[HN Gopher] LAPD helicopter tracker with real-time operating costs
___________________________________________________________________
LAPD helicopter tracker with real-time operating costs
Author : polalavik
Score : 226 points
Date : 2025-11-21 22:11 UTC (1 days ago)
(HTM) web link (lapdhelicoptertracker.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (lapdhelicoptertracker.com)
| bronco21016 wrote:
| Ad in the bottom left covers the UI when expanding the menu out.
|
| I'm sure it depends on screen resolution etc but I'd love to be
| able to click links to the data sources.
|
| Overall an interesting idea. I'd love to know the data source for
| the cost of the operation of the aircraft. Would be really
| interesting to connect a database of all aircraft types then
| present the ability to watch the cost of like "all American
| Airlines flights currently flying" or "all US military aircraft".
| polalavik wrote:
| sorry probably got covered by the ad - data source is the
| hourly from the city controller
| https://controller.lacity.gov/landings/lapd-helicopters which
| says $2,916 per flight hour
| ripberge wrote:
| As someone who lives in central LA and has them circle my
| neighborhood frequently, actually shaking my house, I think this
| is awesome.
|
| These needs should be filled by drones. Way less noisy, dangerous
| and expensive.
| polalavik wrote:
| why LA is spending thousands/hour when drones exist is crazy.
| tcdent wrote:
| You're talking about technology that's only become realistic
| in the last couple years. Even then, there's probably nothing
| off-the-shelf that would serve the current need.
|
| LAPD has been patrolling with helicopters for _decades_. I
| have yet to see a drone follow a car in high speed pursuit
| down the 5 at 100+ MPH.
| kevin_thibedeau wrote:
| The MQ-8 would be cheaper to operate.
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northrop_Grumman_MQ-8_Fire_Sc
| o...
| robotnikman wrote:
| Pretty sure these can't be bought by municipalities.
| Would make more sense to operate them though.
| scottyah wrote:
| In what way would that be cheaper to operate? You'd just
| replace a pilot with a few pilots and a few teams of
| software engineers. Maybe fuel savings?
| digdugdirk wrote:
| On the other hand, I have seen drones chase down F1 cars at
| 100+ MPH...
|
| Realistically though, I agree with your sentiment. Solving
| this would drones would require a constant flock of
| something more akin to Predator drones.
|
| The better question is - why do we allow high speed pursuit
| chases in the first place?
| hatthew wrote:
| As far as I'm aware, high speed drones tend to have quite
| short flight durations due to battery limitations. Drones
| that have the range to follow a fleeing suspect for a
| long time would probably have to be big enough that they
| could cause a fatal accident if they crash, and in that
| case I'd rather have a pilot on board. Better reaction
| time, no risk from jamming, much better field of
| view/awareness, decades of testing, etc.
| typewithrhythm wrote:
| Most of the small high speed drones are that size to fit
| under professional licencing requirements, often so that
| one racing spec can be viable across a wider area.
| Leading to significant competition in that size pushing
| down prices.
|
| Rather than some inherent sized for safety idea.
|
| Jamming might be interesting, I suspect that it's easy
| enough (and a much bigger crime) to follow a very loud
| jamming signal though.
|
| Every practical metric a drone surpasses a helicopter;
| they are so much simpler to operate that you can easily
| offset any perceived downside with more drones. And you
| don't get a tested solution without trying it out.
| tcdent wrote:
| > why do we allow high speed pursuit chases in the first
| place?
|
| AFAIK they've changed their tactics in recent years, but
| growing up around LA these we're like sporting events on
| TV. It's a guilty pleasure, but almost everyone I know
| tuned-in and watched the chase.
| phantasmish wrote:
| Their popularity for viewers (even more so now with
| YouTube, but they're long been a staple of live news and
| late night tv) and the fact that police like any excuse
| to do "badass" things are big parts of why they still
| happen. They're a pretty bad idea. Endangering lives
| (including bystanders) over mostly relatively-minor
| crimes.
|
| But people love 'em, and if you point out what a bad idea
| they are people label you "soft on crime" (as happens
| with a lot of plainly good policy)
| asdff wrote:
| Why do we need to follow a car in a high speed pursuit and
| force it to go 100mph on uncontrolled streets is the better
| question
| sokoloff wrote:
| The person "forc[ing] it to go 100mph" is in the car
| being chased.
| asdff wrote:
| Chased by what? It isn't a lion they are running from. It
| is a police interceptor egging them on to go 100mph.
| sokoloff wrote:
| I think they're overwhelmingly being chased by a police
| vehicle after a lawful request to pull over and stop.
|
| The fleeing driver is choosing to turn that lawful stop
| into felony fleeing/eluding if they choose to attempt to
| flee at triple digits.
| phantasmish wrote:
| This is very much an "it takes two to tango" situation.
|
| Without both of:
|
| - A driver willing to flee the cops.
|
| - A cop willing to chase at dangerous speeds
|
| The high-speed chase doesn't happen. Both make it happen.
| monkaiju wrote:
| Idk, having a bunch of government surveillance drones doesn't
| really sound great... Maybe we just don't need this level of
| surveillance at all?
| autoexec wrote:
| It's absolutely worth looking at the ROI on these flights and
| weighing that against the intrusion on our privacy/freedom.
| No doubt they'll always need drones and helicopters but I'd
| be surprised if there was any real need for them to be in the
| air that often. I think that's a question that should be
| asked everywhere but the LAPD in particular are terrible
| enough that it makes this a great place to start.
| DiscourseFan wrote:
| Couldn't someone take out the drones pretty easily?
| autoexec wrote:
| That depends on the drone. There are drones/UAVs that fly so
| high in the air you can't even see them seeing you from the
| ground. Even low flying drones would be very hard to hit from
| a car involved in a high speed chase, and it's not as if
| people can't shoot at helicopters which are both
| larger/easier targets and much more dangerous if brought
| down.
| Zigurd wrote:
| Helicopters aren't exactly robust under fire and are four
| orders of magnitude more valuable as a target.
| kylehotchkiss wrote:
| Down in SD at least, the sheriff's office helicopters serve
| many purposes. They'll use them for firefighting, hike rescues
| (often! according to their IG), first responder to an aviation
| accident, loudly shouting garbled messages through their
| loudspeaker, etc.
|
| There's just enough high-speed/timely crime here that I prefer
| they use these over drones. There's some extra legal
| protections built into helicopters that drones don't get, like
| prison time if some idiot points a laser pointer.
| VerifiedReports wrote:
| I seriously doubt that physically rescuing hikers or
| delivering first-responders to plane crashes represent a
| large percentage of LAPD helicopter missions. I live in a
| nice suburb and there's one of them circling over it probably
| weekly.
|
| I don't see why large drones can't do most of what these
| helicopters are doing. They're using needlessly expensive
| helicopters, too.
| bluescrn wrote:
| People generally _really_ don 't like drones, but have come
| to accept helicopters
| asdff wrote:
| LAPD doesn't conduct rescue operations or anything like that.
| Different helicopters are used from different agencies.
| stickfigure wrote:
| I work with CHP helicopters as part of our fire district's
| rescue team. We pull a half dozen people a year off of one of
| the local trails (sometimes as "recovery"). Most of these are
| via helicopter. There are two helos for a _huge_ area - Yolo
| county down to Santa Cruz county. By acreage it 's a lot
| bigger than LA.
|
| My point is, two small helicopters are more than enough to do
| that job as a side-gig from all the other CHP work they do.
|
| Also, Cal Fire has its own air wing. LAPD helicopters are not
| equipped for firefighting.
| whalesalad wrote:
| I was in Santa Monica - the dense part with all the alleyways -
| during a foot pursuit involving a heli. Felt like I was in
| vietnam. It was at night, they were pretty low, and that light
| felt like the sun coming into the building.
| rimbo789 wrote:
| This is the kind of government waste that needs to be
| highlighted. Police forces consume a massively disproportionate
| amount of resources from our cities.
| scottyah wrote:
| Lawsuits are most of the money in LA. Juries love to think
| they're sticking it to the police, but it just comes from a
| different fund that extracts from a lot of other departments.
| The LA City Controller is making great attempts at outreach:
| https://controller.lacity.gov/data
| Zigurd wrote:
| Wrong answers only?
| 0xbadcafebee wrote:
| https://www.cbsnews.com/losangeles/news/audit-says-lapds-use...
