Impound vehicles fleeing the police, whether or not the owner was driving Alderman McNeely

Who would object to impounding the vehicles of the soaring number of motorists, who are fleeing from the police, endangering the lives of everyone on the road, even if the driver of the vehicle wasn’t the owner?

Police impounding vehicles have reduced the number of loud stereo violations and the nuisance driving, where people were being intimidated and forced off the road by gangs of drivers.


Members of the City Council Code and Regulation Committee meeting voted in favor of a proposal Monday night to let police impound vehicles involved in cases of fleeing to elude law enforcement.

There was one dissenting vote, Ald. Linda McNeely.

Alderman McNeely believes the owner should be charged less if someone else was driving the car, even though the owners of the vehicle frequently will not tell police who was actually driving their vehicle or will say they don’t know who had it.

It about time some of these drivers and/or owners are held accountable for their vehicles, whether they were driving or not.

The increase in drivers fleeing from the police has  skyrocketed. In 2010, the police recorded 196 such incidents. In the first quarter of 2011 there have been 112, on a pace of 448 for 2011, more than double last year. “There should be consequences for engaging in criminal conduct,” Deputy Chief Mike Booker said. “We also want to reduce the number of people who engage in fleeing because it is inherently dangerous.”

In a previous post, uninsured motorists were allowed to get back into their cars and continue violating the law of driving without insurance and many comments on the post were against impounding the vechicle. How do you feel about a driver going through stop signs and traffic lights or driving 20 to 30 miles per hour over the posted speed limits, endangering you and your family?

Many drivers will do whatever is expected of them, no more and no less. The drivers who are trying to escape the police, violate traffic laws and the very act of fleeing from the police is a violation of the Illinois Vechicle Code. It’s punishable by suspension of driver’s license, even jail and a fine. Vote to impound the vehicles alderman McNeely.



  1. chief

    Sounds GREAT, take that car and have the owner watch as they SMASH it in a compacter into a nice metal square!

  2. “It about time some of these drivers and/or owners are held accountable for their vehicles, whether they were driving or not.”

    How do you decide who qualifys as a some? Can you have a law that punishes some?

    I also think the number of people fleeing the police may decrease if the star stopped publishing stories about how the rockford pd don’t chase.

    • rogerpennie

      Why should an owner have to pay for something he had no knowledge about. If I gave my son my car and he flees the police, that should be on him. To me this is just a way to punish the owner and to insure that the city will receive revenue. That don’t make any sense to make the person not responsible and not present, responsible for anothers action. So, it is fair to take my car, make me pay impound fees and others for the actions of another. What kind of logic is this? There is no logic to it, it is all about money where the city feels they have the best opportunity to get it from.

  3. kevind1986

    Uhhhh – I believe by “some” he means the ones that have been getting away with it. Obviously “some” haven’t been.

  4. Ted Biondo

    Welcome to the blog, Chief.

    Joe, Kevin is right about the “some” – the ones that got away. I don’t want any of these jerks running into me killing any of my family because they don’t give a damn about anyone but themselves.

    All of the jerks should be punished to the full extent of the law and fined for driving like a lunatic on the roads to escape the law.

  5. Uhhh, if that is what he meant why not just say that?

    (It about time these drivers and/or owners are held accountable for their vehicles, whether they were driving or not.)

  6. I could not agree more. Driving is a priviledge, NOT a right. There is nothing wrong with revoking that right to protect the public. This is all about personal responsibility,, a concept our society has grown frightened of.

    If we weren’t so cowardly;

    Vehicles fleeing the police would be impounded.

    Vehicles involved in DUI’s would be impounded. let’s see the drunks put other people in danger without a vehicle!

    Vehicles involved in accidents where the driver can’t produce state-required proof of insurance would be impounded.

    Vehicles were the driver was found to be driving illegally would be impounded, for example, driving on a suspended or revoked license.

    When the owners of “loaned” vehicles start crying about how unfair it is, I will be the first to turn a deaf ear. If you loan your car to a someone who shouldn’t be criving, you might not get it back.

  7. Marcus

    I agree that the current driving laws aren’t enforced well enough.
    We might pretend this law (impending impounding) would make society more responsible, but we’re fooling ourselves.
    If I had the power to pull over dangerous drivers and ticket them (or impound their car)- I could be kept busy all day, every day… And these infractions have nothing to do with drivers evading the police, insurance issues or seat belts.

  8. Scott

    Mr Biondo, I can tell you I really appreciate this ordinance coming down. Its very frustrating to know who we SHOULD be stopping and can’t. They can just drive away with contraband and weapons in their car. I hear, “If I had something in my car, I wouldn’t have stopped” often.
    Somtimes it feels like the traffic arrests shift more to the people who obey us rather than the people who cause the most problems-if that makes sense. Similar to gun laws. The laws affect the people who obey them.
    You should ride along with the police on the summer weekends after 1am and see the “movement” or at least youtube search “HOOD RYDERS”

  9. Ted Biondo

    Your right Scott – the law sometimes seems to be only for those who obey them, not the others who don’t. Same with gun laws – second amendment rights and with many other laws.

    I have seen the youTube Hood Ryders and the way they disregard their own safety and anyone who gets in their way including police officers in squads.

    I’m also getting sick of people like the alderman who don’t want to hold people accountable for their criminal behavior. It’s always some excuse!!!

    Also, Thanks Scott for what you do for the people of Rockford. Without you guys out there, no telling what the situation would be like for the rest of us.

  10. truth hurts

    To all those who are against this law please show me anywhere in the consitiution, federal law, state law or local law where you HAVE THE RIGHT TO RUN FROM THE POLICE?

    I am so sick and tired of giving these people slack when it comes to this.

    How may times have we heard the horror stories where police did not pursue people only to find they have killed someone, kidnaped a child, or harmed/killed someone later.

    Here is how it should be.

    1. If you run from the police and someone gets killed or injured the person fleeing is HELD TOTALLY RESPONCIBLE. Not the police.

    2. If you run more than 1 minute the police have the right to use whatever means to stop you to protect the public.

    3. Your car is confiscated AUTOMATICALLY.

    4. If you are the owner you have to PROVE the person stold the car or some one-in-a-million reason why. You would be amazed how much people who lend their cars out know about their “friend”. If not people would be alot more careful. Would you lend your hunting rifle out to just any friend (for example)?

    The unfortunate truth is unless you make the penalty hit the person where it hurts they have nothing to lose by breaking the law.

    You are right Ted, the law is for the lawbreaker. For the honest person does not need the law to do whats right.

  11. Carolyn Meece

    My car was stolen on night when it was in front of my driveway. I had been resurfacing the driveway and was unable to park it in the garage. It would not be fair to take away and destroy a person’s car when it has been stolen. As usual to my knowledge the person was never arrested nor charged.

    The Constitution is the supreme law of the land and victims do have rights. It has never been necessary for me to ride with any police officer to see what goes on in Rockford, IL.

  12. Adam Faber

    Thank you, Carolyn, for pointing out that laws designed purely to deprive someone of their property and raise revenue for the city are not always good. I would hate to see Ted’s idea further deprive you of your car and cost you more money to get it back just so Ted can feel that he’s tough on crime.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *