meant to reply to this earlier. i can't speak for the minutia of policing policy involved in protocol changes, but a few things stand out when looking at pursuits. one is that ridiculous loss of life occurs, loss of life that's not reasonably expected to have occurred had the perp been allowed to fleet. LAPD actually ran some studies on this, comparing two years (2002 and 2003) of regular pursuit policy and then a policy that cut pursuits in half by 60%, which led to an 80% decrease in injuries and deaths to third parties (as well as a 33% decrease in harm suffered by officers themselves.) phoenix more or less did the same thing, observing that out of 400+ pursuits in 2004 only a tiny percentage of them were conducted by people wanted for violent crimes or even felonies in general, but more than a quarter of them ended up in crashes. since cutting pursuits to exclude misdemeanors and traffic violations there's been a massive decrease in chases (and, subsequently, crashes and innocent people dying.) miami-dade has led the way in a lot of this, enacting these types of policies in the early 90s and quantifying the benefit. and then there's the simple problem of training. tons of cops don't get the necessary training required to handle high-speed pursuits. they routinely roll their cars, hit each other, kill each other, etc. in pursuit situations, often for dumb bullshit that could've been avoided. there are plenty of conceivable options to allow police to decline chase options and make their jobs safer. one is to enact stiffer penalties for running from the police (iirc it's just a misdemeanor in many states) and another is to adopt german police tactics, which are to simply note the license plate of the escaping offender, run him through the system, and then issue a warrant for his arrest. mail it, and if he doesn't turn himself in for the crime, then you deal with it accordingly. it works pretty well, and german citizens feel pretty safe, german cops don't die running into each other while trying to lay spike strips for a guy running from the cops because he's in a three-strikes state and he's got an ounce of dope under his passenger seat. oh yeah and legalize it. a few sources: Villa, J. (2005, October 19). Phoenix Police are Restricting Car Chases. The Arizona Republic. Richter, J. (2003, August 20). Number of Police Pursuits Drop Dramatically in Los Angeles. Los Angeles Police Department Press Release. Dao, J. (2004, July 20). D.C. Police Consider Reinstating Chase Policy after Rash of Car Thefts, Deadly Crashes. The New York Times. Alpert, G. P. (1997, May). Police Pursuit: Policies and Training. National Institute of Justice Research in Brief. Wood, R. (2004, November 26). High-Speed Chases Are Risky. The Cincinnati Post.
no question. i wanna say it was a republican in wisconsin that introduced measures to transfer investigations of police shootings from internal departments to outside sources. everyone has a stake in this: small government conservatives who shouldn't want agents of the state brutalizing citizens and egalitarian liberals who want to see social justice through institutional reform.
agreed. much like experiencing a new culture sheds new light upon your own, knowing a second language provides you new ways to think about and analyze american english and its derivatives. unfortunately monoculturalism is an ugly thread with long roots.
there's no reason not to do it, regardless of where you stand on the debate about police brutality. body cams release cops from wrongful accusations and they produce footage that damns wrongful behavior. it's not a fix-all, since you've also got to make sure your prosecution doesn't rig things in favor of cops in spite of the videos, but it's a damn good start. the fact that people on both sides of the political aisle generally agree with this is a very encouraging sign.
a clump of cells is not the same as a viable baby on any reasonable ethical scale. your attempt to equivocate using tissue of non-viable fetuses to advance medical studies and save lives with lopping the arm off a newborn contributes to the general problem of shrill voices dominating an important combination.
amen to that. abortion makes me very uncomfortable for a host of reasons and it's probably the only issue on the political spectrum that i consider myself fairly conservative on. i think it should be legal - a handful of cells is simply not the same thing as a baby, and the only reason to equate them is because the bible - but i support a very conservative age of viability. unfortunately common-sense talk that integrates scientific dialogue and the opening of wallets to allow free birth control access and education (things that actually cut into unwanted pregnancies, unlike dumb religious rhetoric and abstinence only education) is all drowned out by the incessant screaming of people who dominate the pro-life side of the conversation, namely religious fundamentalists with feeble grasps of critical thinking processes and enough scientific prowess to insist the earth is 6000 years old and mosaic cosmogenies are literally true and applicable in the modern age.