| On average, the city spent an average of $46.6 million on the
| program, the audit disclosed. It also found that there is limited
| oversight or monitoring of the division, its policies and
| practices and whether the program is in line with the city's
| safety needs. [...] The department has 17 helicopters and
| over 90 employees. [..] The city operates their helicopter fleet
| on a nearly "continuous basis" [..] The total translates to more
| than $2,900 per flight hour. [...] Additional findings in
| the audit disclosed [..] 61% of the flight time was in fact
| dedicated to low-priority incidents like transportation, general
| patrols and ceremonial flights -- like a fly-by at a local golf
| tournament, roundtrip transportation of high-ranking LAPD
| officers between stations and passenger shuttle flights for a
| "Chili Fly-In."
| throwaway5465 wrote:
| $5 per person per year then. Or, the price of a can of coke per
| person per month.
|
| Much of which flows directly back into the local economy
| through wages spent and maintnance paid.
| fn-mote wrote:
| You know this is ridiculous, which is why you posted with a
| throwaway.
|
| Obvious excessive spending should not be shrugged off by
| dividing the expense by the population of the area.
|
| Obvious excessive costs need to be reined in. Tax money needs
| to be spent on the highest priorities, which this is not.
| throwaway5465 wrote:
| Some of us always post throwaway.
| unethical_ban wrote:
| In an AI bot and troll infested world, expect quippy
| contrarian opinions posted with throwaways to be taken
| less seriously.
| vee-kay wrote:
| Every message on social media is a throwaway, unless if
| it has some tangible memorable impact on life.
| unethical_ban wrote:
| I disagree. Accounts with a post history, sleep
| consistency and decency in their content and particularly
| older pre AI accounts can at least be trusted as human
| and well meaning.
| tbrownaw wrote:
| Since when does a can of soda cost less than 50C/?
| 0xbadcafebee wrote:
| That 46 million could be spent on education, transportation,
| aid for low-income families, the homeless, jobs programs,
| small business tax breaks, infrastructure renewal, public
| works, etc. According to the report, not only are they
| largely not used for anything productive, there's potential
| harms to both people and the environment. And as many have
| pointed out, the same work can be done with drones.
| mike_d wrote:
| The report is wrong. If you bother to watch LA news you'll
| see they are used a few times a night to track vehicles
| from the air. This frees up ground units and avoids high
| speed chases which saves lives.
|
| It's fun to call this a waste of taxpayer dollars until you
| watch a carjacked vehicle recovered with kids inside.
| free_bip wrote:
| Do you really need 17 helicopters and 90 employees for
| the occasional car chase? This feels wildly over the top.
| They could do that just fine with one third the
| resources.
| 0xbadcafebee wrote:
| On top of that, police car chases are wildly harmful and
| usually started from things like minor traffic
| violations: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wVFXUkFx5Y8
| aapoalas wrote:
| Are you asserting that the report is lying, and that a
| majority of the flight hours aren't actually being used
| for all those mentioned low priority purposes? If so, is
| your assertion based on the helicopters being used a few
| times a night per television reports?
| bildung wrote:
| To drive this point further: The one stable causal
| relastionship relevant here is the one between inequality
| and crime. Reduce inequality in ways 0xbadcafebee suggested
| would reduce inequality - though probably not in sizes
| measureable after a few years.
| vee-kay wrote:
| US Government (especially during Trump regime) has been
| actively defunding public schools, school lunches and
| libraries.
| tclancy wrote:
| Hang on, LAPD with limited oversight? Someone bring back Daryl
| Gates! Man the Ramparts!
| dsamarin wrote:
| Would using drones nowadays end up being much less expensive but
| with all the same necessary capabilities for police work?
| analog31 wrote:
| What are the necessary capabilities? My city has no helicopters
| or drones. There's a medical chopper that flies over my house
| regularly, but it has an obvious purpose.
| TOMDM wrote:
| Being able to follow a car involved in a hit and run and
| intercept them when they stop without restoring to what could
| be a dangerous police chase.
|
| Aerial surveillance has it's place.
| autoexec wrote:
| > Aerial surveillance has it's place.
|
| It does, but I would be very surprised if the LAPD knew its
| place or cared to keep it there to prevent it from
| wandering into places that are totally unnecessary and
| expensive invasions of our privacy.
| asdff wrote:
| Unfortunately standard practice for LAPD is to engage in a
| dangerous police chase along with the helicopter, not to
| simply follow with a helicopter.
|
| They don't really use them for hit and run. How could they?
| Think about how fast that crime occurs and how much time
| will pass between that incident and vectoring a helicopter,
| which might be tied up on other work.
|
| Less than 20% of hit and run cases are even solved in
| California (1). I'm sure the rate is even lower in a city
| like LA.
|
| 1. https://attorneyatlawmagazine.com/legal/opinion/dragged-
| and-...
| LeoPanthera wrote:
| This doesn't seem to work properly in Mac Safari. The map is
| blank except in a thin stripe at the top.
| nonameiguess wrote:
| My first question was how much of this is labor, and from the
| chart provided at the bottom of the helpful link provided
| elsewhere (https://controller.lacity.gov/landings/lapd-
| helicopters), it appears to be around 60%.
|
| I was wondering because I remember the last time I lived in Los
| Angeles in 2009 I went to a Lakers championship parade and talked
| to one of the cops assigned to crowd control, and asked about it
| when a helicopter flew overhead. She told me it's a great job a
| lot of them try to get because even 20 years ago they were
| starting out at something like $215,000 a year and were not
| expected to have any flight experience. The city just trained up
| regular patrol officers and tripled their pay.
| asdff wrote:
| The way they fly you can tell they don't have a lot of flight
| experience. Really low compared to news choppers following the
| same pursuit. Juvenile even, at times (1-4)
|
| 1.
| https://old.reddit.com/r/LosAngeles/comments/1oolm68/lapd_he...
|
| 2. https://www.threads.com/@kilodelta/post/C5m373ZOX9Q
|
| 3.
| https://preview.redd.it/jcfdph3aiczf1.jpeg?width=1164&format...
|
| 4.
| https://preview.redd.it/dl7lqa2blbzf1.jpeg?width=1206&format...
| citizenpaul wrote:
| Roughly a dollar a second which if you are a theater kid you know
| is about $31,536,000 mil a year.
|
| Honestly not that bad considering it provides a real service. I
| mean how much does the city spend on lawsuits against corrupt
| cops and other employees. According to the budget something like
| $300 MILLION on lawsuit payouts last year alone.
|
| Who gives a $hit about the helicopters. Build an app that tracks
| the employees causing these lawsuits that are still keeping their
| jobs.
| asdff wrote:
| People know what to do to get away from the helicopter and they
| have been successful at it. Two chases in one week this past
| august the suspect shook off the helicopter and got away. It is
| as easy as driving under an overpass or into protected
| airspace. In one case this past month, they followed a suspect
| all the way into san diego and allowed them to cross the border
| into Mexico where they were lost.
| dgrin91 wrote:
| That's if it's one helo at a time. If it spikes to 2+ then the
| numbers go up way faster. They have 16 total and I would assume
| 1/3rd can go up at a moments notice
| BadBadJellyBean wrote:
| I find it interesting that the question is "why don't they use
| drones". My question is: why so much air surveillance? I live in
| Germany. The only times I hear a helicopter is if someone is
| being rescued or if someones missing. I rarely see them at all.
| shoddydoordesk wrote:
| There are high speed police chases (100mph+) in Los Angeles --
| no exaggeration -- on an almost daily basis. Air support is the
| primary defense tool for law enforcement.
|
| It's so bad that the local TV stations have their own choppers
| and a dedicated on-screen UI tailored for the chases with GPS-
| based tracking and speed.
|
| If you're lucky you can catch one of the many YouTube live
| streams. Here's one from....two days ago:
| https://www.youtube.com/live/uGiJU-FlpdE
| stefan_ wrote:
| I mean in most other places people have simply realized that
| unless there is an immediate risk to life, the only thing
| high speed police chases do is _create that very risk_.
|
| Nicely contrasts with all the news about the omnipresent
| license plate scanners - it's just pointless, don't take the
| risk, arrest them at your leisure.
| TravisLS wrote:
| Worth noting that many people who run from the police also
| have fake or stolen plates.
| stefan_ wrote:
| I don't get this gotcha. The license plate scanner
| associates a plate with a location and time, it doesn't
| care for who drives it. In a chase, you know the plate,
| you don't know the location. Seems perfect?
| nradov wrote:
| Perfect how? The license plate scanner can only tell that
| a particular plate number was in a particular place at a
| particular time. It doesn't know if the plate was fake or
| stolen, or who was driving the vehicle, or if there was
| contraband in the vehicle. Stopping fleeing vehicles is
| one of the most effective ways to catch people with
| outstanding arrest warrants and get illegal weapons off
| the streets.
| lukan wrote:
| I think the idea is, if you know where the car is and
| where it is going, you don't need to chase it openly on
| high traffic areas with high risk of accidents. You use
| restraint and take them at a safer place. (surely won't
| work all the time)
| nradov wrote:
| You don't know where it's going.
