Gun theft Melb. East - police called, what happens next?

[<<Genesis93>>]

To be confirmed, reported on radio.....

POLICE ATTEND THEFT
Pull up behind a vehicle with a GUN SAFE sticking out the back of the car... radio in for instructions...

Message comes back;

"Do not pursue."

Theives depart with gunsafe.!!!

IF this is true... serious qustions need to be asked.

Apart from allowing firearms to be stolen....wonder if the owner has been charged for safe storage offences??

Non pursuit is an open invitation to commit crime.

[adam]

What radio did you hear this on? Scanner or broadcast network?

I hope it's not true - but I now that police are now err on the side of caution and not pursue almost every time - there's too much responsibility to take with the new laws if something goes wrong. Easier to defend why they didn't pursue than why they did - and the force will let cops out to dry to save face if someone gets hurt.

[Title_II]

So cops should pull over everyone with a gun safe?

[<<Genesis93>>]

on 3aw, if it is indeed a true account, I'd bet the police/DOJ will NOT confirm, for obvious reason....

The policy is to NOT pursue, I'd like to know the particulars of the policy, recalling the 2 tri-state escapees were recently allowed to 'drive away' because of the threat... the THREAT!

I'm just confused, I now dont really know what the job of the police is, if its not to catch the crims.... WTF is it?? To indimidate and keep the common good folk in a constant state of fear?

If a car drives past a cop car, with the, whats it called blueline cameras?? blue something or other, that reads plates (yes, the surveillance state is here) and determines the rego expired yesterday, they will get on the light and sound and stop that car in NO TIME..... if however the plates are reported stolen then perhaps the occupants are obviously involved in crime, theft, SO THERE'S A THREAT - best let them drive away, you know, just to be safe, oh&s and whatnot....

They'll stop the just expired rego, an easy $700odd fine and the otherwise law abiding driver, who inadvertently missed the rego payment, will probably be more than compliant, who isnt when an armed individual stops you and demands money --effectively--. Teach them a lesson too.

Its called the low hanging fruit...

If true, this report will need to go via S&FP to next Vic Parliament session....

[<<Genesis93>>]

So cops should pull over everyone with a gun safe?

No, only those DRIVING away from a reported gun theft....

[<<Genesis93>>]

Title, the relevance is that we are hammered as law abiding gun owners, apart from the barriers and hoops to owning, we need to lock them up, most importantly the police time and time again claim the theft from law abiding owners is driving the gun crime and supply of arms to what we should call the 2 shades of gray market (they can't agree whether its black or gray) they claim we're therefore responsible, even though theyve been called out many time.

The tards claims the handgun crime is all/mostly from stolen/previously legal handguns, then vicpol admit that (consider the XX thousands of illegal handguns around) only 6 had been stolen (still too many) during a 12m period, and they had zero evidence linking them to any crime.....

Then they ALLOW stolen guns to calmly drive away.....allegedly.

[Title_II]

So cops should pull over everyone with a gun safe?

No, only those DRIVING away from a reported gun theft....

OK, I missed that. If there was a reported theft, and they saw these people LEAVING THE PROPERTY with a gun safe hanging out of their car, or otherwise had a description of the car, I get it.

At first blush it sounded like it was somebody driving down the road with a gun safe and police assumed it was from a robbery.

[Title_II]

Title, the relevance is that we are hammered as law abiding gun owners, apart from the barriers and hoops to owning, we need to lock them up, most importantly the police time and time again claim the theft from law abiding owners is driving the gun crime and supply of arms to what we should call the 2 shades of gray market (they can't agree whether its black or gray) they claim we're therefore responsible, even though theyve been called out many time.

The tards claims the handgun crime is all/mostly from stolen/previously legal handguns, then vicpol admit that (consider the XX thousands of illegal handguns around) only 6 had been stolen (still too many) during a 12m period, and they had zero evidence linking them to any crime.....

Then they ALLOW stolen guns to calmly drive away.....allegedly.

Complaining that cops don't pursue/prosecute criminals will never change public opinion or politics. If they are robbing your guns then it is your fault. If they are not, it is still your fault. Gun banners will never blame police or police policy. You will not find a defense there.

You must aim higher. You are trying to fight over the details. You will always lose on the details. You can only win on the principle. That takes more than catching a cop sleeping on the job, unfortunately.

But, hey, them from every direction.

[Blackened]

Rumour has it the cops were called and they seen a car with a safe hanging out the back of a car .... With stolen plates on it! But they didn't chase it

[adam]

From my understanding of the new pursuit policy - they can only pursue fleeing drivers when there is a threat to public safety or a serious offense committed. The pursuing officers need to be able to justify their reason for the pursuit, or they're hung out to dry.

In my opinion - this would have definitely covered the requirements.

However, policing is a job to the cops. They're not going to put their jobs at risk. If they are unsure - they know that they will not be backed up if they make the wrong decision - so they err on the side of caution. I understand why the individual police may have made the decisions they've made. I think the overall decision of the police force in general (and that of the politicians however) is beyond stupidity and needs to be reevaluated ASAP.

But, everyone these days wants someone else to take the blame, and the responsibility. Everyone's worried about their own butts - and in many ways - understandably so. I mean - what cop is going to risk his Job to catch crook's that the justice system will give a slap over the wrists and they'll be back on the streets in no time at all again anyway? Why should the cop care and put his job on the line when the government and the courts just don't seem to care?

[<<Genesis93>>]

The policy came in as a result of numerous death due to pursuit and the fleeing drivers meeting trees.... or the likes...mind you they ALWAY declared the pursuit had "ended prior to the collision".....

Thats why they devised this brilliant policy....

What would be stopping every driver on the Victorian roads to remove their plates, then when they see the blue light behind, pulling them over for 'not displaying registration plates'...... TO KEEP DRIVING?? no need to speed away, just dont pay attention.
- this is sarcasm, I would never suggest actually doing it, but get the point??

and they dont put their job on the line, and fear repercussions of their daily choices, such as do they apprehend an individual.... the Police union would defend an officer even if the Chief Commissioner witness the officer commit a crime...

[lole]

The policy came in as a result of numerous death due to pursuit and the fleeing drivers meeting trees.... or the likes...

Not to be the heartless reply guy but... Can't say that that bothers me much.

A policy of not chasing is carte blanche for harder criminals to do what they like when they know escape is assured.

I understand and support discontinuing a chase if it becomes a danger to others. You know, if a robber is driving along the foot path to get away and endangering pedestrians then let it go.

If it's quiet roads, late night, whatever the situation and there's no significant danger to the cops or the public then chase them to the end. Let them drive into poles I say.

[Baronvonrort]

Has anyone got a link for this story?

[<<Genesis93>>]

Its a hard one.... yes, they do the wrong thing, many end up in an unrecognisable bag of meat, bits and pieces, usually young, very young, who knew better. Do they and more so their families deserve it? Hard to say but usually the danger extends to others in the public domain.....that is the issue.

The policy of ZERO pursuits is just wrong. They need to evaluate each different situation, it seems the police officers are possibly not up to that task, if we are to read into the policy

[Elek]

Has anyone got a link for this story?

Rumour confirmed: Police unable to pursue stolen car containing stolen goods

Police confirmed a burglary at a Blackburn South house about 11.20am on Monday morning.

The Rumour File heard the getaway car - which itself was stolen - was identified shortly after the burglary, but could not be pursued when it sped away.

The offenders were still on the scene when the burglary was initially reported, but fled by the time police arrived. Police were told a gun safe had been stolen.

A car "with a gun safe hanging out" was spotted by police on Hawthorn Rd near Blackburn Rd shortly after.

The Sergeant who spotted the car activated his lights and indicated for the car to pull over, but it took off at speed. The Sergeant was unable to pursue the car, even though the licence plates showed it had been stolen, due to the Police pursuit policy.

http://www.3aw.com.au/news/rumour-confi ... l1njq.html

[Elek]

Some commentary on the policy here too

Police officer blows whistle on 'frustration' in force over no pursuit policy

A whistle-blowing police officer has told Neil Mitchell there's growing frustration within the force surrounding the controversial 'no pursuit' policy.

But the state's Assistant Police Commissioner has defended the new protocol, saying it's for community safety.

The policy has been called into question following the death of a 47-year-old mother-of-two at Mordialloc after she was critically injured in a head-on smash with an allegedly stolen BMW.

Bruce (not his real name) is a serving member and told 3AW Mornings that vehicle had been spotted by police on "several occasions" leading up to the crash, with "three or four" citings in one night alone.

But due to the new policy, officers were instructed not to pursue the vehicle.

"It's devastating," he told Neil Mitchell.

"There's a lot of good street police out there that aren't being allowed to do what they know how to do.

"I'm not saying we definitely would have stopped it – but we didn't do anything.

"Everything has been taken out of our hands."

The officer said discretionary power needed to be given back to those on the job.

He said the policy was undermining the police force on the road.

"It's embarrassing when cars pull up next to you and laugh, give you the bird and just take off – do a burnout right in front of you."

But Asst. Commissioner Doug Fryer hit back, saying there was a lot of misinformation surrounding the policy.

"Everyone is referring to it as a 'no pursuit' – that is not the case – it's a restricted pursuit policy," he explained.

"The safety of our community has to come first."

http://www.3aw.com.au/news/police-offic ... l1jp0.html

[KWhorenet]

This fcuking ridiculous

Basically reassures crims to just floor it. No worries.

[<<Genesis93>>]

Has anyone got a link for this story?

Rumour confirmed: Police unable to pursue stolen car containing stolen goods

Police confirmed a burglary at a Blackburn South house about 11.20am on Monday morning.

The Rumour File heard the getaway car - which itself was stolen - was identified shortly after the burglary, but could not be pursued when it sped away.

The offenders were still on the scene when the burglary was initially reported, but fled by the time police arrived. Police were told a gun safe had been stolen.

A car "with a gun safe hanging out" was spotted by police on Hawthorn Rd near Blackburn Rd shortly after.

The Sergeant who spotted the car activated his lights and indicated for the car to pull over, but it took off at speed. The Sergeant was unable to pursue the car, even though the licence plates showed it had been stolen, due to the Police pursuit policy.

http://www.3aw.com.au/news/rumour-confi ... l1njq.html

WE cant let this go unchallenged..... It means we are all vulnerable, if we do experience a criminal act, whether a robbery, burglary, whether or not involving the theft of our firearm....

We now DO NOT have the support of the police.... Yes, we activated the lights, but they keep going...

STUPID you forgot the magic word " could the PLEASE pull over and allow me to arrest you......

This situation is beyond ridiculous, its plain endangering the public, when the out laws are in control.

[sandgroperbill]

I'm sorry, but when you join the Police, you do so understanding that you may find yourself in dangerous situations, and you put yourself into these situations to protect the public. Might as well just get rid of the Police. Its not like they can be used to do anything, anyway.

We're getting very close to a prediction made several decades ago. I actually found an old video that somebody put on YouTube predicting something very similar in 1970.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=DNj1dXi-z0M

[adam]

But Asst. Commissioner Doug Fryer hit back, saying there was a lot of misinformation surrounding the policy.

"Everyone is referring to it as a 'no pursuit' – that is not the case – it's a restricted pursuit policy," he explained.

"The safety of our community has to come first."

Pitty there wasn't a caller who rang in asking about the gun safe theft where police didn't pursue then.

[<<Genesis93>>]

Next time the chief or assistant commish gets on 3AW, someone should call in..... I think one of them go in there quite often, for their usual slot for the propaganda, feed the sheeple, the police are here helping...

The Police, whom I have the utmost respect for, when they deserve it, swear an oath to uphold the Queen's peace, that means doing the Queens duty of keeping the 'subjects' safe. I dont think allowing the crims to casually drive away from any and every incident qualifies as keeping the peace....

Their job isnt at all to be the state's revenue collectors.....or if you like the states armed highway robbers

[Redwood]

What're they chances they'd air the bit though.

Close to zip I'd say.

It'd just get chopped and all listeners would get is the spiel on how our tough laws are keeping us all "safe"

[happyhunter]

.

