Acting on pursuits: Prianos' campaign gets boost from "24" star

Actor Glenn Morshower visited here recently as spokesman for a Chicoan's campaign to reduce deaths from police pursuits.

[Stickler]

Fox 30 does not shoot film and never has. They shoot video. Big difference.

[Michael]

No its a small difference compared to peoples lives. Dont try to distract from the real purpose of this article, Police accountability in high speed pusuits.

[Go Fox 30]

Stickler wrote:

Fox 30 does not shoot film and never has. They shoot video. Big difference.

I'm for Fox 30, they did an awesome job...go Fox 30. You've takin the lead on getting to the heart of real issues here in the North State.

[ya let them go]

drunk driver's never hurt anyone...

[A Good Dog]

I want to thank the ChicoER for covering this story, the Priano's for starting this organiztion, and Mr Morshower & Fox 30 for contributing to it's cause. THANK YOU THANK YOU THANK YOU.

[John]

Which scenario is more dangerous:

1. A drunk driver on our streets.

2. That same drunk driver going twice as fast and even more dangerously while being followed by several police officers going just as fast...

Seems pretty simple to me.

[Mmm hmm]

I think it's extremely obvious that police should weigh the severity of the crime versus the hazards of a pursuit. I've talked to a couple of cops about the issue in a casual matter. They told me that at least locally, pursuits have changed dramatically because of public concerns. They rarely pursue anyone anymore, and the times they do, they are usually almost immediately canceled by their sergeant and let the car they're chasing go. On the flip side of all of this, I read the ER frequently. It seems like everytime the cops don't catch someone, for whatever reason (not always in pursuit matters), people are sooooo quick to crucify them for being incompetent. I think that it's mostly anti-police folks that bother to make the bulk of the negative comments.

[Jimmy D]

"Victims of Police pursuits". Are you kidding me? As if the Police are out looking to get into high speed pursuits. It's the criminal that causes the pursuits. They are not "Police pursuits", they are pursuits of criminals.

It's interresting that Mrs. Priano doesn't think that drunken driving endangers the public. I wonder if she consulted "MADD" (Mothers Against Drunk Driving) on this issue. According to them, in 2006 there were 17,602 people killed in drunk driving accidents. Perhaps Law Enforcement Officers should just let them go.

This is yet another pathetic example of "feel good" legislation that will do nothing to protect our community, and will make law enfoecement completely impotent from dealing with fleeing criminals.

It is truely a sad loss that the Prianos suffered, but that loss does not qualify them to try and dictate policy in an area that they know nothing about. The focus of their grief is doing nothing to protect the community.

[flower]

Jimmy D wrote:

"Victims of Police pursuits". Are you kidding me? As if the Police are out looking to get into high speed pursuits. It's the criminal that causes the pursuits. They are not "Police pursuits", they are pursuits of criminals.
It's interresting that Mrs. Priano doesn't think that drunken driving endangers the public. I wonder if she consulted "MADD" (Mothers Against Drunk Driving) on this issue. According to them, in 2006 there were 17,602 people killed in drunk driving accidents. Perhaps Law Enforcement Officers should just let them go.
This is yet another pathetic example of "feel good" legislation that will do nothing to protect our community, and will make law enfoecement completely impotent from dealing with fleeing criminals.
It is truely a sad loss that the Prianos suffered, but that loss does not qualify them to try and dictate policy in an area that they know nothing about. The focus of their grief is doing nothing to protect the community.

exactly - totally agree with you Jimmy D

[AreYouSure]

Jimmy D wrote:

"Victims of Police pursuits". Are you kidding me? As if the Police are out looking to get into high speed pursuits. It's the criminal that causes the pursuits. They are not "Police pursuits", they are pursuits of criminals.
It's interresting that Mrs. Priano doesn't think that drunken driving endangers the public. I wonder if she consulted "MADD" (Mothers Against Drunk Driving) on this issue. According to them, in 2006 there were 17,602 people killed in drunk driving accidents. Perhaps Law Enforcement Officers should just let them go.
This is yet another pathetic example of "feel good" legislation that will do nothing to protect our community, and will make law enfoecement completely impotent from dealing with fleeing criminals.
It is truely a sad loss that the Prianos suffered, but that loss does not qualify them to try and dictate policy in an area that they know nothing about. The focus of their grief is doing nothing to protect the community.