| mrtksn wrote:
| That shouldn't matter, after all, even if the plate is
| legit, you can't just find a person's location from the
| database. They usually have some legal address or
| something, not live location.
|
| So unless there's an immediate danger, there is no reason
| for chasing people and create dangerous situations. You
| can just follow them around from the severance cameras
| and catch them once they are no longer on the move. Even
| if you don't have disability for one reason or another,
| it still doesn't make much sense to engage in high-speed
| driving around people minding their own business.
| shoddydoordesk wrote:
| So your proposal is to just let the criminals run away? And
| that somehow won't embolden them further?
|
| "Once this baby hits 88mph, we're home free!"
|
| Air support is used to coordinate with law enforcement up
| ahead to deploy spikes to end the chase.
|
| You are just repeating empty political talking points that
| simply don't work in the real world.
| bluedino wrote:
| A lot of departments terminate chases very early
| shoddydoordesk wrote:
| They could learn a few things from the Georgia State
| Patrol, the undisputed world champions of the PIT.
| mapt wrote:
| Basically, letting them run away and then setting up a
| raid at their house the next morning is safer for
| everyone. If you can follow them from altitude well
| enough to do that, you reduce risk dramatically relative
| to either interception or chase.
|
| > They could learn a few things from the Georgia State
| Patrol, the undisputed world champions of the PIT.
|
| Why not just open up on them with antitank weaponry? PIT
| maneuvers are extraordinarily dangerous, especially at
| high speeds.
| shoddydoordesk wrote:
| Buddy, most of these are stolen cars. Do you think they
| are driving them home and parking it in the driveway?
|
| If you are eluding the cops at 100mph you are a danger to
| the public, they are not going to let you go home.
|
| >Why not just open up on them with antitank weaponry?
|
| I've heard cops say something similar on body cam
| footage.
| netsharc wrote:
| If they're eluding cops at 100mph and being a danger to
| the public, it's because they're being chased by cops...
|
| But well, it's America, having the risk of a stray cop
| bullet hitting you because just like car chases, shootous
| are inevitable, makes it safer!
| zrobotics wrote:
| "If you are eluding the cops at 100mph you are a danger
| to the public, they are not going to let you go home."
|
| I'm not sure that the cops pursuing people at those
| speeds is doing anything besides making the situation
| more dangerous. Police in the US are grossly
| undertrained, I wouldn't trust them to actually be
| competent at what is very technical and difficult
| driving.
|
| One would think that basic firearm safety would be the
| bare minimum, since we pay them to carry a gun. However,
| I have had to vacate a shooting range 3 times due to
| police showing up and being unsafe with firearms. I have
| had this happen in 3 different ranges, where off-duty
| cops have shown up and proceeded to ignore basic safety
| rules like not flagging people with guns. I'm not dumb
| enough to try to give a cop a safety lecture, so I've
| always packed up my stuff and left. However, if they
| aren't even given enough training to not figure out to
| point their guns downrange instead of at the firing line,
| they aren't trained well enough to trust with something
| technical and difficult like a pit maneuver.
|
| One of these times was at a CA range, they were socal
| cops. Training standards for police in the US are
| woefully low, most cops aren't able to hit the broad side
| of a barn given ideal circumstances. They agitate about
| how dangerous their job is, but they don't train like it
| is. They fire a few rounds a year and have absolutely
| horrendous marksmanship standards. Don't get fooled, your
| average cop has roughly zero idea on firearms safety or
| even how to use the darn things.
| prmoustache wrote:
| > If you are eluding the cops at 100mph you are a danger
| to the public, they are not going to let you go home.
|
| They would not even try to reach those speed if they
| weren't chased. A criminal who thinks he escaped the
| police will try to not attract attention. They would just
| follow the normal flow of the traffic and you can follow
| their path thanks to the millions of cameras and the
| helicopter mentionned earlier. We are not in the 70's
| anymore.
|
| You can follow them from a distance they can't spot you
| so you can lock the road if they turn back and dispatch
| police force form in various exit points of an highway
| without starting an high speed chase.
|
| High speed chase is about cops endangering the public for
| the thrill and adrenaline really. They do that because
| they like it, not because they need it to arrest
| criminals.
| twelvedogs wrote:
| just like so many things that work in every country but
| the US apparently
| wredcoll wrote:
| Why are you countering his political talking points with
| your own?
| bildung wrote:
| It's probably reasonable to take a step back here and
| ask: Why is this not a universal problem? It's not as if
| every juristication outside the US simply lets criminals
| run away.
| sokoloff wrote:
| In many cases, the driver is not associated with the
| plates, with the car and/or plates being stolen.
| dylan604 wrote:
| John Oliver recently did a segment on police chases
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wVFXUkFx5Y8
| asdff wrote:
| They get away from time to time from the airship. Two in one
| week this past august and I don't think they ever caught the
| suspects. One drove under an overpass and fled on foot, the
| other entered LAX airspace which requires waiting on
| clearance from ATC and got away somehow after that. I don't
| know why they don't just shoot a magnetic dart at the car
| with a gps tracker on it.
| efnx wrote:
| It would have to be a very special dart. Cars are mostly
| aluminum and foam. A piercing dart would be dangerous and a
| magnet would really work.
| asdff wrote:
| Outside certain high performance cars, most cars have
| steel body panels.
| bluedino wrote:
| Some steel body panels. Much of a car is made of
| plastic/urethan type materials, hoods are usually
| aluminum, some bodies are all aluminum....
| WarOnPrivacy wrote:
| > Outside certain high performance cars, most cars have
| steel body panels.
|
| I never thought of my Olds Silhouette minivan as a high
| performance car. Neat.
|
| The rubbery panels were great. I was at school pickup and
| another parent backed into it. They crushed the front
| fender to the firewall. Then they pulled up and it popped
| out.
|
| They were freaked out but it was fine. And it's just a
| car.
| Aurornis wrote:
| It's more common than that. A lot of cars have aluminum
| panels now.
| Esophagus4 wrote:
| These exist!
|
| https://www.thedrive.com/news/police-tag-fleeing-cars-
| with-g...
|
| https://www.starchase.com/products/vehicle-mounted-gps-
| launc...
| Aurornis wrote:
| > I don't know why they don't just shoot a magnetic dart at
| the car with a gps tracker on it.
|
| Hitting a car going 100mph with a magnetic dart that and
| getting it to hit on a metal part, not a window or trim,
| and specially a steel panel, is not easy at all.
| mapt wrote:
| There's a lot more aluminum than steel on car exteriors
| these days.
| hollerith wrote:
| This got me curious so I went out on the street and held
| a magnet to the front passenger door of the first 6
| parked cars I came across. The magnet stuck to 4 of them.
| The ones it did not stick to are a Nissan Rogue and a
| Jeep Sahara 4xe.
| brian-armstrong wrote:
| Decided to scratch up some peoples' clear coats for a
| little science experiment?
| hollerith wrote:
| Could I have damaged the cars even though I saw no signs
| of damage?
|
| It would be nice if someone else with knowledge would
| chime in here. If this damages cars, then I want to know,
| so I can stop doing it in the future.
| bradlys wrote:
| Unless the cars are perfectly washed and clayed, even
| running a clean finger over a car is likely to introduce
| scratches. I just wouldn't ever touch someone's car.
|
| You can look up people even trying to detail their cars
| to make them cleaner and end up leaving "love marks." It
| doesn't matter how soft the thing you're using is. It's
| because the car has contaminants on it and by rubbing
| anything on the car, those contaminants end up scratching
| everything. It's like when you're at the beach and you're
| trying to remove sand off your skin. You're probably not
| aggressively rubbing it off or using much pressure but it
| still hurts. It's the same with cars, it's just that the
| rocks aren't as visible to you. They will leave swirls
| and scratches though... which become noticeable.
|
| I've had people just lean against my car when it wasn't
| completely clean and completely ruin the paint requiring
| an entire 5 stage detail.
| wredcoll wrote:
| > I've had people just lean against my car when it wasn't
| completely clean and completely ruin the paint requiring
| an entire 5 stage detail
|
| Assuming this is true, it seems like something has gone
| badly wrong somewhere in this process.
|
| Why can't cars have paint that survives being "leaned on"
| clnhlzmn wrote:
| I think the person you replied to probably just has a
| different definition of "completely ruined" than you or
| I.
| bradlys wrote:
| Visible marks from over 20ft away. You tell me.
| prmoustache wrote:
| Yeah we are talking pathological territory here. Car
| paints need less love than their owners need therapy if
| they have to "detail" their car every time a cat jump on
| the hood to enjoy the warmth.
