
cars are pretty safe front impact wise

>only broke my legs
damn, good thing you didn't hit a four

kek

>person tries to elude police after they find 0.2g of maree-huana with them
>police: "How do we turn this into a riskier situation for every pedestrian and person around?? I know, lets get into a high speed chase and lets render her car useless and uncontrollable by using spikes!!"
>tomorrow news "The suspect lost control of his car, killed 3 pedestrian, damaged 2 buildings, but in the words of officer McPig 'We just darn knew this fella was a danger to society, what with his 0.03 grams of mareee-huana, so we're glad we got a dangerous criminal off the street' "

American "police" everyone

to be fair the sides of vehicles are MUCH more fragile than the bumpers, if you were rear ended at 15 mph, the damage would have been way less

Come back when you're out of high school

Not so common in transverse cars, only really been a thing recently.

I once had to cut a small hole through a 90s volvos firewall to route a cable, and that motherfucker wore out an almost brand new bit.

this is why american police are fucking idiots

police in some states are already starting to call chases off once they have a license plate.

Only an edgelord would think it was worth the risk of dead bystanders and the damage to property to catch somebody with a gram of meth. Only in cop obsessed Burgerland this is seen as normal

What would you recommend they do? I know many departments have a no-chase policy for motorcycles...but for cars..who knows

>Someone does something irresponsible and stupid
>this is the polices fault because they tried to stop the criminal

>someone commits a misdemeanor/irresponsible
>"QUICK BUBBA LETS DEPLOY THE SPIKES, RUBBER SHELLS, CALL A HELO, LETS GET THAT DARN ASSHOLE ON A HIGH SPEED CHASE"
>but we have a license plate, we could just serve a warr-
>"SHUT THE HELL UP, THIS IS PERSONAL"

Proof if proof were needed, sped doesn't cause accidents the police do.

>>someone commits a misdemeanor/irresponsible
>instead of taking a misdemeanor which would be literally nothing but a fine maybe the driver decides to speed off at extremely high speeds almost triple the speed limit in certain areas all because she thinks it's easier to evade cops for a fucking misdemeanor so she breaks tons more laws some being felonies
>it's the cops fault she stepped on the gas and ran
Fuck off loser the driver did literally everything wrong. A misdemeanor wouldn't have taken her life but she thought it was a good idea to try and drive dangerously through a residential area

A judge wouldn't serve a warrant for a fucking misdemeanor

Oh so they should just let the law breaker go and break more laws by doing 100mph in a 30? Endangering the lives of hundreds of people all because her marijuana addiction?

>>it's the cops fault she stepped on the gas and ran

no, but its the cops fault she stepped on the gas, and again, and again, and again, because instead of letting her go and catching her later, they think it's wise to risk the lives of everyone around them in order to catch some drug user

I am not defending her. I am amazed that all this damage and all that risk, to the eyes of a typical amerifat, is worth it. I am not saying let her go, but you could, you know, serve her a fucking warrant when her car is on her driveway

I'm sure that business owner is thrilled, once her insurance premiums go up, but gosh darn we got a dangerous person off the street thanks to the professionalism of the sheriff

>allowing a methhead to continue driving
>giving them the chance to skip town

You people are stupid.

...

>Oh so they should just let the law breaker go and break more laws by doing 100mph in a 30?

and what makes you think she'd be speeding if the chase was called off? the reason why she was speeding was because she was being CHASED hurr durr

>omg she broke the law
>time to chase her, spook her, and now instead of a lone car, lets get the entire precint on a high speed chase to catch a drug user hurrr

Amerifat logic

>chasing a methead
>she crashes into a crowd and kills 9
>"HURR DURR AT LEAST WE GOT HER!! GO WAR ON DRUGS"

>I'm not defending her
>proceeds to blame every problem on the druggie

You're a fucking retard and enabling and defining blatant crimes because the first one was petty

Is it the cops fault she decided to break the law with having an insignificant amount of pot? Did the cops force her to make a decision and run?

