Who is to blame: cops or robbers?
A man killed earlier today when burglary suspects fleeing police crashed into his vehicle has been identified as 51-year-old Keith Shoemaker of Birmingham, said Jefferson County Chief Deputy Coroner Pat Curry.
Events leading to the fatal crash began when an officer in the East Precinct Burglary Task Force saw three men burglarizing a home at 740 Biscayne Drive and asked for assistance, said Lt. Henry Irby, a spokesman for the police department.
Once marked police cruisers arrived, Irby said, police began looking for the car spotted at the burglary. Moments later, the suspects’ vehicle struck another vehicle at 9200 Parkway East. The suspects jumped out of their car and ran, but were captured a short time later, Irby said. They were riding in a silver Chevrolet Malibu.
Paramedics arrived at the scene and pronounced the other driver dead. He was driving a blueish/green Toyota Corolla.
A friend of mine posted this story on Facebook and said, “Reckless police officers are to blame for this man’s death.” I say the robbers are at fault, no question.
I like that police try to catch criminals. I like that they are trying to protect our property by chasing bad guys. Am I sad that Mr. Shoemaker lost his life. Yes. I wish it had not happened. But I also wish people didn’t steal from one another. It’s not like the perps in this case were suspected of jay walking.
I’ve known people who have been burglarized and had guns stolen. What do you think a criminal brazen enough to break into your house might do with a firearm?
I’m glad the police chased them and caught them. What do you say?
Print This Post
I think there is a case for police chases in some circumstances. However, high speed police chases in major metro areas like BHAM for a crime (burglary) where no one was injured are uncalled for. It doesn’t make sense to risk lives of innocent people when no lives have been lost in the commission of the crime that inspired the chase to begin with. It goes without saying that high speed police chases of drug suspects are beyond stupid.
Loretta, Perhaps you’re familiar with this story outside of the article but I could find NOTHING in the article about a high speed chase, or even a chase. The article says that police arrived and “began looking” for the vehicle and that it crashed about the same time. That sounds to me like the police arrived, the burglars fled (perhaps at high speed) and crashed. If the police were chasing them I don’t know why the reporter would not have mentioned a chase in the article. Anyways, that’s beside the point. What do you want the police to do? To argue that police shouldn’t pursue criminals is asinine. What do you think will be the outcome of a policy where you just have to hit a certain speed and the police will give up? Right now the vast majority of people don’t run from the police because they know that there will be a virtually unlimited supply of people (and helicopters) chasing them with little hope of escape. That’s called a deterrent factor. It boggles my mind that anyone would argue for a blanket policy like that. Burglary is a violent crime. It requires the violence of breaking into a home with the assumption that there could be people inside. That demonstrated violence makes them a threat that should be mitigated. Sure there needs to be some common sense guidelines and procedures in place to avoid silly chases but it tells you a lot about people that they would be willing to run from the police. They’re risking the lives of people around them and even their own life. That makes them very dangerous and I’m glad we have police officers willing to interdict them and get them off the streets.
Ditto what PJ said.
We agree that there should be guidelines. In my opinion burglary is not a violent crime unless a gun was used or some sort of physical violence was used in the commission of it. Burglary is stealing which makes the question “Are human lives less important than material items?” Would I be pissed if someone broke into my house and made off with my possessions? You bet! Would I want police to chase them through high traffic and high population areas where someone who has absolutely nothing to do with the people who robbed me might lose their life? Absolutely not.
I am in Connecticut on a business trip right now. I will finish this conversation with y’all tonight when I have a little more time.
It would be nice if police had the luxury of calmly interviewing the cooperative perps about whether or not they were armed, whether or not they had to resort to violence in the commission of their crime, or whether or not they have paid their taxes. But this is the real world. When police arrive at a crime scene they have to make split second decisions with whatever information they have available.
