|
Ottawa
Canada - During my 22-year career as a
member of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police I
participated in numerous high-speed pursuits.
Fortunately, none of those resulted in injury
or death, although a few cars were damaged. I will never forget some of those hair-raising experiences as
long as I live.
There
was very little we could do to stop pursuits except to
back off and wait for the fleeing vehicle to run out
of gas, break down, or hit something.
All too often it was the latter.
We resorted to the use of spike belts on many
occasions, but in most cases the suspect would drive
around the belt or take another road.
We were not allowed to use firearms, nor could
we place impenetrable objects such as large trucks
across the roadway.
We always had to leave the suspect an “out”
so that he could continue to wreak havoc on the
unsuspecting public.
High-speed
pursuits have been a fact of life since the invention
of the automobile (perhaps they started off as
low-speed pursuits ala O.J. Simpson).
During the past century nobody has managed to
solve the problem, although many devices such as spike
belts have been used with limited success.
In 1996 the U.S. Department of Justice set up
the Pursuit Management Task Force to study the
problem, which is a significant one.
The statistics are horrendous, with hundreds of
innocent people killed and thousands injured annually.
The Task Force, in its 1998 final report,
concluded that there was no “silver bullet” that
would effectively stop pursuits, however it identified
“co-operative systems with law enforcement
activation” as the preferred technology to emerge at
some future time.
A co-operative system is one in which every
motor vehicle is equipped with an immobilization
device which can be remotely activated by police.
The Task Force examined many other
alternatives, but all were too complicated, expensive
or obtrusive. The
challenge was to find an inexpensive method that would
be safe for the police, the public and the criminal.
July
31, 1999 Sgt. Richard MacDonald of the Sudbury
Regional Police was killed during a high-speed pursuit
near Sudbury, Ontario while laying a spike strip
across the highway.
When he heard the news report, my son, a
20-year-old computer science student, asked why
nothing was being done to stop the carnage.
He was firmly convinced that if we could reach
the moon, we could stop runaway cars.
This started a thought process leading to the
invention of a co-operative system that can stop any
vehicle anywhere, at any speed and at any time.
It is surprisingly simple.
We
have applied for patents on a system that consists of
an electronic module to be installed in each motor
vehicle, plus a small computerized control panel to be
mounted in each police vehicle.
The module, at the time of installation, is
programmed with the identifying features of its host
vehicle and then permanently sealed.
It is hard-wired to the vehicle’s ignition
and four-way flasher circuits.
The
police control panel has a directional antenna that
can be aimed to the front, to the rear, or both.
Its radio range is up to 500 ft.
When the officer encounters a fleeing vehicle
he can enter three vehicle descriptors – make (Chev),
style (van) and color. He then presses the “Flash” button which sends out an
encrypted signal directed at all vehicles fitting that
description. Modules
in vehicles matching the description will respond by
engaging the four-way flashers for thirty seconds.
When the officer sees the flashers he knows he
has locked on to the vehicle.
He will then check to see if any other similar
vehicles are responding.
If not, he presses the “Stop” button to
begin the immobilization process.
If there is more than one respondent, the
officer must wait until both he and the suspect have
passed all other respondents.
In a case of very high speed this will take
only a few seconds.
As soon as he sees that the suspect vehicle is
the only one in front of him with lights flashing he
can press the “Stop” button.
Immobilization
begins with a 45-second slow-down process whereby the
module retards the ignition circuits enough to slow
the engine down to little more than an idle.
This gives the driver an opportunity to bring
the vehicle to a safe stop while the power steering
and brakes are still operating normally. If the driver fails to respond positively, the officer can at
any time press the “Stop” button a second time to
cut the ignition immediately.
After 45 seconds of slowing down, the module
cuts the ignition and the target vehicle is
immobilized for 15 minutes, or until remotely reset by
the officer.
If
the officer can not see the target vehicle clearly
enough to get its description, all he has to do is
press the “Flash” button, watch for the reaction,
then follow at a safe distance and press the
“Stop” button when both he and the suspect have
outdistanced all other responding vehicles.
The “Flash” signal is a prerequisite so
that no vehicle will react to the “Stop” signal
unless it has first received the “Flash” signal.
This ensures that few, if any, uninvolved
vehicles will be immobilized by this procedure.
If they are in the immediate vicinity their
four-way flashers may be activated, but they will stop
after thirty seconds if no subsequent signal is
received during that period.
Those
of us who have been involved in pursuits know that
many chases start from a standstill, after a routine
vehicle check. The
driver, fearing arrest or other adverse consequences,
decides to make a break for it and the chase is on.
The P-CEL system has a small transmitter
normally plugged into the side of the computer. When an officer leaves his car he should take the transmitter
with him and keep it within easy reach while checking
the stopped vehicle.
At the first sign of trouble he can push the
“Panic” button on the transmitter and the
vehicle’s engine will be immobilized immediately.
This prevents pursuits from even starting; they
are no longer necessary.
The
Pursuit Management Task Force envisioned a system such
as this, and in doing so they listed a number of
requirements any system would have to meet in order to
be approved for widespread use.
I am pleased to advise that we designed the P-CEL
system and applied for patents several months before
we became aware of the report, and that our system
meets or exceeds every one of those criteria.
The
strength of the P-CEL system lies in it simplicity and
effectiveness. It
can be operated by a lone officer with one hand while
driving at high speed, and no backup is required.
It works in any environment, and does not rely
on cellular systems or other infrastructure.
It uses radio signals to blanket a given area
and the operator has the ability to select one vehicle
from that area, whether it be a freeway, back lane or
parking lot. It is much safer and more effective than laser-based devices
which need to be aimed with great accuracy by someone
other than the driver of the pursuit vehicle.
P-CEL is a stand-alone system, one that we are
very proud of.
We
have demonstrated the concept to the Royal Canadian
Mounted Police, who have agreed to assist us with
testing the finished product to ensure it meets their
stringent requirements. We have received a great deal of support from the police, the
public and the media, who agree that this invention is
most promising and long overdue.
We
have two significant challenges before us.
The first is obtaining sufficient venture
capital to bring this concept to the manufacturing
stage. The
second, and perhaps most difficult, is convincing
lawmakers to pass legislation making this type of
technology mandatory in every vehicle.
Is is heartening to note that the California
Senate presently has a bill before it which would make
this type of technology mandatory in every vehicle.
There are many stakeholders with various
interests, and getting them all to agree may take
considerable time and effort.
The police, auto manufacturers, insurance
companies, legislative bodies and various interest
groups will all have a role to play.
God willing, they will agree this is a serious
problem that needs to be dealt with, and the sooner
the better. We
have the technology.
|