If cops become complacent with letting people speed off dangerously then anyone will think they can get away with it. Reinforcing the statute of the law is pertinent to a lawful and orderly society

No judge would serve an arrest warrant for a misdemeanor she wouldn't even get arrested for

>and what makes you think she'd be speeding if the chase was called off?
Nice projectipn faggot thinking she'd suddenly become a safe person if da evil cops didn't chase and brutality her

because we can totally test all 100million people to see whos on meth

then actively keep them from ever setting foot into a working car

lets make that your job, your pay is 8.10$ per hour

get to work asshole

>pot
What part of TWEAKER did you not read? That has a specific meaning.

You let her go, she's gonna skip town, and you're gonna have to waste months of time and hundreds of man hours to track her down and arrest her.

The only thing the cops did wrong was fail to outperform her garbage sedan.

its not about letting them go you retarded amerifat. It's about, once you have an ID, you call the chase off and catch them at a time when you don't put innocent bystanders' lives at risk because you're so paranoid about da reefer. What the fuck is so hard to understand that risking the lives of people around the chase isn't worth it for a fucking joint?

nice assumption, assuming that if someone wasn't being chased they'd just speed off anyway because reasons. And nice logic, assuming that 1 person speeding is safer than 9 of them

Holy fuck I swear Amerifats live in a Michael Bay movie. They can't cope with the fact that maybe, just MAYBE not engaging in a high speed chase trying to catch 0.2g of weed isn't worth the risk to bystanders. Nope, they've been brainswashed to believe that the risk is worth it, that innocent people's lives are worth it as long as no one is allowed to humilliate Big Scary Police (I guess serving a warrant isn't as kewl)

lmfao

>You let her go, she's gonna skip town, and you're gonna have to waste months of time and hundreds of man hours to track her down and arrest her.

right, I'm sure the police is in the business of spending hundreds of man hours to catch a fucking tweaker

can you make any more retarded arguments?

Who let the retards out?

>let's make more work for the cops because I'm an arm chair lawyer who thinks it's Magically better to let a criminal go so they can disappear

She wouldn't have even gotten arrested she would have just gotten a ticket at best but because you think it's somehow better to be captain hindsight and project shit like she'd somehow not speed again after she just took off speeding you somehow think you're right for your own judgment sake

The criminal was a dangerous she wouldn't have gotten arrested she would have gotten a ticket. Instead because she was high on drugs she decides to run, put everyones life at stakr

You Magically think she'd stop speeding once she somehow evaded the cops or that she wouldnt do it again? You're naive as fuck. She is a criminal that broke more laws by running instead of just taking a fucking ticket. No judge would give an arrest warrant for something she wouldn't even get arrested for. You arm chair layers are fucking stupid as shit and use your predisposed notions outside of the situation to determine what's right completely removed from everything. The cops did nothing wrong in stopping her

so to sum up this thread

>single car incident, only driver hurt
>BUT OMG THINK OF THE CHILDREN SHE COULD HAVE HIT!

More like

>druggie thinks it's a good idea to avoid a ticket by causing mayhem
>kills herself because she didn't want to get a 100 dollar ticket
>hippies come into thread all like "she did du nuffin" and blame the cops because a druggie decided to break the law

>it's retarded because someone won't agree either my opinion that the cops somehow forced her to speed

How about not speed or break the law in the first place

>da cops infiltrated her mind, grabbed her leg and forced her to step on the gas pedal. The cop forced her to speed and forced her to break them even laws

a regular person becomes a monster in your eyes once they have inhaled methenphetamine

i bet you think people who smoke pot are inherently lazy

Dude, this is Veeky Forums. You're supposed to act retarded even if you're not. You're making too much sense for the bus riders here.

If people thought they could get away from the cops by running it would happen all the time

Now it's people usually only in a desperate enough situation to take the risk and even then the police chase you down and run you into something.

The police are culpable for escalating the danger little but they only chased her after she ran. It's still her responsibility not to start doing dangerous things that necessitate detaining her.

12 year old's that think the cop's actually give a shit about a little pot, and that it's the same as meth? This girl was a meth head. I really don't see where they're pulling all this small amount of marijuana shit from. Poor reading comprehension I guess.

Anything above pot and shrooms is the domain of human detritus. And those are still HIGHLY degenerate. Anything above a few beers on the weekend is. Stop pretending it's not. Worthless people are worthless because they do things that MAKE them worthless. Meth is one of those things.

And yes, pot makes you lazy. Ask anybody who smokes it, they will admit as much.