..In an area they know nothing about? I would think after losing their daughter, they've done nothing BUT study this "area" everyday since. You are a thickheaded individual if you think anything less. The mission candy & her family are on is completely justified. Who better too, they know the great loss that can occur , unfortunately so do I ( I too have been locked into the past, I'm still there, almost 2 years ago now...).
I applaud them and their efforts to bring just a little more security to the families of our area, and accountability to police departments. As you obviously don't need to be a criminal to be deeply effected by high-speed pursuits & their outcomes, you should think about the tragic side of them. About the families who needlessly suffer loss. And especially here in California.
The police in California are covered by a blanket immunity ( CVC 17004.7 look it up). They just have to have a policy in place for pursuits, one they DO Not even have to follow, to BE immune to a lawsuit. That means, no matter what they do during the pursuit, even if they go 100mph past bus stops, or run a subject straight into an oncoming car... The family of any innocent victim(s) can't even get these adrenaline junkies into court, and make them prove why they did what they did, that they followed their policies, and could not have done anything different. It wont happen, if they just Have a policy( & i reiterate again, have a policy that they don't even have to follow!) As long as they have a paper that says police pursuit policy- they are in the clear to do WHATEVER. It's not right, it definitely should NOT be legal. They deprive citizens the rights to life, freedom, & liberty with no due process, with this law in place.
These families & mine, that suffer loss during these pursuits are then locked in the past, locked into grief & frustration, and deep sadness. And the lack of public accountability for their actions just puts the cherry on top. It's not right. It needs to change for the good of us all. Our right, in California, to due process was taken away when Arnold S. signed that piece into law. The police can say we've changes this or that, but trust this. Nothing has changed, or will until this law is wiped off the books. They are civil servant, and as such they should be held accountable to us for their actions!
This IS a police state. I hate to say that, but it has become clear to me during the last 2 years. They can do ANYTHING, and are NOT, under the law, to be accountable to any citizen victims.
Read that carefully, and think long and hard about it.

[Jimmy D]

O.K. I'll rescind the "know nothing about" part, and lower it to "know a little about". Grief driven responses often times clouds judgement and does not allow one to see the objective side of an argument.

"Adrenaline junkies?" you say? Ask any Officer with time on the force and you will realize that they do not relish the thought of getting into a pursuit.

If this was a "Police State", you would have been "disappeared" by now for saying that.

Read carefully, thought long and hard about it and still feel the same. I truly hope you find some peace with your loss.

[Candy Priano]

Without question, DUI is a serious — very serious — situation. I'm very supportive of MADD’s efforts. In fact, it is my goal to have PursuitSAFETY work with MADD because drunken driving is a public safety issue by itself, and when combined with police chases, the risk to the innocent is obviously increased. Initiating a high-speed pursuit to pull over an impaired driver in the name of making the roads safer frequently risks doing exactly the opposite, hastening rather than preventing tragedy. PursuitSAFETY is working on developing all possibilities of improving safety in such dangerous situations, including better training, procedures and technologies.

I will attend a law enforcement conference in Indianapolis in September. Training includes pursuit stress, rolling roadblocks and supervisory responsibility. Once again I will be learning from some of the best in their field, and I look forward to further discussion on this important public safety issue. I’m not working alone. PursuitSAFETY’s advisory board includes two officers, victims’ advocates and experts in high-risk police activity.

[Candy Priano of Chico]

AreYouSure wrote:

<quoted text>
..In an area they know nothing about? I would think after losing their daughter, they've done nothing BUT study this "area" everyday since....
The police in California are covered by a blanket immunity ( CVC 17004.7 look it up). They just have to have a policy in place for pursuits, one they DO Not even have to follow, to BE immune to a lawsuit. That means, no matter what they do during the pursuit, even if they go 100mph past bus stops, or run a subject straight into an oncoming car...

You are correct about California's immunity law regarding police pursuits. You and your family are in my prayers. Thank you for your support.

[rainman]

While "Jimmy D's" comments seem laced with a little frustration, his premise is correct. These are actions that are precipitated by someone fleeing from the police, not the police themselves.
Emotional rants like those from "AreYouSure" make the assertion that the police are the source of the dangerous action by their effort to apprehend those who flee. She even casts all officers as "adrenaline junkies", and because we afford officers immunity from civil liability, she says we live in a "police state". She claims first hand experience with a similar tragedy and loss, and asks that we accept the arguments of those like her because of that experience. Because people like the Priano's have an authenticity of victimhood, we should endorse without question their often emotion based pleas.
Unfortunately we live in a world that contains dangers brought on by cruelty, random violence, and stupidity. Most people consciously know we can't control those things. We select and train men and women to become police officers because most of us are unable, or more often unwilling to take on that role ourselves. Because we as a community have the power to dictate the actions of these officers we are placing more and more restrictions upon them out of an incessant obsession with being safe. The thinking goes something like this: "If we can't make the lawless in our community act safe, we can surely make the cops stop chasing them." It's a ludicrous argument yet it gets traction every time someone is injured or killed in a pursuit. This happens largely because we focus on the victims for guidance.
I have no expectation that the Prianos nor anyone in their shoes will have a rational and reasoned response to the unspeakable tragedy that has befallen them. I do, however, expect the media and idiots like Sam Aanestad to exercise a little more intelligent discretion before taking up their causes. The legislation they propose would open the door to lawsuits against the individual officers involved in pursuits that result in injury or death. This would guarantee no officer would ever pursue anyone ever again. It doesn’t take a genius to deduce the negative impact on our society that would most certainly result. But hell, the soccer moms would feel safe.

[Candy Priano of Chico]

I would never support or sponsor the type of legislation described in Rainman’s comments. Kristie's Law is about preventing these tragedies and would not have allowed lawsuits against the individual officers involved in pursuits that result in injury or death.