| dns_snek wrote:
| If we're taking it this far then driving on the highway
| is like sandblasting the paint with dust and you do that
| without even thinking about it.
| prmoustache wrote:
| Cars spend a significant amount of time outside and they
| depreciate so quickly it just doesn't matter. One
| shouldn't expect a paint to stay perfect the same way we
| expect our skin to wear and age over the years.
|
| I don't even know what a 5 stage detail means but I can
| safely say you are overreacting. A car is just a tool and
| a rando putting a fridge magnet or leaning against your
| car once in a while is just completely negligible
| compared to the amount of shit a paint is exposed to when
| driving it. Sand and dirt do not ask for your permission
| either.
| brian-armstrong wrote:
| As long as the car is dirty, then contact with it can
| damage the top coat. This is a lot more true if you need
| to drag or scrape the magnet to remove it.
| tom_ wrote:
| It won't really matter all that much, but it will have
| done more than 0 damage to the paintwork (since metal is
| hard and paint is soft). Worth noting that drivers are
| touchy and emotional, and can't be trusted not to murder
| you over perceived slights, so it's safest to stick to
| doing nothing. Stuff something under the windscreen
| wipers if you really must, and even that is risky.
| Aurornis wrote:
| Unfortunately, yes. Dropping a magnet onto a car and
| pulling it off, especially if not recently cleaned, will
| damage the paint to some degree. Maybe not enough for an
| average person to notice, but you really shouldn't do
| this to other people's cars.
|
| Some people will get snide about anyone who cares about
| their car's paint, but as someone who once bought a car I
| had to save a long time for and spent a lot of time with
| car care products I would be very sad if I saw you drop a
| magnet on to it and then pull it off without a second
| thought. Please don't.
| AnthonyMouse wrote:
| Also, the paint on cars isn't just cosmetic. It's what
| keeps the metal from getting wet and then rusting.
| hollerith wrote:
| I'll avoid doing it from now on.
| nandomrumber wrote:
| A flexible fridge magnet is probably fine.
|
| Seems like everyone here is assuming you used a 40lb
| neodymium magnet you dropped in the dirt first.
|
| I like to assume the best in people.
| asdff wrote:
| OK, one with a big glob of bubblegum on it then.
| dylan604 wrote:
| What happens when they miss and hit you in the head
| instead?
| deadbolt wrote:
| Probably the same thing when the police shoot an innocent
| bystander currently - absolutely nothing.
| BoorishBears wrote:
| The actual darts for this don't look that far off tbh:
| https://www.toledoblade.com/local/police-
| fire/2016/04/06/GPS...
| BoorishBears wrote:
| They already have darts for this that use adhesives to
| stick to any part of the vehicle and shoot out from the
| pursuing vehicles
| bahmboo wrote:
| There is a thing called the grappler now. Seems like a
| reasonable tool: https://policebumper.com/
| Balgair wrote:
| Now this assumes that the LAPD/LASD/whomever actually cares
| to catch the suspect! In my (limited) experience with them,
| you could incinerate a full bus and they'd not blink an
| eye, but if you block the intersection at one of the many
| rush hours, that's a capital offense!
| dilippkumar wrote:
| > There are high speed police chases (100mph+) in Los Angeles
| -- no exaggeration -- on an almost daily basis.
|
| How is anyone driving at that speeds in LA traffic?
| dylan604 wrote:
| Like an asshole. We've all seen them, even if not in a
| chase. It may not be 100mph+ the whole time, but when
| there's open air, they'll get there.
| BadBadJellyBean wrote:
| Then why do you have so many car chases? That seems like an
| odd problem. There must be a reason.
| ripberge wrote:
| I have only been to Germany once, but my assessment was
| that we have a very different population here.
| BadBadJellyBean wrote:
| Possible but it seems like the chases are not even a US
| problem but more a "certain places" problem. I genuinely
| wonder what the cause of this behavior is.
| dylan604 wrote:
| > I genuinely wonder what the cause of this behavior is.
|
| Seriously? It's from people not wanting to be arrested
| and go to jail. If they get away, perfect. If they don't,
| well, they were going to jail anyways. Now they have a
| cool story to tell while in jail. These are not people
| getting pulled over because they rolled a stop sign.
| These are people doing dirt, know it, and are willing to
| try something to avoid getting caught. It's really not
| complicated
| samdoesnothing wrote:
| I think they're asking why there's such a large
| population of people willing to commit crimes and then
| get into high speed chases.
| dylan604 wrote:
| The cause of the behavior (as phrased when asked) is not
| wanting to go to jail. Asking why people are in
| situations where they are committing crimes that could
| land them in jail is a totally different question.
| Typically, poverty. Also common, addiction.
| wredcoll wrote:
| Except that people around the world generally don't want
| to go to prison, so why do americans have more high speed
| chases?
|
| (assuming they do in fact have more per capita/car...)
| c420 wrote:
| I'm going to guess... because we can? Police here are
| willing to chase for almost anything in most
| jurisdictions. I bet there are restrictions on what
| constitutes a chasable offense in the rest of the world.
| zimpenfish wrote:
| > I bet there are restrictions on what constitutes a
| chasable offense in the rest of the world.
|
| UK has stuff like [0] which contains a whole bunch of "is
| it worth it?" considerations. Also if a chase causes a
| death, the officer(s) can be prosecuted[1] - I suspect
| the nonsense of "qualified immunity" means there's no
| risk to a US officer for initiating a chase that ends in
| death.
|
| [0] https://www.college.police.uk/app/roads-
| policing/police-purs...
|
| [1] e.g https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-
| london-58889155
| dmurray wrote:
| In Ireland, the police (and the public) look on the UK
| regime with envy.
|
| After this case [0] the standing orders are that it's
| basically never worth it, you risk a prosecution no
| matter what the circumstances.
|
| [0] https://m.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/garda-
| charged-aft...
| zimpenfish wrote:
| > so why do americans have more high speed chases?
|
| Off the top of my head: 1) US cops are more likely to
| harass, maim, kill you than most other places (whether
| you've crimed or not); 2) US legal system seems a little
| hinky when it comes to certain people; 3) "three strikes"
| (not sure if that's countrywide or state-level? pretty
| sure it's still around tho'?) can mean life for three
| trivial crimes; 4) car-centric country - lots of them and
| everywhere is designed for cars[0].
|
| [0] Imagine a car chase around London[1] or some other
| wackily streeted city.
|
| [1] No, the godawful nonsense Hollywood comes up with
| does not count.
| Rebelgecko wrote:
| California's 3 strikes law only applies to "serious"
| felonies. The list is pretty reasonable IMO _. No one is
| getting life in prison for littering or insurance fraud
|
| _ It's basically a list of violent crimes, the only one
| that seems out of pocket is selling PCP, meth, or cocaine
| to childre, which is bad but could arguably be less bad
| than the others on the list
| aerostable_slug wrote:
| Raping an unconscious person is not on the list of
| violent felonies. Neither is domestic violence with
| traumatic injury, assault with a deadly weapon, or felony
| battery with serious bodily injury.
|
| It takes a lot to earn strikes in California.
| zimpenfish wrote:
| > California's 3 strikes law only applies to "serious"
| felonies.
|
| But not all states are California.
|
| > No one is getting life in prison for littering or
| insurance fraud
|
| William James Rummel begs to differ[0] - fraudulent use
| of a credit card ($80), forged check ($28.36), failure to
| return payment for non-performed work ($120.75) and
| voila, life sentence (albeit later reduced to time served
| on procedural grounds.)
|
| [0] also references "Graham v. West Virginia, a 1912 case
| which involved an individual convicted of three separate
| counts of horse thievery total[l]ing $235" which ended up
| in a life sentence.
|
| In summary, some states may have sensible 3 strike laws,
| some may not.
|
| [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rummel_v._Estelle
| SauntSolaire wrote:
| I would love to see more comprehensive stats to answer
| this question, rather than relying on cases studies you
| have to go back over one hundred years to find.
| seemaze wrote:
| Lots of high capacity vehicular infra in LA.. I imagine
| most places just have 'chases'.
| georgeecollins wrote:
| Or.. https://youtu.be/RvV3nn_de2k?si=7bXkaIri1_o95Ofs
| bigfatkitten wrote:
| > Typically, poverty. Also common, addiction.
|
| The latter is often a result of the former. People self-
| medicating to escape misery.
| Aurornis wrote:
| Can happen, but being miserable is a not a prerequisite
| to wanting to get high.
|
| I think it fits a narrative to explain addictions away as
| something that happens to someone as a victim of their
| circumstances, but personal choices are a real input.
| closeparen wrote:
| Stealing cars (often at gunpoint) and driving them
| recklessly is an entertainment activity for young men
| with poor impulse control and little regard for human
| life. This kind of person makes decisions of comparable
| quality elsewhere in life that are probably incompatible
| with being middle class.