>Anything above pot and shrooms is the domain of human detritus
prove it

>Anything above a few beers on the weekend is
so youre telling me that cigarettes are degenerate as well?

meth wouldnt be an issue in society if it were legalised anyway

How is meth not ten times as directly harmful as pot and booze? The only reason pot activists have a leg to stand on is because all it does is make you a dopey idiot, a meth habit will kill you before too terribly long. Even if it doesn't you'll look like 60 year old trailer trash at 30.

ITT: people who don't understand the ends don't always justify the means.

meth used in moderation doesnt do any more damage than weed or alcohol used in moderation. yeah if you binge on the stuff itll make your life shit but its just a substance.

legalising would end all the gang related crime and bullshit associated with it

>meth wouldnt be an issue in society if it were legalised anyway
>pedophilia wouldn't be an issue in society if it were legalized anyway

#BLM has done a good job in demonizing the police in my area. They get mad at stores going after shoplifters saying racial profiling is illegal. As a result, the stores often drop charges (to avoid racism media circus) if the shoplifter suspect is black, but charges remain if the shoplifter suspect is white.

>meth used in moderation doesnt do any more damage than weed or alcohol used in moderation

Around here, post meth high causes a lot of users to have a hair trigger anger response. So there does seem to be changes in meth users' personalities even after the meth has worn off.

>Not knowing that meth withdrawal is just extended periods of sleep and feeling tired.
>Believing the media about drugs in any way, shape, or form.

I'm just going to go back to enjoying my d-amp and morphine high.

>nice tits
Yeah, so where's the pics?

Gotta go with this. Most sane people know it's not worth it to run away. "Just letting people off" who decide to run from the cops is not so hot a solution in my eyes.

If it had been a volvo OP would be dead.

Cars are built to crash into each other at ~45 mph. Not into a concrete wall at 70. She was dead the moment she decided to keep going without tires.

Guys, if we just get rid of the law then there won't be any more criminals, and then everyone will be safe! That's how it works, right?

world problems: solved

>advocating against dangerous high speed chases that could result in the death of innocent people for misdeneaors = "lol no mo' laws y'all hear"

It takes a special kind of stupidity to be unable to grasp the point of the argument, but I'm sure you can do it if you try hard enough

It's been said about a gorillion times that it is not to let people away, but that if you're chasing someone for a misdemeanor, and you have positive ID/plate, then maybe, y'know, it's not worth endangering pedestrians over it. And maybe makes more sense to serve them with a warrant.

Of course the nuances of the argument goes right through the bus riders and trump voters, who still keep shouting ""Muh letting them go muh respect muh autoritah", which, once again, it isn't the fucking point of the argument. At all

Fuck this board is chock full of knuckleheads, pun intended

>comparing pot to fucking meth

Shatterfags fucking kill yourselves

Oh wait, you already are

>special kind of stupidity
More like sarcasm

Wheres the tits?

Good thing she's got her Head & Shoulders in the glovebox now.

Covered by talc powder from the takata airbag.

there's literally nothing wrong with meth

meth has that sickly euphoric rush to it that makes you feel terrible at the same time as great. what is much better is 2fluoro-methamphetamine, least euphoric stim out there and thus the most productive. only one i take anymore.

ok

kek

So in that case why should the police respond to bank robberies? Or home invasions? Or murders? The crime is already done, isn't it much safer to just let the criminal get away with what they want and try to track them down with CCTV or witness testimony later? Why risk a violent confrontation that could result in the death of innocent people? Is there any crime that police can actually respond to under your logic? Or should we just get rid of police altogether?

Not him, but because THE POLICE ACTUALLY KNOW WHAT THE FUCK THEY'RE DOING. If an operator allows you to go chase a criminal down and either one of you gets hurt there's serious legal consequences as that injury (or death) could have been prevented by waiting for the people literally employed to deal with it, but instead some autist who thinks he knows best realizes he can't control the situation and makes everything worse.

Why don't we just let volunteers raid meth labs? Obviously there's no sort of training or comprehension of the law involved here.

This was a police chase, that's what we're talking about. If anyone in this thread was talking about vigilante justice I missed it. The guy I was responding to was complaining about the police chasing criminals.

