Shoot back at LEOs

[texanjoker]

While I have 99% love for LEO (1% disdain for LEO speeders without lights and unsignaled lane changers out writing tickets) I am also happy to read that we at least are not required to just belly up and wait for them to stop.

Sec. 546.004. EXCEPTIONS TO SIGNAL REQUIREMENT.

[...]

(c) A police officer may operate an authorized emergency vehicle for a law enforcement purpose without using the audible or visual signals required by Section 546.003 if the officer is:
(1) responding to an emergency call or pursuing a suspected violator of the law with probable cause to believe that:
(A) knowledge of the presence of the officer will cause the suspect to:
(i) destroy or lose evidence of a suspected felony;
(ii) end a suspected continuing felony before the officer has obtained sufficient evidence to establish grounds for arrest; or
(iii) evade apprehension or identification of the suspect or the suspect's vehicle; or
(B) because of traffic conditions on a multilaned roadway, vehicles moving in response to the audible or visual signals may:
(i) increase the potential for a collision; or
(ii) unreasonably extend the duration of the pursuit; or
(2) complying with a written regulation relating to the use of audible or visible signals adopted by the local government that employs the officer or by the department.

Thanks for posting.

[texanjoker]

... While I have 99% love for LEO (1% disdain for LEO speeders without lights and unsignaled lane changers out writing tickets) ...

At one time I would have agreed with you about unlit LEO speeders and unsignaled lane changers. Then someone broke into our neighbor's house while she was grocery shopping. She ran crying to our house when she discovered her broken-in door. We 911'ed it and a bunch of unlit speeding swat LEOs surrounded her house. I would bet they worried not one nonce about signaling lane changes on the way over. Now I understand LEOs may need to get somewhere quickly and silently and have replaced my prior bad judgement with a new appreciation for what might be the reason for such actions.

SWAT for a burglar, that is scarier than a burglar and a waste of resources.

SWAT teams are not on missions 24/7 each day. People forget they are LEO's first. Many times swat units are out working special details in uniform when nothing is going on to include patrol in some areas. Would you rather these on duty LEO's not respond? To me that would be a waste of resources.

Since I don't know how many responded other than the saying "a bunch of unlit speeding swat LEOs surrounded her house" I would venture to guess a "Bunch" is more then is needed to perform the action to clear a house, since some here do it with 1 chl holder.

Edited to add: this is a thread drift so won't respond along this topic again.

Please tell us the proper number of officers needed to clear a house.

Good question: Simple answer as many as it takes to safely do it based on the resources available. In the city you will have more then the rural areas. To do it text book, on a burg in progress, with suspects believed to be inside, you would need a perimeter set up to contain the suspects. Since there are 4 corners to a building, you need more then one officer on the perimeter. Then a minimum of 2 to make entry. A small building can be cleared with two. If bigger to be safe you need more to contain areas. Even when I worked k9's, I had at least one cover officer with me when clearing the buildings with my dog. That would be an officer that I knew could safely work around a K9 as clearing is a lot different then without. Making entry is very dangerous. I have been there were you make entry and the suspect then takes a shot at you. It does wake you up

Side note most LEO's clear buildings with pistols. The long guns stay outside.

[gigag04]

[
Roll your eyes. I can take the dig. Regulations stating that they may run without lights doesn't mean that they can always speed without lights. Gigag, I view you of a man of integrity. Do you honestly want me to believe that you know of none or see no other LEOs violating the laws I described without probable cause. That would appear a huge stretch to this outsider. That will be a tough sell to this guy.

Because I respect you I will also give the out that your team/city may be better than the patrol cars I see where I live.

I never said that none do. I would offer that most times, we cannot tell what type of call the LEO is responding to. In my experience, the ends justify the means. It's likely like most things in life where most are doing it right, and a few are abusing it. Roadside, we don't know which is which.

[goose]

[
Roll your eyes. I can take the dig. Regulations stating that they may run without lights doesn't mean that they can always speed without lights. Gigag, I view you of a man of integrity. Do you honestly want me to believe that you know of none or see no other LEOs violating the laws I described without probable cause. That would appear a huge stretch to this outsider. That will be a tough sell to this guy.

Because I respect you I will also give the out that your team/city may be better than the patrol cars I see where I live.

I never said that none do. I would offer that most times, we cannot tell what type of call the LEO is responding to. In my experience, the ends justify the means. It's likely like most things in life where most are doing it right, and a few are abusing it. Roadside, we don't know which is which.

I don't disagree. You won't give me 1% for the ones you know do it? I'm pretty pro cop. I expected maybe a "yeah, yeah, yeah. It's an issue, fair enough." I'll take my 1% because the 'ends' of us getting tickets doesn't justify the 'means' of the ticket writer being the cop calling the kettle black.

[gigag04]

Mods - can we split this discussion off as a separate thread? I feel it's a good discussion just largely irrelevant to the OP.

