[dylan604]

> 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

[zimpenfish]

> 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]

These are trivial matters in that the penalties are minor, not that they are optional.

[dns_snek]

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]

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]

> 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.

[nmeofthestate]

"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.

[speakfreely]

> 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]

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.

[closeparen]

Driving on public roads carries a responsibility to respond reasonably in all kinds of stressful situations. People incapable of handling a traffic stop should not be licensed.

[SauntSolaire]

You're literally just making up scenarios in your head.

[ashtakeaway]

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.

[zimpenfish]

> 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.

I beg you to watch the John Oliver segment where he gives several counter-examples to this narrative.

[samdoesnothing]

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]

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.

[closeparen]

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.

[bigfatkitten]

> Typically, poverty. Also common, addiction.

The latter is often a result of the former. People self-medicating to escape misery.

[Aurornis]

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.

[lukan]

"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]

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?

[wredcoll]

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]

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]

> 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]

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...

[seemaze]

Lots of high capacity vehicular infra in LA.. I imagine most places just have ‘chases’.

[georgeecollins]

Or.. https://youtu.be/RvV3nn_de2k?si=7bXkaIri1_o95Ofs

[zimpenfish]

> 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]

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]

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]

> 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

[Aurornis]

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.