Was about to say I responded to the wrong guy, meant Either way the difference is the cops are both trained and knowledgeable of the law enough to make judgment calls, control situations and combat "suspects" should the need arise which is why they're allowed to pursue, some random neckbeard who wants to use somebody littering as an excuse to barrel down a 35mph street at 90 and pull guns on people is why this isn't allowed.

Even if said neckbeard legitimately thought he's helping, he isn't.

>So in that case why should the police respond to bank robberies? Or home invasions? Or murders?

key word: misdemeanor

you guys drink used oil for breakfast or something? holy shit how fucking stupid can one be?

I've said the word MISDEMEANOR a million times already. I'm not saying they should let any criminal get away to catch them later, I'm saying the ones that a high speed chase isn't worth.

Well, it so happens that some states are already doing that (not getting into high speed chases over somebody who was stopped after speeding, or some other dumb misdemeanors) because its not worth the risk of injury or death to bystanders

So should the police never respond to misdemeanor calls at the risk of escalating the situation? If so, what's the point of having misdemeanor crimes if any potential criminal knows they can commit it without fear of the police stopping them?

also

>THE POLICE ACTUALLY KNOW WHAT THE FUCK THEY'RE DOING

yeah they sure fucking do

no, you fucking dolt, more like

>police stops car for w/e
>turns out to be a misdemeanor
>cop has ID and license plate
>person tries to flee
>instead of getting into a stupid/dangerous chase, issue warrant arrest
>person gets arrested being a dense motherfucker while posting on Veeky Forums
>the fucking end, nobody gets hurt

read the fucking thread, I never proposed the cops not arresting people for small crimes.

>cops are both trained and knowledgeable of the law enough to make judgment calls, control situations and combat "suspects" should the need arise
I should correct myself, the law and governing bodies view it this way. Regardless of the law working or the cops actually being competent, in no universe should civilians be allowed to take the law into their own hands.

Well, it so happens that some states are already doing that (not getting into high speed chases over somebody who was stopped after speeding, or some other dumb misdemeanors) because its not worth the risk of injury or death to bystanders
And this is what I'm getting at, the police have to work within whatever the government considers acceptable, if they decide to ban chases over misdemeanors then sure. What the cops are doing is already considered dangerous to all parties involved, do we really want a bunch of untrained morons who either don't know the law or care about it to get involved in these sorts of situations?

>that poor Tundra

I'm going to kiss my old Tundra goodnight before I go to bed

You might actually be retarded. Of fucking course the police are going to try to stop them, pursuits, one of method of stopping them is considered too dangerous or in other words, the risks are worse than just letting the criminal go, whether or not it means the criminal will be found later. Pursuits aren't the only way to apprehend a criminal but if you were even semi-literate you'd understand this.

Also as mentioned in if police chases are already dangerous then we're just making the problem infinitely worse by letting random retards chase criminals.

I'm not asking about what you think should happen in this situation, I'm asking you to apply your logic. You're saying the reason the police shouldn't chase people for misdemeanors is that it raises the risk of people being injured. But surely whenever the police respond to a call it raises the risk of people being injured due to the confrontation between a criminal and the police? Car chases aren't the only way that people can be injured or killed. So if the police shouldn't chase people for that reason, why should they respond to any misdemeanor call? Surely the same risk is present.

Again, so do you think that the police should always refuse to answer a call about a misdemeanor in progress, or refuse to confront someone who they see committing a misdemeanor, and instead just seek to apprehend the criminal later, just because it's safer?

>Again, so do you think that the police should always refuse to answer a call about a misdemeanor in progress, or refuse to confront someone who they see committing a misdemeanor, and instead just seek to apprehend the criminal later

see

Se I'm not talking about the police never arresting people for misdemeanor crimes, I'm talking about police responding to misdemeanor crimes. In my previous post I specifically said "refuse to answer a call" not " not arresting people for small crimes" as in the post you referred me to. I think your reading comprehension skills may be failing you tonight.

Everything has a risk you fucking moron, the risk vs. reward of responding to a call is low enough that it's worth carrying out whereas the risk vs. reward of a police chase for a misdemeanor is not considered worth it. Fuck nigger, are you trying to not understand things?
>Surely the same risk is present.
What. No. A criminal fleeing GREATLY increases the risk. We have one guy in a car driving dangerously, should we let him go wherever he wants to go or should we add more cars into this, said cars causing the criminal to flee WAY farther than he would have otherwise.

