Exercise in Futility?

Or an attempt at martyrdom?

• Regular readers of CWB may find this hard to believe. And, no, we haven’t been hacked.

  A Chicago police officer engaged a carload of armed men in a high-speed, cross-city chase Sunday night after the group, suspected of at least nine holdups, committed three robberies in Lincoln Park and on the Near North Side.

  Sunday night’s first robbery was reported around 11 p.m. outside the Armitage Brown Line station in the 900 block of West Armitage. A 42-year-old woman told Chicago cops she was walking on the sidewalk when four men got out of a white SUV and took her purse at gunpoint, according to a CPD media statement.

  A Near North (18th) District tactical sergeant spotted the white vehicle minutes later on Halsted Street. And the chase was on.

One one hand, "Bravo!" for doing what we were hired to do, trained to do, and up until a few years ago, expected to do.

One the other hand, "What the Hell are you thinking?"

• “I’m not going to terminate [the chase] myself until we crash,” he radioed as he pursued the car toward the United Center. “It’d be great if I could get some help. I’m all by myself.”

  And there’s the rub. Despite the cop’s efforts, putting his career at risk should anything bad happen during the chase, he had no backup to help him. No police helicopters were up. The state police weren’t in the area.

  Worst of all, perhaps, as the sergeant chased the car through a West Side police district, one of that district’s sergeants ordered his units not to pursue the robbers.

  “I haven’t seen one squad car,” the sergeant radioed around 11:22 p.m., about a minute before the crew bailed out near 15th and Drake. They ran from the scene, and the lone sergeant, soon joined by local district officers since the chase had ended, searched for them. No luck. The group got away.

That “I’m not going to terminate [the chase] myself until we crash,” is begging for a problem.

And the "...as the sergeant chased the car through a West Side police district, one of that district’s sergeants ordered his units not to pursue the robbers" is a BIGGER problem.

Believe it or not, we used to chase people. And folks. And we have a drawer full of awards proving it. But after numerous trips to Federal Court and a complete collapse of political support for actually engaging criminals, we backed off. We did a "risk / reward" analysis and it wasn't difficult to see which way the winds were blowing. We didn't like it; it wasn't what we signed up for. But it was reality, and we adapted. We aren't stupid like that Koniarski woman.

We can't say the sergeant from 018 was wrong. Far far from it. Victims don't want to be victims and they'd really like to have their property back. But we'll bet those victims gave up their property pretty quick when faced with a gun/knife/beating threat.

What we can say, and have said, is that from a risk/reward standpoint, we can't justify it. The sergeant might be outraged at crime. He might be pissed at what that the Department has become little more than "crime monitors" or whatever that TV commercial said. We've felt the same thing. But we can't justify continuing on, trying to get other coppers to commit to what might turn out to be the worst experience of their careers. The risk is too high.

Voters elected "progressive" politicians who embrace crime, criminals, and the thought that these ne'er-do-wells are only trying to feed their families or some such bullshit. Until they feel enough is enough, we don't know that it will change in the near or distant future. We can only control our reaction to it.