| lukan wrote:
| "Asking why people are in situations where they are
| committing crimes that could land them in jail is a
| totally different question. Typically, poverty. Also
| common, addiction."
|
| Can't we just blame GTA?
| samdoesnothing wrote:
| Are you suggesting criminals in other cities and
| countries do want to go to jail? Like, the reason there
| aren't high speed chases in Amsterdam is because
| Amsterdesian criminals actually enjoy life in the clink?
| Aurornis wrote:
| The population in big US cities is very heterogeneous.
| There isn't one single culture.
|
| In a city with large population, it only takes a few
| people willing to commit crimes to make the news.
| zimpenfish wrote:
| > These are not people getting pulled over because they
| rolled a stop sign.
|
| Although if you watched "Last Week Tonight" recently (S12
| E28, 2025-11-02), Mr Oliver's long segment is about
| police chases and IIRC he covered more than a couple of
| cases where people were, in fact, being pulled over /
| chased for trivial matters which then lead to crashes,
| deaths, etc.
| closeparen wrote:
| These are trivial matters in that the penalties are
| minor, not that they are optional.
| dns_snek wrote:
| Of course they're not optional, but you shouldn't be
| starting a high speed pursuit over a seat belt violation,
| or for someone going 5 over the speed limit. Principle of
| proportionality should apply, you shouldn't be risking
| the lives of the public over anything but the most
| serious offences where them getting away poses a greater
| threat to the public than potentially killing a
| bystander.
| yreg wrote:
| It goes the other way as well. It is dumb to run away
| from police when they stop you for minor infraction and
| face a very high chance of getting caught and getting
| into a major problem. At least I would hope that the
| penalties for running away are very serious.
|
| The police officers don't know why you are running away
| and can reasonably expect that there is something wrong
| other than an unbuckled seat belt -> a kidnapped person,
| tons of drugs in the trunk, a wanted murderer driving,
| etc.
|
| Well at least in my country where chases are rare. I
| understand in US it is difficult since people are more
| eager to run away.
| idle_zealot wrote:
| > It goes the other way as well. It is dumb to run away
| from police when they stop you for minor infraction and
| face a very high chance of getting caught and getting
| into a major problem
|
| Right, people are dumb. You can't just throw your hands
| in the air and declare a problem unsolvable because
| people are dumb and keep acting against their best
| interest; you acknowledge that fact and change tact
| accordingly. If it turns out that trying to pull people
| over for minor infractions causes 1% of those incidents
| to turn into violent chases then you should _stop pulling
| people over for minor infractions_ and figure out a safer
| way to ticket them. At the _very least_ you shouldn 't
| _chase after them in your car_ and add another dangerous
| vehicle to the road. It reflects a mindset of "get and
| punish the bad guys" being prioritized over "improve
| safety of your community," which pretty much sums up the
| culture problem with American police and criminal justice
| in general.
| speakfreely wrote:
| > you shouldn't be starting a high speed pursuit over a
| seat belt violation, or for someone going 5 over the
| speed limit.
|
| That's the thing: normal people don't. Violent criminals,
| people with active arrest warrants, and people carrying
| highly illegal/dangerous things in their vehicles are the
| types that run from traffic stops.
| hkpack wrote:
| What about depressed people? What about stressed people?
| What about people with autism who overreact when spooked?
| What about people on the edge who didn't care about the
| consequences because of the life situation?
|
| What about people who are convinced that police may kill
| them for mild violation as they saw that multiple times
| on the news and social media? The reaction to flee may be
| justified at the moment as it is life or death anyway,
| even if only in their heads.
|
| There are a lot of "normal" people around who will act
| abnormally in a high stress situation.
| ashtakeaway wrote:
| Thank you for speaking to reality of situations that the
| majority of internet commenters never talk about. I think
| dang needs to put the HN member lock back on.
| SauntSolaire wrote:
| You're literally just making up scenarios in your head.
| nmeofthestate wrote:
| "you shouldn't be starting a high speed pursuit over a
| seat belt violation, or for someone going 5 over the
| speed limit"
|
| That would indeed be dumb, but once somebody dumb has
| decided to do that they're guilty of something much more
| serious and the car chase is completely justified.
| stickfigure wrote:
| https://www.google.com/search?q=florida+man
| 9cb14c1ec0 wrote:
| There is this perception that if you drive fast and
| recklessly enough the police will quickly stop following
| you. It's a get-out-of-jail-free card in popular
| perception.
| twelvedogs wrote:
| police will chase in the US for really any reason, kinda
| dumb when they have your plates they can just mail you a
| fine
|
| john oliver did a whole thing on it
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E8ygQ2wEwJw
| AnthonyMouse wrote:
| > kinda dumb when they have your plates they can just
| mail you a fine
|
| Except that the person trying to get away knows that too,
| so if all they're doing is buying themselves a bigger
| fine, why are they doing it?
|
| The answer to that could be because they stole the car,
| or because there's a body in the back, in which case
| mailing them a fine doesn't work.
| idle_zealot wrote:
| > The answer to that could be because they stole the car,
| or because there's a body in the back, in which case
| mailing them a fine doesn't work.
|
| Except it's almost never that. The answer is that people
| are stupid and impulsive.
| AnthonyMouse wrote:
| There seems to be a lot of variance in the percentage of
| police chases that involve stolen vehicles but the
| numbers seem to be in the range of 10% to 70% and even
| the low end of that isn't particularly low.
|
| You also have the problem that if you steal a car and
| then run from the police the result is that they don't
| pursue you and send a ticket to the person you stole it
| from, that makes it a lot easier to steal a car, and then
| the percentage goes up.
| domoregood wrote:
| True, but chases involving stolen vehicles (a non-trivial
| percentage of all chases) means that mailing a fine to
| the registered owner wouldn't be a universal solution.
| themafia wrote:
| "I wasn't driving at the time. Someone took my car."
|
| There is generally no crime for owning a vehicle used in
| a crime. The violation belongs to the _driver_ and to no
| one else. Burden of proof can be extreme in US courts.
| dns_snek wrote:
| You don't need to be chasing them on the road. Attach a
| GPS tracker to the car and follow it with drone, collect
| surveillance footage and arrest them once they come to a
| stop.
| themafia wrote:
| They do have GPS dart launchers and other systems.
| They're fairly unreliable. It's difficult for the lead
| driver in a chase to deploy accurately and cars are
| typically dirty enough to make most adhesives ineffective
| particularly when deployed at highway speeds.
|
| A hoodie is enough to defeat the drone surveillance, and
| regardless of what facial recognition technology you use,
| a jury still has to buy the output of that system.
|
| For drones with less than a 6 foot wingspan that don't
| require a runway you've got maybe 30 minutes of flight
| time at a top speed of 30 miles per hour. So unless you
| know where they're going already you're not going to be
| able to effectively deploy it in the time necessary to
| capture them and you can't loiter long enough to track
| them with infrared.
|
| The helicopter is an insurance policy. When you have a
| bunch of marked units doing twice the speed limit on a
| long enough chase they're going to hit something. Those
| crashes are devastating and lead to eye watering
| settlement amounts. The helicopter can safely chase most
| vehicles at almost any speed and the risk of them
| crashing with any civilian or even civilian property is
| effectively zero.
| mschuster91 wrote:
| > kinda dumb when they have your plates they can just
| mail you a fine
|
| thing is, in Germany and many other European countries
| there's a mandate to register your place of residence
| with the authorities in a timely manner (i.e. 2 weeks
| after moving in).
|
| Americans and Brits don't have that, so "mail them a
| fine" is most likely going to result in the letter not
| arriving where it should.
| inferiorhuman wrote:
| I can't speak to the UK but in California there are
| various rules around updating vehicle registration when
| you move. Enforcement is pretty lax unless you drive
| something with exceptionally high registration fees.
|
| There's strong wording about updating voter registration
| when you move, but I doubt there's much in the way of
| actual law. If there is it's basically never enforced as
| far as I can tell.
| imalerba wrote:
| There's a newer video more on topic of police chases
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wVFXUkFx5Y8
| squidgyhead wrote:
| Because they have so many car chases on the news. So people
| get the idea that car chases are a solution that people use
| to get out of trouble.
|
| Seems like a vicious cycle, fed by the terrible news media.
| themafia wrote:
| Population density. In other countries they have a lot of
| motorcycle chases, and a lot more motorcycle based crime,
| but it's a crime of opportunity, which is created by highly
| dense and interwoven urban cores.
| cenamus wrote:
| European cities are small? You don't hear about many
| chases in Berlin/Paris/London, do you?
| themafia wrote:
| Berlin and Los Angeles _city_ both have 3.8 million
| residents. The greater Los Angeles Metropolitan area has
| 18 million residents. The greater Berlin Metropolitan
| area has 6 million residents.
|
| It's not only dense but the scale is far larger than most
| European cities. Only Asian and South American cities
| outclass the insanity that is LA. Until you've been there
| it's hard to appreciate the scope of it.
| marcinzm wrote:
| The Greater LA areas has 34k square miles of area.
| Germany, the whole country, has 128k square miles. In
| other words, the LA area alone is a quarter the size of
| all of Germany.
| themafia wrote:
| A huge chunk of that is national parks and deserts. It's
| not all inhabited. Only about 25% is classified as urban
| with the overwhelming majority of that being concentrated
| in Los Angeles and it's surrounding cities.
