Hacker News Reader

Comment by ryderm | Hacker News Reader

> The reporters found nearly 800 officers who reached speeds of 90-130 mph, many of them while off duty.

Well, driving above the speed limit while on duty is required. Why would that be included in the statistic? And driving 90 is hardly out of the ordinary where I'm from. That being said, driving 120 or 130 while off duty is clearly a bad idea.

View on HN

> Well, driving above the speed limit while on duty is required.

Admittedly, it's not really physically possible to catch up to someone traveling at 90 mph when you're limited to 65, however they have lights and sirens that, according to law, they are required to use while responding to an emergency or incident, which broadly covers speeding.

According to the original article, more than half of all incidents occurred outside of the officers jurisdictions. Miami-Dade limits officers to 20 mph above the speed limit at all times, even while enroute to an emergency (270 cops were found going over 90, 70 being the highest speed limit in Miami-Dade). FHP limits officers to 15 above the posted limit, but does allow excesses if the situation requires it, but only if the environment allows it and it is safe to do so, but earns the prize for the fastest speed of 129.8 mph.

http://databases.sun-sentinel.com/news/broward/ftlaudCopSpee...

You might be interested to learn that radio waves can travel well in excess in of 90mph. as can helicopters. In fact, many jurisdictions ban high-speed chases, specifically because they are more dangerous than they help.

I'm apparently missing something. How is speed of light and the maximum horizontal speed of a helicopter relevant to the capabilities a single cop traveling in a single highway capable vehicle in pursuit of another highway capable vehicle?

I think I'm perfectly aware of the existence of radio waves and the breakthrough in communications their discovery unlocked, but I wasn't talking about that. I was talking about two different objects traveling at two different speeds in the same direction being physically incapable of meeting at another point unless the faster object slows down or stops, or in this instance the slower object breaks the speed limit and speeds up.

I think OP was making the point that, instead of speeding, a police officer should radio other officers ahead of the speeder in an attempt to catch the perpetrator.

It's a bad point because police already do radio ahead while they're in pursuit. Also, some cities do not allow police to chase suspects but it all depends on the crime. For example, they may chase someone wanted for murder but not someone else who's wanted for a non-violent crime. The argument is that it's not worth putting the public at risk for some offenders but for others it's important to apprehend the suspected criminal.

without sly ad homonym attacks this will be boring. the basic intent is to say that there is nothing but ego that requires the original officer to make the stop. radio to air pursuit and other police should generally be safer than creating a chase scenario.

"You can outrun his motor, but you can't outrun his motorola."

"Well, driving above the speed limit while on duty is required."

Not always. It is technically not even allowed unless they are actively responding to a call, I believe. (There's a lot of police work that involves being in a marked car without being on your way to stop a robbery in progress).

Reply on news.ycombinator.com