I know emotions and adrenaline mess with people, including the professionals, and their judgement needs boundaries. It isn't as if they should never chase for fear of escalating the situation, but nor should they always chase.
Jazz, your explanation hit my gut feeling that escalating a minor offense into a chase means a negative result for innocent bystanders. I don't have any stats but would say almost any screwed bystanders warrants minimizing these chases.
Anyway, I'm betting the policy makers don't mind this ruling at all. Police might mind, even the middle command who surely don't want to lose their tools, but those above will see it as ammo to help justify increased surveillance systems. Track offenders without chases. It could also put more wind in the sails of mandatory GPS vehicle tracking. Increased monitoring, citing, revenue, etc. JAZZ, if you can speak to it, what's your company's thinking in this area? (inside vs. public?)
__________________
There are a vast number of people who are uninformed and heavily propagandized, but fundamentally decent. The propaganda that inundates them is effective when unchallenged, but much of it goes only skin deep. If they can be brought to raise questions and apply their decent instincts and basic intelligence, many people quickly escape the confines of the doctrinal system and are willing to do something to help others who are really suffering and oppressed." -Manufacturing Consent: Noam Chomsky and the Media, p. 195
|