Roll your eyes. I can take the dig. Regulations stating that they may run without lights doesn't mean that they can always speed without lights. Gigag, I view you of a man of integrity. Do you honestly want me to believe that you know of none or see no other LEOs violating the laws I described without probable cause. That would appear a huge stretch to this outsider. That will be a tough sell to this guy.

Because I respect you I will also give the out that your team/city may be better than the patrol cars I see where I live.

I never said that none do. I would offer that most times, we cannot tell what type of call the LEO is responding to. In my experience, the ends justify the means. It's likely like most things in life where most are doing it right, and a few are abusing it. Roadside, we don't know which is which.

I don't disagree. You won't give me 1% for the ones you know do it? I'm pretty pro cop. I expected maybe a "yeah, yeah, yeah. It's an issue, fair enough." I'll take my 1% because the 'ends' of us getting tickets doesn't justify the 'means' of the ticket writer being the cop calling the kettle black.

I have no idea the exact percentage of people driving unprofessionally on the way to non-priority calls/things, but your 1% seemed to include all LEOs violating the transportation code for any reason:

goose wrote:
While I have 99% love for LEO (1% disdain for LEO speeders without lights and unsignaled lane changers out writing tickets) I am also happy to read that we at least are not required to just belly up and wait for them to stop.

Some things merit a code 3 response (lights and sirens). Some do not, but still justify getting there quickly without lights/sirens - most family violence disturbances and burglary calls fall in the category. Sometimes an officer will ask for backup - and you can tell its urgent, but not justifying a code response like a fight in progress would. Sometimes you are sent an out of zone report call and they reporting party/victim has been waiting 45 minutes without contact. There are many valid reasons that an LEO might speed a bit on the way to something. At 3 am, I've gone over the speed limit wihtout lights because I had to go to the bathroom and there was no traffic. I've done that before I worked in LE too Sooo...

I believe most agencies had a policy for how fast a unit can go w/o lights or sirens. I would think it would be around 10-15 over the posted limit.

[The Annoyed Man]

I believe most agencies had a policy for how fast a unit can go w/o lights or sirens. I would think it would be around 10-15 over the posted limit.

Back when I worked in the ER, I recall a PPD officer telling me that all emergency vehicles were limited to 45 mph on surface streets.....as that was the maximum allowed speed limit anywhere in the city. In other words, even running code 3, the responding officer could go 45 in a 45 zone, and he could go 45 in a 25 zone, but unless he entered a limited access highway with higher speed limits, 45 was the limit. He told me this was also true for fire engines and EMS vehicles. But, this was in Pasadena, a mid-sized city with maybe 100,000 residents at the time (not counting county residents living just outside the city limits), with limited exceptions and for practical reasons going more than 45 was simply not safe for anybody, officers included. It was too hairy. I remember a paramedic ambulance on its way to our ER which took a corner too fast and tipped over on its side with a patient on board, necessitating the dispatch of two other ambulances to transport the patient AND the crew of the first RA to our facility. In fact, I believe that it was that incident that spawned the conversation I had with that cop about speed limits for emergency vehicles.

I'm sure that other cities have other policies.....and it is even possible that Pasadena California has changed that policy since then (this was back in the mid 1980s), but the idea that emergency vehicles are limited by statute to a given speed limit while navigating surface streets is not an old one to me.

Gigag, does your agency have any particular restrictions like that?

[goose]

Mods - can we split this discussion off as a separate thread? I feel it's a good discussion just largely irrelevant to the OP.

I have no idea the exact percentage of people driving unprofessionally on the way to non-priority calls/things, but your 1% seemed to include all LEOs violating the transportation code for any reason:

Not at all. If they are making a silent _run_ they aren't in fact violating transportation code as you clearly address in your posting of regulations. I in NO way implied that I thought all LEO violate the law. My quote that you have below says "for LEO speeders." Answering a call does NOT make an LEO a speeder. Not answering a call, or chasing felons, etc, and going above the speed limit does. If you can't concede that a 1% figure isn't a low ball then we're probably at an impasse. I have repeatedly thanked LEO on the board for their contributions. I also thank you all in person for risking your lives for my family. It was a light jab at what I view as common knowledge. You don't appear to believe that the knowledge is common. Fair enough. I apologize if you felt in some way impugned by my jab.

goose wrote:
While I have 99% love for LEO (1% disdain for LEO speeders without lights and unsignaled lane changers out writing tickets) I am also happy to read that we at least are not required to just belly up and wait for them to stop.

At 3 am, I've gone over the speed limit wihtout lights because I had to go to the bathroom and there was no traffic. I've done that before I worked in LE too Sooo...

I take back the apology. :-) How many civilians have gotten a ticket for doing that? I bet more than one.

[gigag04]

Goose - I'm not saying your point isn't valid, but I wouldn't guess at percentages or numbers either. If mush have me agree to an arbitrary 1% then yes, we are at an impasse.