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greater_Los_Angeles#Urban_a
| rea...
|
| This isn't a size measuring contest. I think Europeans
| forget how _young_ America is. That's the only unique
| part of this country. Give us a few thousand years and
| we'll be on par.
| cenamus wrote:
| Well, and we always have to shit on the younger (and now
| bigger) brother
| cassepipe wrote:
| You'd be surprised to learn that geopolitics do not
| actually mimick family disputes
| lukeschlather wrote:
| No it was a population density measuring contest and you
| were trying to argue that greater LA was more dense than
| greater Berlin, without defining greater Berlin in a
| rigorous way. The size of Germany relative to greater LA
| was brought up to attempt to put the population densities
| in perspective.
| victorbjorklund wrote:
| The US is less densely populated than most European
| countries. It is in fact the 180th most densely populated
| country in the world.
| rasz wrote:
| 28 seasons of Alarm for Cobra 11 tell me Germany is riddled
| with criminals running from Polizei on the Autobahn.
| almosthere wrote:
| Practice for GTA6
| hackable_sand wrote:
| Don't forget to boycott Rockstar!
| Zigurd wrote:
| Same reason that nearly every police response in the US is
| an armed response. Same reason police kill more Americans
| than terrorists do. US police culture is toxic and deadly.
| Several cities tightly restrict high-speed chases. That
| should be the norm.
| adriand wrote:
| My home town of Hamilton, Ontario (population 560k)
| recently made the news because a guy stole a bus, with
| passengers onboard, and started driving it through the
| city. It was newsworthy because he also dropped people
| off at their stops, and even rejected someone who tried
| to board with an expired bus pass. But what stood out for
| me in addition to all that was the police response. They
| quietly followed the bus, intentionally not using sirens
| to avoid "spooking" the guy. They waited for the right
| moment, boarded the bus and arrested him peacefully and
| without incident.
|
| I recognize my little city is not like LA (which I've
| visited twice) - the types of crimes, the types of
| criminals and the prevalence of weapons are far
| different, although we also have our share of gun
| violence and murder. But we have also not militarized our
| police, and there's very much a police culture of service
| to the community. Here, when a cop uses their weapon,
| it's seen as a failure. This was a situation handled
| properly, and it made me proud.
| captainkrtek wrote:
| I'm Canadian and American, and have lived in both places
| and seen the stark differences myself. In the US, the
| police culture is certainly militarized and proud of it.
| Even in small towns you have days where the police roll
| out the biggest armored vehicles they have to show off,
| and that's their idea of a "community event", kids think
| its cool obviously, but it's really just "lets show off
| all of our high power toys".
| vee-kay wrote:
| Those high-powered toys by the cops are merely for
| showing off and to victimize the weak. Those toys
| typically never come into play to protect the citizens.
|
| Case in point: during the Uvalde school shooting incident
| in 2022, when a shooter (Salvador Ramos) went on a
| killing spree inside the school, then hundreds of cops
| gathered outside with brand new body armor (gifted to
| them just months ago) and armed with automatic guns, but
| they never dared to go inside to tackle the shooter. Not
| only that, those cowardly cops actively prevented parents
| and state patrol officers from going in to rescue their
| kids. The cowardly cops were led by a cowardly police
| chief, who later gave excuses for the delayed response to
| the deadly situation and his mishandling of the police
| force, by claiming to have forgotten his walkie talkie!
|
| Ultimately one of the border patrol officers and some US
| deputy marshalls (who had travelled 70 miles to reach the
| scene after getting an alert) managed to sneak in to the
| back, break the locked door, and used a tactical shield
| to corner and finally kill the shooter, thus ending his
| bloodbath (19 children and 2 teachers were tragically
| killed).
|
| And if you think arming cowardly showoff cops with guns
| and armor is useless and potentially dangerous, you
| should know the Uvalde school shooter was a minor but he
| managed to buy the guns legally from a gun shop on
| credit!
|
| That's how lax and evil the gun laws and resulting
| shootouts in USA are.
|
| USA has more mass shootings and more school shootings
| than any other place in the world.
|
| No wonder they facilitate and glorify high-speed car
| chases. It is all a thrillride for these adrenaline
| junkies high on power.
| FireBeyond wrote:
| You forgot the most insane part of this (or at least of
| the aftermath) - the police chief was re-elected shortly
| after!
| KarlKode wrote:
| Reminds me of the story where two guys went for a joyride
| in a Tram in Braunschweig (DE). They boarded a tram
| during the night, drove for a few stops (including
| letting passengers board & leave) and left the tram
| there.
|
| The funniest part of the story is that they didn't commit
| any crime and were let go.
|
| Story here (in German):
| https://www.spiegel.de/panorama/justiz/braunschweig-
| junge-ma...
| Philip-J-Fry wrote:
| Exactly, unless someone is in imminent danger there's
| basically no reason to do a high speed chase. Get the
| plate, track it on the thousands of ANPR cameras that
| exist, look up the owner and just knock on their door
| later on.
|
| Like 99% of high speed chases only end when the culprit
| crashes their car, and often that's into someone else's
| car risking harm to innocent civilians.
| tarr11 wrote:
| The cars are usually stolen
| boringg wrote:
| That may be - it should be noted that criminals in the US
| are also much more violent and brazen then most of the
| rest of the planet. If your criminal population is
| packing heat the response tends to be much more
| aggressive. Its a bit cat and mouse.
| Zigurd wrote:
| Crime is down. Not because we have aggressive cops that
| shoot people a lot. https://counciloncj.org/crime-trends-
| in-u-s-cities-mid-year-...
| notreallytho wrote:
| That's what happens when cities stop reporting crime
| statistics
|
| https://www.themarshallproject.org/2022/06/14/what-did-
| fbi-d...
| Zigurd wrote:
| Murder is down in line with the rest of crime. What that
| tells you is that even crime that's hard to fail to
| report follows the general trend.
| cavisne wrote:
| Down from a massive peak in 2020/2021 when cities tried
| the "lets not enforce crime" approach. Still elevated
| from pre 2020 levels.
| throw-the-towel wrote:
| Not trying to dispute your conclusions, but I'd be wary
| of using the peak Covid years as a reference.
| closeparen wrote:
| Okay, and? As long as crime is below its peak level,
| there's no need to apprehend criminals?
| lukeschlather wrote:
| Shooting people and high speed chases are bad tools for
| apprehending criminals. They are more likely to harm
| innocent people than criminals. Facing off with "violent
| and brazen" criminals doesn't change this, but also the
| fact that crime is down suggests US criminals are in
| fact, neither more violent nor more brazen than those in
| areas where police use less destructive methods.
| alksdjf89243 wrote:
| > also the fact that crime is down...
|
| This is not a fact. What is a fact is that many police
| departments stopped reporting crimes, so there are fewer
| crimes being reported, not that there are fewer crimes
| being committed.
|
| https://www.aol.com/thousands-police-depts-stop-
| reporting-00...
|
| There are myriad reasons why, but stemming the upward
| trend of reported violence makes politicians look better
| and we all know how honest politicians are.
| slg wrote:
| This is a perfect summary of that "toxic and deadly"
| culture. Why are police treated as a dumb tool that will
| always respond to violence with more violence? Why is the
| onus on the criminals to deescalate the situation? Why
| doesn't the duty of enforcing the law come with a bigger
| burden to keeping the peace? And why do the police not
| have any culpability in violence they helped escalate?
| AngryData wrote:
| You don't think that is a response to their knowledge
| that cops will often shoot and kill them on sight along
| with the incredibly harsh criminal punishment?
|
| In the EU if you get caught doing a crime, yeah you will
| get charged and punished, maybe take a billy club to the
| leg during an arrest, but nothing too extreme and you go
| to jail for a bit, maybe pay some fines, but you live and
| learn. In the US there is a good chance you get shot
| right away, if you aren't shot the cops will likely beat
| you and abuse you doing the arrest, the prosecutor and
| court will try and dump a decade+ long sentence on you
| even if there was no violence involved and the material
| value is only a few days worth of work, and the prison is
| a horrible environment by designed that often fucks
| people up mentally.
