News:

It's funny how the position for boot-licking is so close to the one used for curb-stomping.

Main Menu

Police cameras

Started by Elder Iptuous, November 15, 2012, 04:39:22 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Cainad (dec.)

Quote from: Elder Iptuous on November 20, 2012, 04:15:23 PM
Cainad,
the only abuse that i see is selective recording (or retention) to misrepresent events.

Yes.


Quote
  I see this as coming down the pipe, unless we either set up the system with checks to ensure, as best we can, that this is prevented.

Won't happen. Anyone who tries to make it happen will be shouted down as someone who hates our boys in blue.


Quote
  Or, we ban police from using cameras.  that strikes me as a particularly odd thing.

Unnecessary. I doubt most cops would bother with recording equipment if they weren't made to carry it.


Sorry for being pithy about this. Unless this system does some kid of weird web-streaming thing that uploads footage directly to a database accessible to a civilian agency, it will be abused.

Elder Iptuous

Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on November 20, 2012, 04:16:08 PM
Quote from: Elder Iptuous on November 20, 2012, 04:15:23 PM
Roger,
i would say that there is a significant difference between police cameras for the purpose of monitoring police behavior and a public surveillance system.

If the cameras aren't aimed at the police, then they're monitoring something else.

if the argument is that a POV camera doesn't monitor the behavior of the person whos POV it is from, then i've got no response.

The Good Reverend Roger

Quote from: Elder Iptuous on November 20, 2012, 04:27:19 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on November 20, 2012, 04:16:08 PM
Quote from: Elder Iptuous on November 20, 2012, 04:15:23 PM
Roger,
i would say that there is a significant difference between police cameras for the purpose of monitoring police behavior and a public surveillance system.

If the cameras aren't aimed at the police, then they're monitoring something else.

if the argument is that a POV camera doesn't monitor the behavior of the person whos POV it is from, then i've got no response.

Can't tell who's wearing it.
" It's just that Depeche Mode were a bunch of optimistic loveburgers."
- TGRR, shaming himself forever, 7/8/2017

"Billy, when I say that ethics is our number one priority and safety is also our number one priority, you should take that to mean exactly what I said. Also quality. That's our number one priority as well. Don't look at me that way, you're in the corporate world now and this is how it works."
- TGRR, raising the bar at work.

AFK

If you had it set up in a way that every officer was assigned a camera, with a specific serial number or other identification, you could tell who WASN'T wearing it. 


If Officer Jones was wearing camera S-370 and John Doe said Officer Jones shoved him to the ground, and the camera shows the person with the POV shoving someone to the ground, the officer has to either say, "yeah, that was me" OR that it wasn't him, at which point he has to explain who the fuck has his camera and why.


Of course this could be abused, but if a lot of thought and planning is put into it you can make it very difficult to abuse which gives an officer minimal loop holes to weasel out of complaints.
Cynicism is a blank check for failure.

Elder Iptuous

Quote from: Cainad on November 20, 2012, 04:26:26 PM
Quote from: Elder Iptuous on November 20, 2012, 04:15:23 PM
  I see this as coming down the pipe, unless we either set up the system with checks to ensure, as best we can, that this is prevented.
Won't happen. Anyone who tries to make it happen will be shouted down as someone who hates our boys in blue.
i think there's a large enough percent of the population (and growing) that believes more controls need to be put on our police.  i don't think that the majority put blind trust in them anymore.

Quote from: Cainad on November 20, 2012, 04:26:26 PM
Quote
  Or, we ban police from using cameras.  that strikes me as a particularly odd thing.
Unnecessary. I doubt most cops would bother with recording equipment if they weren't made to carry it.
I'm arguing from the standpoint that technology will render recording so easy and invisible as to be the default with the majority of the population within our lifetimes.  right now, it is an effort to put this in place.  it will eventually be an effort to prevent it.


Quote from: Cainad on November 20, 2012, 04:26:26 PMSorry for being pithy about this. Unless this system does some kid of weird web-streaming thing that uploads footage directly to a database accessible to a civilian agency, it will be abused.
that is something that would be horribly abused, and i would oppose.

Mesozoic Mister Nigel

Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on November 20, 2012, 04:16:08 PM
Quote from: Elder Iptuous on November 20, 2012, 04:15:23 PM
Roger,
i would say that there is a significant difference between police cameras for the purpose of monitoring police behavior and a public surveillance system.

If the cameras aren't aimed at the police, then they're monitoring something else.

Boom. Roger nails it.

I'm a fan on cameras for monitoring the police. Put cameras on top of all the cop cars, and make it a Federal offense to interfere with video recording an officer on duty so that cops are forced to stop spotlighting people with cameras.

That'll never happen, though. This is just another tool for cops to use against the public.
"I'm guessing it was January 2007, a meeting in Bethesda, we got a bag of bees and just started smashing them on the desk," Charles Wick said. "It was very complicated."


Mesozoic Mister Nigel

Iptuous, are you just playing Devil's Advocate here?
"I'm guessing it was January 2007, a meeting in Bethesda, we got a bag of bees and just started smashing them on the desk," Charles Wick said. "It was very complicated."


Cainad (dec.)

Quote from: Elder Iptuous on November 20, 2012, 04:38:55 PM
Quote from: Cainad on November 20, 2012, 04:26:26 PM
Quote from: Elder Iptuous on November 20, 2012, 04:15:23 PM
  I see this as coming down the pipe, unless we either set up the system with checks to ensure, as best we can, that this is prevented.
Won't happen. Anyone who tries to make it happen will be shouted down as someone who hates our boys in blue.
i think there's a large enough percent of the population (and growing) that believes more controls need to be put on our police.  i don't think that the majority put blind trust in them anymore.