First we had one car who probably would only flee maybe 20 minutes if left alone (really he'd just park after a few minutes and hide somewhere if he knew cops weren't following him, cars are a lot harder to hide than people) and likely slow the fuck down without cops on his ass to not draw further attention. We'll consider this risk X. Now we have 6 cops pursuing him, so that's 7 total cars driving dangerously resulting in 7X. Now those 20 minutes he would have driven, that just turned into an 8 hour long police chase, so now our 20 minute stroll is 480 minutes. which is 24x the amount of time driven. If you've been following, now we have 7 cars driving 480 minutes each instead of 1 driving 20, so assuming our X factor was the risk of 20 minutes of dangerous driving for a car, we went from X to 168X.

In other words, as the result of pursuing, it's 168X more likely somebody is going to crash or end up hurt between the time the criminal flees and stops. Holy fuck I'm bored.

>First we had one car who probably would only flee maybe 20 minutes if left alone (really he'd just park after a few minutes and hide somewhere if he knew cops weren't following him, cars are a lot harder to hide than people) and likely slow the fuck down without cops on his ass to not draw further attention. We'll consider this risk X. Now we have 6 cops pursuing him, so that's 7 total cars driving dangerously resulting in 7X. Now those 20 minutes he would have driven, that just turned into an 8 hour long police chase, so now our 20 minute stroll is 480 minutes. which is 24x the amount of time driven. If you've been following, now we have 7 cars driving 480 minutes each instead of 1 driving 20, so assuming our X factor was the risk of 20 minutes of dangerous driving for a car, we went from X to 168X.

Thank you. Ffor a board that loves to make fun of nigger's intelligence, they're sure acting like complete niggers when it comes to understanding this. Holy fuck guys. C'mon it's not too hard. Its a very simple argument

Is the pic the scene? If so the downforce of the spoiler didn't help her turn lel

All that analysis is irrelevant because what I'm asking you to compare isn't the difference in danger between a criminal fleeing when pursued by police versus not pursued, what I'm asking about is the difference in danger between a criminal fleeing in a car versus being confronted in any other situation. Can you say for sure that the risk of a criminal crashing into an innocent person during a police chase is that much higher than the risk of a criminal hurting an innocent person when avoiding arrest in some other way? What if the criminal attacks the officers, or takes a hostage, or starts shooting randomly? Can you really say that any such scenario is *that much* less likely to result in an innocent person being hurt than in a car chase? And if so, how much? How much less dangerous does it have to be for the police to be able to respond to a misdemeanor call? Can you quantify it? If someone could theoretically prove that the likelihood of an innocent person being injured in a police response was similar to that of a person being injured in a car chase, would you agree then that the police should never respond to misdemeanor calls? Or are you saying there's something special about car chases that puts them in a wholly different category from other types of danger?

You do realize people are actually employed to figure this shit out, right?

I do, and that's sort of my point. People have done this analysis, and clearly they didn't come to the conclusion that it's too dangerous for cops to chase people for misdemeanor crimes, since no one ever told them to stop doing it. It's not like these cops are rogue officers who are chasing down misdemeanor offenders in the face of all scientific evidence and public policy. This is their standard operating procedure after decades of experience and analysis. So when some user on Veeky Forums pops up and starts insulting them for doing it and insisting on how dangerous and wrong it is, I'm inclined to disagree with them unless they seem to know better than the experts who have done the analysis. And I'm not seeing that evidence here, which is why I'm inclined to call those people retarded.

>Unpredictable, high speed operation of multi-tonne vehicles
>a tweaker saying "WTF MAN DONT DO IT I'LL SHOOT THAT DOG"

yeah

it might be better all around to stop criminalizing complete bullshit or make a list of offenses that aren't worth the time and money, but cars are just more dangerous to the public. if someone pulls a gun you can shoot them. if someone gets in a car you're fucked.

pretty sure they become a monster when the risk the lives of others to avoid a speeding ticket.
People who do this just happen to be druggies extremely often. Are you going to tell me this is a coincidence?