Skip to main content

View Diary: Cop cams could change police behavior, but technology can only do so much (175 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Obviously (14+ / 0-)

    If you are doing nothing wrong, you shouldn't have a problem with a cop cam.

    I am a statistician, not a magician although we are easily confused. I guess that explains why people keep trying to tie me in chains and place me under water.

    by Edge PA on Tue Aug 19, 2014 at 12:28:09 PM PDT

    •  WTF? It's about RealityTV 24/7. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Edge PA, white blitz

      Cops will demand D-list celebrity wages.

      (actually pretty stressful to wear one all day, I should think.)

      Happy little moron, Lucky little man.
      I wish I was a moron, MY GOD, Perhaps I am!
      —Spike Milligan

      by polecat on Tue Aug 19, 2014 at 12:32:09 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Give it to them. (5+ / 0-)

        But tax the rich to pay for it.

        "The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness." —John Kenneth Galbraith

        by eyeswideopen on Tue Aug 19, 2014 at 01:01:07 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  They're usually activated at the beginning... (15+ / 0-)

        Of a field contact. So it's not recording the cop while he's on his lunch break talking to a friend. Nobody expects these officers to be angelic human beings who never swear or get irritated. But we do expect them to be respectful, competent professionals when carrying out their duties.

        •  But the Frugenson police (9+ / 0-)

          Believe police cameras should remain in a box in a storeage room.  They have Dash Cams, it just isn't a priority to mount them.

          Agreed they don't need them during lunch.  But the default question during and incident should be why wasn't it on.

          I am a statistician, not a magician although we are easily confused. I guess that explains why people keep trying to tie me in chains and place me under water.

          by Edge PA on Tue Aug 19, 2014 at 02:13:45 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Yes. Policies will need to be developed... (6+ / 0-)

            That specify the exact situations when the cameras need to be activated, with discipline for any non-compliance.

            I didn't know that Ferguson PD had dash cams, but hadn't mounted them. That's terrible. At a certain point, it seems to me that a failure to utilize purchased equipment becomes a misuse of public funds, and there needs to be accountability there as well.

          •  I've heard this... (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:

            ...but does anyone have a reliable citation for it? Have we heard from Ferguson officials or others why they were not installed and in use?

            Since there is no legal requirement for them (unless there is some state or local law I'm not aware of), it may not be a priority over buying another police car or accelerating the hiring of an additional officer. Ferguson has fairly high crime rates and fairly low police:resident ratio compared to many areas.

            There could be legitimate reasons. For example, maybe they were still developing policies and training and they were making reasonable progress on that. Or, maybe the cameras have only been in storage for a few weeks. Or, maybe they only have enough for half the cars and the remainder are on backorder and it would cost more to install them in two waves. Or, maybe the current union contract has some sort of a twist in it that makes deployment impractical until the contract is renegotiated (something regarding disciplinary processes).

            Inquiring minds want to know.

            •  Not as easy as just turning on the camera (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:

              I assume implementation of such video requires policies to collect, store, retreive, retain and destroy such video records. Once you have them they are discoverable and subject to FOIA etc. So, someone has to be tasked with retreiving them. If someone asks for all video of Officer so and so arresting people, someone has to go through all the videos.  Once you began using it, you create an expectation it will always be used so you have to care for and replace the equipment. If you can't find the video requested or if the audio is bad it will be held against you. Nothing is simple these days.

              And, as a practical matter, how often is such video really needed? It's not like you're usually recording a crime. You're just recording what the officer is doing. Maybe if you're in a place with a lot of use of force complaints it makes sense. But for the average dept it may be creating a ton of work for not much practical use.

              And, just because it's on video doesn't mean the pictures are reliable evidence. You know how the instant replay can depend on the camera angle. When does the camera engage? What area does it cover? What kind of angle does it use?

              "If you think you have it tough, read history books." Bill Maher

              by berkshireblue on Tue Aug 19, 2014 at 09:03:22 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  Dashcams no panacea (0+ / 0-)

              They seem to be designed for recording traffic stops. If the cruiser isn't pointing in the direction of the incident, anything recorded by the dashcam is useless in determining who did what.

    •  Just like they told us when W was in office! (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      "If you've done nothing wrong, you should have nothing to hide". That's what they told us! If it was good enough for US under the Patriot Act, it should be good enough for officers NOW!

      I have family in law enforcement (3 generations) & I support this idea! If an officer is doing his job properly, the camera will vindicate him. If an officer is NOT, then we can use it to fire and/or prosecute him. Hell, maybe bad officers might decide to LEAVE the force if they know they're going to be on film.

      A village can not reorganize village life to suit the village idiot.

      by METAL TREK on Tue Aug 19, 2014 at 04:48:16 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  That is the credo of the surveillance state (0+ / 0-)

      We find it applies to citizens more often, unfortunately.

      And then, there is the whole "eye of the beholder" thingy when it comes to "evidence".

      Bro, get a good lawyer on retainer, and first thing, bounce this off them:

      If you are doing nothing wrong, you shouldn't have a problem with {method A, B, C ...}.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site