|
| Harsh punishment for crimes is rarely a very good
| deterrent against crime, it just makes people who were
| desperate enough to resort to crime more desperate and
| determined to escape capture. If I had a decent bank
| account I could probably get most charges lowered to
| something acceptable in the US, but most people
| committing low level crimes usually don't have lawyer
| money and will have their life ruined with a ridiculous
| sentence.
| nenxk wrote:
| Restricted high speed chases lead to a lot more crime
| though there's some car thief's I've watched on insta and
| they avoid LA and stick to Oakland because of the chase
| laws you also have people in New York like squeeze benz,
| license, doolie, and a lot more who have made entire
| social media careers driving around recklessly and
| getting into crashes on freeways because they won't get
| chased more than a mile there's been a huge rise in
| "cutting up" in nyc because why not if you won't get
| chased you can just remove your plate and do whatever.
| unethical_ban wrote:
| If someone is tiktok famous for filming the evidence of
| their felonies, that's an enforcement problem.
| jeltz wrote:
| Not sure why car chases are necessary to solve this
| problem. Just arrest these people in their homes. Those
| videos are enough evidence for arrest and conviction.
| ACCount37 wrote:
| Who do you arrest? An abandoned car?
| vel0city wrote:
| Start with the registered owner of the car and
| investigate from there. Follow it through the network of
| cameras that are already deployed around the city. If it
| was stolen from them, investigate the theft. In a large
| number of these chases the person is operating their own
| car.
| victorbjorklund wrote:
| I'm 90% of the cases the police knows who the driver is.
| WUMBOWUMBO wrote:
| add on to the fact that a city like NYC has a vast
| network of surveillance cameras
| ponector wrote:
| American police just like it. They start chase for any
| reason, even for a broken tail lamp. Also not a simple
| chaise, but one where they intentionally provoke a car
| crash, often with fatal results for innocent people.
| SauntSolaire wrote:
| You phrase it like the police can force you to run from
| them.
| gosub100 wrote:
| Because our society is spoiled, averse to consequences, and
| addicted to pleasure. People cannot tolerate it when they
| don't get what they want. What they want (when being pulled
| over) is NOT to go to jail, hence, due their conditioning,
| they avoid the consequence. Up to and including bringing
| injury and death onto themselves and strangers.
| aerostable_slug wrote:
| It's insane this is downvoted when it's the truth. Again
| and again the person is running from something small, but
| that's not an indictment of the chase, it's proof of how
| freaking stupid and self-centered the subject is: they
| are willing to put dozens of lives at risk to avoid
| something like getting their car towed because they're
| driving on a suspended license. The officer chases them
| because they don't know why they're running (but it must
| be a good reason to risk picking up a felony), not
| because going after a suspended license is worth a chase.
|
| We are seeing the result of a combination of factors
| including aversion to consequences and the inability to
| empathize with those they put at risk.
| gosub100 wrote:
| its a breakdown of community, with capitalism largely to
| blame. In small towns, this type of behavior is less
| likely when you know the sheriff or judge and feel like
| they are a part of your social sphere. In a large city,
| any red-light-flashing cop is just an NPC that spawed and
| will take your in-game credits. I think this is the
| result - for many of us - when each person we see every
| day is likely someone we'll never see again. The megacity
| is just a huge machine with sharp gears and lurking
| dangers you have to evade.
| jayd16 wrote:
| Because the police chase them.
| tokai wrote:
| Its interesting how both police chases and swatting is
| super rare outside of the US.
| almost_usual wrote:
| The US is still cowboy country in many ways.
| chrisweekly wrote:
| I wonder how much of the high-speed chase "scene" is actually
| fuelled by all the hoopla. (TV broadcasts of soccer/football
| matches tend not to show streakers on the field for this
| reason)
| jjwiseman wrote:
| In 2003, "Los Angeles Mayor Jim Hahn, along with Los
| Angeles Police Chief William Bratton, Los Angeles County
| Sheriff Lee Baca, the California Highway Patrol, the Los
| Angeles Police Chiefs' Association and the Los Angeles
| Board of Police Commissioners sent a letter Feb. 26 to news
| directors of television stations asking them to consider
| reducing the amount of police car chase coverage they
| broadcast." Officials asserted in their
| letter that live continuous coverage causes dangerous
| police chases to be looked upon as entertainment, and
| encourages suspects to flee in pursuit of instant fame.
| "Dangerous suspects are acquiring instant celebrity status
| when they recklessly evade police over our streets
| and highways. This form of notoriety is life
| threatening and should not occur," said Los Angeles
| County Sheriff Lee Baca in the press release.
| "There have been instances where drivers look out windows
| and wave. Many [suspects] have made it abundantly
| clear that they're enjoying the whole thing," said
| Julie Wong, director of communications for the mayor's
| office.
| shmeeed wrote:
| Intersting. Did this letter have any effect?
| JLO64 wrote:
| Personally I prefer Fox 11's coverage of these chases. The
| guy they have up there is fun to listen to and always
| sprinkles in comparisons to past chases.
| dudeinjapan wrote:
| This YouTube video is missing a Kavinsky soundtrack.
| Avshalom wrote:
| The thing is: there shouldn't be. Car chases cause far more
| damage (including injury and deaths of bystanders) than the
| crimes that precede them do and "air support" is not a
| defense against that in any way.
| samtho wrote:
| Law enforcement operates in a position where they "can't
| lose" an encounter. This is a major cause of rapid and
| unnecessary escalation with LEOs and the civilians they've
| stopped.
| ultrarunner wrote:
| Friendly reminder that LEOs are civilians as well-- while
| they may dress like it, they are not military.
| FireBeyond wrote:
| Very much so. Perhaps their training shouldn't explicitly
| use such language and work to increase that separation -
| LE training is _notorious_ for teaching cops old and new
| that anyone /anything "not a cop" is not one of them, and
| is a threat or has threat potential.
| Avshalom wrote:
| I understand, but again, they shouldn't.
|
| (This is why we want to abolish them)
| CPLX wrote:
| Genuine question. What do you think the alternative is?
|
| Let's say for argument's sake, that it was relatively well
| known that you could just drive away rapidly from a police
| encounter and successfully escape. Do you think that would
| affect the number of people who made that decision to do
| that?
|
| I can see both sides of this, but I'm curious what yours
| is.
| Avshalom wrote:
| So either we just use drones to track people while they
| escape at normal speeds or we use the pre existing
| panopticon to do so, or we use normal police detective
| work. Frankly even helicopters but with out police
| chasing is noticeably better from an over all lives lost
| perspective.
|
| Did you know that (pre covid) about half of all police
| deaths were due to car crashes? Even from a view point
| which completely ignores non-cops: chases are a terrible
| plan.
| victorbjorklund wrote:
| That is the case in many countries and as far as I know
| many states in US (for non-violent crime). Doesn't result
| in a lot of people trying it because most people
| understand if the police knows who you are it won't help
| to drive away and the people who are dumb/high/psychotic
| to not understand this they will do it regardless of
| wether the cops chase or not.
| asdff wrote:
| They bought them and spent a lot of money on supporting
| infrastructure and are therefore compelled to use them when
| they chase a middle aged drunken homeless man through a
| neighborhood.
| embedding-shape wrote:
| Where in Germany though? Helicopters tend to be more popular to
| use for various purposes in very densely populated places, like
| Hong Kong or New York City, but you don't really see them much
| in rural areas except for emergencies.
| BadBadJellyBean wrote:
| In a big city. Not rural at all.
| c0balt wrote:
| At least for Berlin I can attest that helicopters, outside of
| the yellow ones for emergency care, are a very rare
| occurrence. I have yet so see a police helicopter outside of
| a large demonstration.
| chmod775 wrote:
| They're used in Berlin, though they're surprisingly quiet
| compared to the emergency care ones. Maybe flying higher?
| Here's their POV:
|
| https://www.youtube.com/shorts/U3mncVE1TQ0
|
| Unsurprisingly, the comments are mostly making fun of them
| for wasting tax money on hunting down some guys with spray
| bottles.
| Semaphor wrote:
| I live in a pop 200k city, hospital copters are a daily
| occurrence. Police? Never seen one, Hamburg, one of our
| biggest cities, apparently has 3.
| rootusrootus wrote:
| Same for me. I live in a pop 1M city in America. Hospital
| choppers are fairly common. Police choppers rare.
|
| Also, according to the tracker, there's only one airborne
| in LA right now, and it is a pretty large city. It's close
| to 100x bigger than a 200k city.