PJ is right. Anyone who is willing to break into another persons property does so knowing the possibilities. One of the possibilities is that the victim is home and is not likely going to wave the criminal in and point him toward the jewelry. Violence is a very likely outcome. Therefore anyone willing to break into someones house is likely predisposed to engaging in violence to accomplish his goal. Such people should be pursued by all possible means when found. The people sworn to protect us from criminals cannot fulfill their obligation if they let potentially violent criminals melt away back into society without a chase.
Most chases, and 30% of those involving a fatality of either the police, the “suspect, or an non-involved party, are the result of simple traffic stops. From the report, cant say anything about the unfortunate result. In the Hsv case last year, I dont think the police were justified in continuing the chase because:
the suspect was known to the officers as was the car she was driving
the suspect was a drug user, not a drug dealer
the chase was conducted with unmarked cars ,a violation of HPD policy
Art, I agree about the chase in HSV. At a minimum I thought high speed pursuit should have been terminated once on the Arsenal. At that point the fugitive was as good as caught.
Burglary is non violent only if the homeowner does not return while the burglar is there
But the burglar doesn’t necessarily know that the homeowner isn’t home and, therefore, he engages in his criminal act knowing that violence is a possibility.
Brian I think you are giving to much credit to the burglar. They don’t usually engage in lots of logical thought. If they did they probably wouldn’t be burglars.
I think you just helped me make my point, Loretta. Criminals aren’t typically rational – THAT IS WHAT MAKES THEM DANGEROUS. That is why we need police to catch them.
No Brian your argument was that burglars think their plans through knowing all the consequences of what might happen and most of them, unless they are professionals, do not think their plans through.
Whether they:
doesn’t matter! (I do think that even the most desperate, cracked up criminal is rational enough to know that when you break into someone else’s home that person may be there.) Either way they DO cause harm to people’s private property and COULD LIKELY cause harm to the people themselves. I don’t give a rats hindquarters if they are completely rational or thoroughly insane.
Look, part of being a libertarian is having a love for private property rights. Without government protection of those rights we essentially do not have them. Some libertarians loathe virtually all police actions. I like it when they defend our private property rights. Letting criminals run away from a burglary without any pursuit would only weaken our private property rights by encouraging additional lawlessness.
We live in a country where we do not arrest people for what they MIGHT do or COULD LIKELY do. You know that. I’m all about property rights. But I still say that a burglary where no one was hurt is not justification for a police chase through a high traffic/high population area.
What if your wife and kids had been in the car hit by the burglars that the police were chasing?
I don’t oppose all police actions. I am a big fan of homicide detectives, for instance. I am not against police pursuing burglary suspects so long as they do it in a way that does not endanger the lives of innocent people in the vicinity of their chase. They have radio’s in their cars and can radio ahead for road blocks, extra cars and with a description of the suspects and so forth. High speed chases are totally unjustified for a simple burglary charge.
Again, the police didn’t know the extent of what the burglars did at the crime scene. Did they kill the residents? Was the house vacant? The police don’t know at the time.
Don’t try tugging at my heartstrings. Of course it sucks that an innocent man got killed. But he was killed as a result of three criminals who robbed a house and then tried to escape. It is the criminals’ fault that an innocent man is dead. If it were my wife and kids I would want to see a needle hanging out of the criminals’ arms as soon as practicable. I sure as hell wouldn’t blame the cops for trying to stop criminals.
(NOTE: In the circumstance Art mentioned in #6 my conclusion would be different.)
I think the problem is that in most cases there are to many unknowns. The HPD wont chase a car very far, very fast or very long for a property crime. I assume the cops in the Bham case had no information to believe that the suspects had done anything more serious than burglary. After the fact, the HPD does not even send an officer to investigate many property crimes, they just fill out a report with the victim over the phone “for you insurance” .
And dont think for a second that cops dont enjoy a chase, which I believe played a part in the death chase in Huntsville. The cops involved ignored their own departments written policies in order to continue the chase.