TAM - ours does. However limiting all emergncy vehicles to posted limits is stupid. It's a CYB for the city And misses the point. I've gone over 110mph on SH6 going to a call, and shut down a high speed pursuit after we exceeded 55mph on residential streets at dusk. It's a situationally dependent thing as I'm sure you agree.

[The Annoyed Man]

Goose - I'm not saying your point isn't valid, but I wouldn't guess at percentages or numbers either. If mush have me agree to an arbitrary 1% then yes, we are at an impasse.

TAM - ours does. However limiting all emergncy vehicles to posted limits is stupid. It's a CYB for the city And misses the point. I've gone over 110mph on SH6 going to a call, and shut down a high speed pursuit after we exceeded 55mph on residential streets at dusk. It's a situationally dependent thing as I'm sure you agree.

I do agree. When I say that it's an old idea to me, that doesn't mean that I think it isn't bizarre. If that's ME in the back of that RA with a MI or a GSW, I want them to haul posterior getting me to a hospital, and the speed limits be hanged. Just don't crash the thing onto its side.

Just to be clear, the emergency vehicles weren't limited to the posted speed limits.....they were limited to the top speed limit set by statute within the city limits. So they could go faster than a posted 25mph for instance, but they couldn't exceed 45mph. Now, whether the officers actually honored those limits in the breach..... I have no idea.

In re: percentages and numbers, can you agree to 0.35%?

[goose]

Goose - I'm not saying your point isn't valid, but I wouldn't guess at percentages or numbers either. If mush have me agree to an arbitrary 1% then yes, we are at an impasse.

hehehe. I am enjoying this at least. If you thought my point was valid what were the statutes/regulations and other comments for? I didn't realize this was about a single number. My disdain was 1%. I feel like that is a gracious and low level of discontent for people out fighting the good fight. I get to make up that number. I thought I had made up a small one. Heck, I'd be ecstatic if I thought my wife and kids were that unhappy with me.

You do realize that this conversation might be an example of why some people (no guesses at exact numbers) feel like they can simply never win when dealing with LEO? We are belaboring the minutia when we've at least agreed my point was valid. I still respect what you do for our communities. I hope I never have to have a conversation like this with you in an official manner. I've already lost.

[Tamie]

Back when I worked in the ER, I recall a PPD officer telling me that all emergency vehicles were limited to 45 mph on surface streets.....as that was the maximum allowed speed limit anywhere in the city. In other words, even running code 3, the responding officer could go 45 in a 45 zone, and he could go 45 in a 25 zone, but unless he entered a limited access highway with higher speed limits, 45 was the limit. He told me this was also true for fire engines and EMS vehicles. But, this was in Pasadena, a mid-sized city with maybe 100,000 residents at the time (not counting county residents living just outside the city limits)

Was that in Pasadena Texas or Pasadena California. Because Texas state law is different than California state law.

[E10]

So, back to the OP, can we shoot at LEOs who are driving recklessly, speeding, running red lights, and eschewing their turn signals?

[goose]

So, back to the OP, can we shoot at LEOs who are driving recklessly, speeding, running red lights, and eschewing their turn signals?

Alright, that's funny right there.

[texanjoker]

So, back to the OP, can we shoot at LEOs who are driving recklessly, speeding, running red lights, and eschewing their turn signals?

If you want suicide by cop go ahead.

[gigag04]

If you thought my point was valid what were the statutes/regulations and other comments for? I didn't realize this was about a single number.

Again, you simply identified your displeasure with unspecified LEO speeders. Which includes a subset of ones that have justifiable reasons to do so w/o using emergency equipment. My intent was to introduce possible acceptable explanations for SOME of the behavior observed of the larger statistical population of "LEO Speeders."

You do realize that this conversation might be an example of why some people (no guesses at exact numbers) feel like they can simply never win when dealing with LEO? We are belaboring the minutia when we've at least agreed my point was valid.

I try my hardest to be as best prepared as possible in performing my duties, whether on patrol, preparing a case, or off duty. We might be discussing an interesting topic here or there for many members, but with some of the conversations on here - it is what I do daily. I love what I do, and try as best I can to be the best at it. (iIn may, when I start my engineering career and leave full time LE, it will be a bittersweet moment.) Regarding feeling like you can't win, generally speaking, LEOs are confrontational people who are used to having their life's work scrutinized by supervisors, strangers, media, and attorneys on both sides. This is not unique to LE, but it is very prevalent so it's our reality. I believe that is largely responsible for that persona that so many if us create. It's also a source of safety for some. Sure there are plenty of jerks that do it wrong. I know many.

In practice many are surprised to find out I hardly ever write moving violations (besides no insurance). I can think of 4 I wrote in 2012, including a semi blowing a light and almost killing me.

I still respect what you do for our communities. I hope I never have to have a conversation like this with you in an official manner. I've already lost.

thanks!