| Aurornis wrote:
| > I live in Germany. The only times I hear a helicopter is if
| someone is being rescued or if someones missing. I rarely see
| them at all.
|
| Same for me, but I live in America.
|
| The specific location matters a lot. The LA area is more
| population dense and bigger than might be obvious.
|
| To put it in perspective, the GDP of the LA area is about 1/4
| as much as the GDP of your entire country.
| rootusrootus wrote:
| > bigger than might be obvious
|
| That's underselling it a bit, IMO. You can look at an aerial
| map and observe that it's pretty big, but experiencing it in
| person ... it's _enormous_. It just goes, and goes, and goes,
| and goes ...
| sneak wrote:
| That's pretty much only because of Hollywood's film industry.
| It isn't comparable otherwise.
| toast0 wrote:
| The greater LA area has Hollywood film and television and a
| lot of music stuff too. It has the 16th and 19th busiest
| container ports in the world (Los Angeles and Long Beach)
| [1]. It has the 11th busiest airport by passenger volume
| [2], and several other airports because that one isn't
| enough for the area. It has a pretty extensive computer
| industry. There's a lot of petroleum processing. There's a
| lot of agriculture. There's some financial services (many
| cities in the US are bigger in finance, but there's still a
| lot in the LA area). A pretty good amount of manufacturing.
| Several top tier universities. It drives a lot of tourism.
|
| And then there's all the GDP that arises from the
| population itself: construction, healthcare, education,
| real estate.
|
| If you take away the entertainment industry, it becomes a
| different place, but there's a lot of economic activity and
| most of it isn't film and tv and music production.
|
| [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_busiest_container
| _port...
|
| [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_busiest_airports_
| by_pa...
| potato3732842 wrote:
| It's not about results per dollar. It's about sending a
| message.
| Nextgrid wrote:
| The police state needs to enforce its dominance.
| h14h wrote:
| I suspect it has something to do with LA's large footprint.
| Comparing to where I'm from in Chicago, LA county is over 4x
| the land area with less than 2x the population:
|
| https://www.comparea.org/r122576+r396479
|
| Don't know how the math works out exactly, but if they don't
| have the workforce to cover their patrol area with squad cars,
| there's probably an argument to be made for covering gaps with
| areal support. Given that Chicago struggles with workforce
| shortages, I can only imagine how much worse it'd be if you had
| to cover 4x the area with half the tax base.
| throwaway48476 wrote:
| Don't give them ideas.
| jjwiseman wrote:
| They're not usually doing surveillance on people, they're
| mostly used as a quick way to get eyes overhead when something
| else is happening--foot pursuit, high speed pursuit, just about
| anything really where an aerial perspective might be helpful.
| They can fly anywhere in LA pretty quickly.
| sharts wrote:
| Los Angeles is a massive city. To cover that much ground given
| limited police it's sort of necessary.
| PeterHolzwarth wrote:
| Too true. It's hard to understand just how gob-smackingly
| enormous the greater LA metroplex is - it's as large as some
| small countries.
| aleph_minus_one wrote:
| > My question is: why so much air surveillance? I live in
| Germany. The only times I hear a helicopter is if someone is
| being rescued or if someones missing.
|
| Relevant German song concerning this mentality:
|
| Foyer des Arts - Hubschraubereinsatz (1982)
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2pAr1IMiP6A
|
| Here is some video of the song that also shows the lyrics:
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ykRB9SVlDhU
| jurschreuder wrote:
| The difference between rich and poor is way bigger in the USA
| it's been growing and growing since Ronald Reagan, while in
| Europe it has stayed basically the same.
| nmeofthestate wrote:
| The German eagerly commenting that, actually, it's different in
| Germany is becoming a defining cliche of HN comment sections.
| Teever wrote:
| Honestly I'll take that over the "street poops are so bad in
| SF" brigade any day of the week.
| mgraczyk wrote:
| We have more criminals and more crime in the US
| VerifiedReports wrote:
| Looks like there's supposed to be a map, but it only loads the
| very top edge... occasionally redrawn.
|
| Hm, now on reload it shows a whole map... but if you zoom in it
| resets it and zooms out by itself at intervals.
| andy99 wrote:
| Seconded, I thought it was just me
| ninininino wrote:
| This is neat but also has serious implications for criminal
| enablement.
| asdff wrote:
| Why? Helicopters already are on ADS-B.
| polalavik wrote:
| no it doesnt. this data is public all over the place. most
| notably https://www.flightaware.com/
| ninininino wrote:
| Cool. And yours is simpler and doesn't require looking up
| what the identifiers are for LAPD in particular. Just own it.
| rootusrootus wrote:
| I found the list of identifiers with a single google
| search. For any criminal who cares, it is a tiny amount of
| additional effort.
| asdff wrote:
| This was circulating recently and is sort of funny:
|
| https://old.reddit.com/r/LosAngeles/comments/1oolm68/lapd_he...
|
| LAPD flies quite recklessly especially downtown, where they
| aren't even clearing the buildings. News choppers fly much
| higher, well over the skyscrapers, and have no problems getting
| very tight shots on whatever subject there is down there.
|
| If you follow them on ADS-B you see they really aren't used that
| frequently at all for calls and end up in holding patterns with
| nothing to do really before flying somewhere else for a new
| holding pattern, until their shift is up presumably.
| bigiain wrote:
| > end up in holding patterns with nothing to do
|
| Cynical-me assumes those are the ones running stingrays/imsi-
| catchers.
| colordrops wrote:
| I don't see why a realistic theory that happens to point at
| an unpleasant possibility should be called "cynical".
| maxbendick wrote:
| Living in LA, the LAPD helicopter noise really is incessant.
|
| It's hilarious to hear flying cops try to be intimidating through
| when dispersing illegal concerts or singling individuals out in
| non-violent crowds. It's impotent posturing and an obvious waste
| of money. They really don't need to send 5 squad cars and a
| helicopter for noise complaints.
|
| I will say though that the loudspeaker on those things are
| surprisingly clear, even through the buzzing of a helicopter.
| burnt-resistor wrote:
| _Blue Thunder_ wasn 't just B-movie conspiracy theory paranoia
| porn but also contained a warning about technology
| authoritarianism and invasion of privacy, and police over-
| militarization.
| NullCascade wrote:
| What is the ROI?
|
| During the summer of 2017 Denmark flew hourly surveillance
| helicopters and military SIGINT aircrafts over Copenhagen to stop
| Sweden-like gang shootings. It was expensive but worked.
| swrobel wrote:
| "Sweden-like gang shootings" is not a phrase I expected to come
| across
| frizlab wrote:
| I must say I initially wondered why the LDAP protocol needed
| helicopters... then I re-read the title.
| MathMonkeyMan wrote:
| No, the helicopter tracker is implemented in LDAP.
| frizlab wrote:
| Makes more sense, thanks!
| insane_dreamer wrote:
| We need an ICE spending tracker.
| zobzu wrote:
| Not ICE, but a bunch of similar data at scale for the US
| https://usdebtclock.org/
| AIorNot wrote:
| What no Blue Thunder?
|
| https://youtu.be/LXg5Pu-yZrE?si=DFYPLVCBjYVi7a_g
| zkmon wrote:
| It's just a matter of striking a balance between "what a waste"
| and "what a lack of law and order". So, like a pendulum swing,
| cut down all spending drastically, until people scream "where is
| government?" and then swing backwards, until they cry "what a
| waste". Keep swinging back and forth until you find the local
| minima. Wait, am I talking about gradient descent?
| QuiEgo wrote:
| To those not familiar with LA or the USA, here's a cultural time
| capsule from 2Pac circa 1996:
|
| " It's the, City of Angels and constant danger South Central
| L.A., can't get no stranger Full of drama like a soap opera, on
| the curb Watchin' the ghetto bird helicopters, I observe"
|
| Pretty much still sums it up.
| smt88 wrote:
| Well the danger part has decreased a lot. It peaked at almost
| 100 per 10k people in the 90s, and now it's closer to 25. Still
| very high, but a lot of progress.
| getpost wrote:
| Kenneth Mejia, our progressive, data-driven controller audited
| LAPD helicopter use, and published his findings.
|
| "The ASD program costs nearly $50 million annually while most of
| the flight time is not devoted to high priority events. Our audit
| found that the estimated annual cost to operate the helicopter
| program is $46.6 million (i.e., $127,805 per day or $2,916 per
| flight hour). There are 14 City departments whose annual budgets
| do not reach this amount;"
|
| https://controller.lacity.gov/landings/lapd-helicopters
| mwkaufma wrote:
| Publicly funded noise-pollution.
| almost_usual wrote:
| Actually a lot less than I expected.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2025-11-22 23:01 UTC)