[sandgroperbill]

I don't know all the inner workings and decision making that went into creating such policies, but my understanding is basically risk v reward while minimizing the risk to innocent civilians and the pursuing officers as best as possible.

I agree, it shouldn't be left up to arm chair experts to make such calls, therefore, let the pursuing officers make that call, not someone back at the station, at least initially or until you can get other methods of tracking the thieves, ie air support.

Now, without knowing all the details, and making an assumption that they had stolen a firearms safe, or even what looks like a firearms safe, natural assumption would dictate that said thieves aren't going to take the firearms safe home, reinstall it, and then use the contents responsibly. Nope, they're most likely to sell the contents off, which to my mind, can see multiple people who cannot or will not get licenses now with illegal firearms, which will be used for who knows what, multiplying the risk well beyond that of the original pursuit.

The exception to this is if there is a very clear lead or idea as to who may be responsible and, therefore, a very good chance of recovering the firearms safe with its contents quite quickly.

As for trying to remove risk from the equation, ie only pursuing in extreme circumstances, this emboldens criminals to commit further crimes and puts more restraints on Police trying to do their job, therefore, most likely making their job more dangerous over time whilst also increasing the risk to the community over time. I can't see the longer term benefits, but feel free to correct me here.

As for me, I have the utmost respect for Police Officers and realise, just like everywhere and everything else, a few bad ones can tarnish the reputation of everyone, but I've almost always found them to be level headed and respectful. They don't deserve to be ridiculed or spoken down to because the decisions of people making their decisions for them or giving them their orders. They have just as much right to go home to their families or friends as any of us do, but there are inherent risks associated with their jobs, something that everyone that joins the Police undoubtedly knows and accepts (which is why each individual officer should have our respect unless they do something seriously wrong to lose it, and I don't mean making a mistake. People make mistakes and should have our backing even when they do, unless it is very serious).

Do I think every crim should be pursued? nope. Do I think that, assuming they knew or thought the thieves had a firearms safe, they should have pursued? yes. Do I know for a fact that they did, or that the Police thought there was a firearms safe involved? nope. If they did, then they should have pursued. If they didn't, I'll defer to their decisions.

[<<Genesis93>>]

The cops weigh up the circumstances at the time and make a risk assesment in the interest of somebody innocent being taken out versus the pursuit. Sounds like common sense? Arm chair experts blow hot air about a policy they don't even understand because a gun safe is mentioned.

You would have thought that the 'weigh up the risk / make a judgement call ' was the standard operating procedure for, well... forever. But apparently the po po officers were not really good at making the judgement call.... so it was decided for them by others. This has resulted in one or maybe 2 Officers literally sitting on their hands while WATCHING a safe full of stolen firearms drive away toward the horizon and into the hands of the criminal underworld. The same criminals -so many guns available gun crime more guns being discovered everyday world they BLEAT on about at every press conference or media interview.....

Yes, I'm an arm chair expert too, but if I misunderstood something here please elucidate...

This policy of Zero / or limited pursuit (exemplified by the matter of this thread) WILL change, sooner rather than later.....It simply must.

[David Brown]

And wait……what happens when one of these serial numbers appears at a crime scene after killing some innocent (usually not) victim. Yep the LFO source of guns is real!! Better round em all up.

[happyhunter]

.

[<<Genesis93>>]

If you read the reports from police it's not a zero pursuit policy. The call is made by a senior officer back at base whether to chase or not. This has been part of the policy for years. Experienced TOG police in the right type of vehicle are involved in pursuits daily. You might assume that these types of media reports are beat up no different to reports on gun crime.

I have no doubt the policy has always /for a long time, to call it in and get an OK for a green light to so speak....the policy behind the decision make has definitely changed, this is admitted by the police, call it no pursuit, call it limited pursuit call it the easter bunny....

but what the media beats up on the matter is really irrelevant once the police confirmed they didnt pursue a safe full of stolen guns.

[agentzero]

If you read the reports from police it's not a zero pursuit policy. The call is made by a senior officer back at base whether to chase or not. This has been part of the policy for years.

I'd be interested to know the criteria that has to be met for them to engage in a chase.

Seems to be all but unachievable in recent memory.

[happyhunter]

.