Quote from: Cainad on November 20, 2012, 04:26:26 PM
Quote
  Or, we ban police from using cameras.  that strikes me as a particularly odd thing.
Unnecessary. I doubt most cops would bother with recording equipment if they weren't made to carry it.
I'm arguing from the standpoint that technology will render recording so easy and invisible as to be the default with the majority of the population within our lifetimes.  right now, it is an effort to put this in place.  it will eventually be an effort to prevent it.


Quote from: Cainad on November 20, 2012, 04:26:26 PMSorry for being pithy about this. Unless this system does some kid of weird web-streaming thing that uploads footage directly to a database accessible to a civilian agency, it will be abused.
that is something that would be horribly abused, and i would oppose.

Point. I retract that statement; it was pretty dumb.



Quote from: FROTISTED FUDGE CAK on November 20, 2012, 04:39:49 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on November 20, 2012, 04:16:08 PM
Quote from: Elder Iptuous on November 20, 2012, 04:15:23 PM
Roger,
i would say that there is a significant difference between police cameras for the purpose of monitoring police behavior and a public surveillance system.

If the cameras aren't aimed at the police, then they're monitoring something else.

Boom. Roger nails it.

I'm a fan on cameras for monitoring the police. Put cameras on top of all the cop cars, and make it a Federal offense to interfere with video recording an officer on duty so that cops are forced to stop spotlighting people with cameras.

That'll never happen, though. This is just another tool for cops to use against the public tweaker pedo terrorists.

BUT THINK OF THE CHILDREN

Elder Iptuous


The Good Reverend Roger

" It's just that Depeche Mode were a bunch of optimistic loveburgers."
- TGRR, shaming himself forever, 7/8/2017

"Billy, when I say that ethics is our number one priority and safety is also our number one priority, you should take that to mean exactly what I said. Also quality. That's our number one priority as well. Don't look at me that way, you're in the corporate world now and this is how it works."
- TGRR, raising the bar at work.

AFK

I don't think the technology, in terms of cost, reliability, etc., is really in a place yet where this could be done in a workable way.  But I see nothing wrong with the intent and philosophy behind it.  I mean, really, police aren't all a bunch of jacked up, scheming, and coniving babboons.  And I can assure you they WANT the bad apples weeded out because it makes the test of them look bad. 


Now, that said, there probably would be some consternation from the Unions, but I bet that could be negotiated in a lot of cases.
Cynicism is a blank check for failure.

The Good Reverend Roger

Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on November 20, 2012, 05:01:56 PM
I mean, really, police aren't all a bunch of jacked up, scheming, and coniving babboons.

No, but I can say from experience that it only takes a couple.
" It's just that Depeche Mode were a bunch of optimistic loveburgers."
- TGRR, shaming himself forever, 7/8/2017

"Billy, when I say that ethics is our number one priority and safety is also our number one priority, you should take that to mean exactly what I said. Also quality. That's our number one priority as well. Don't look at me that way, you're in the corporate world now and this is how it works."
- TGRR, raising the bar at work.

Mesozoic Mister Nigel

Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on November 20, 2012, 05:01:56 PM
I don't think the technology, in terms of cost, reliability, etc., is really in a place yet where this could be done in a workable way.  But I see nothing wrong with the intent and philosophy behind it.  I mean, really, police aren't all a bunch of jacked up, scheming, and coniving babboons.  And I can assure you they WANT the bad apples weeded out because it makes the test of them look bad. 


Now, that said, there probably would be some consternation from the Unions, but I bet that could be negotiated in a lot of cases.

:lulz: But that one guy can't run the whole police department by himself.

Seriously, though, the problem isn't the individuals, it's the institution. You give a bunch of apes weapons and tell them that everyone else is the enemy, and you have the police force.
"I'm guessing it was January 2007, a meeting in Bethesda, we got a bag of bees and just started smashing them on the desk," Charles Wick said. "It was very complicated."


The Good Reverend Roger

Quote from: FROTISTED FUDGE CAK on November 20, 2012, 05:15:30 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on November 20, 2012, 05:01:56 PM
I don't think the technology, in terms of cost, reliability, etc., is really in a place yet where this could be done in a workable way.  But I see nothing wrong with the intent and philosophy behind it.  I mean, really, police aren't all a bunch of jacked up, scheming, and coniving babboons.  And I can assure you they WANT the bad apples weeded out because it makes the test of them look bad. 


Now, that said, there probably would be some consternation from the Unions, but I bet that could be negotiated in a lot of cases.

:lulz: But that one guy can't run the whole police department by himself.

Seriously, though, the problem isn't the individuals, it's the institution. You give a bunch of apes weapons and tell them that everyone else is the enemy, and you have the police force.

There's another side to that, of course.

"The public" is a zoo full of animals that want to kill each other only slightly less than they want to kill anyone who tries to stop them from killing each other.

The truth, of course, usually lies somewhere in the middle.  Unless you're in Portland, Oakland, LA, or Houston, in which case Nigel's post applies accurately.
" It's just that Depeche Mode were a bunch of optimistic loveburgers."
- TGRR, shaming himself forever, 7/8/2017

"Billy, when I say that ethics is our number one priority and safety is also our number one priority, you should take that to mean exactly what I said. Also quality. That's our number one priority as well. Don't look at me that way, you're in the corporate world now and this is how it works."
- TGRR, raising the bar at work.

AFK

Law Enforcement culture will vary from department to department and community to community.  The ones I work with don't view the public as enemies or animals and are doing what they do precisely because they value the public and want it protected, which is why I think, in theory, the idea of recording police interactions is one that would receive less resistance than one might think.



Cynicism is a blank check for failure.