When cops who kill leave their body cameras turned off

[EMNofSeattle]

but we don't turn off security cameras all of the time to wait for something relevant to happen.

depending upon the system used they're usually on a loop continually overwriting, and private operators are not subject to any form of requirements in regards to records keeping and cataloging evidence like the Government is.

 

[Lutherf]

There is no privacy in public. A gas station has no reasonable cause to video my comings and goings thru their front door. Yet they fo it.every single time at every single gas station. Same with most retail establishments.

At a gas station you're on private property and the owner of that property is using cameras to protect his investment. There's nothing unreasonable or unconstitutional about that.

 

[Lutherf]

The ones in prison already are... once you do your time though you are free.

Right, and a cop who hasn't done' anything wrong should be entitled to the same right to privacy.

 

[reinoe]

And body cams protect LEO's from false claims of assault or police brutality.

There's more fals claims coming from the police than the citizens. That's why most officers are against bodycameras.

 

[Bodi]

Right, and a cop who hasn't done' anything wrong should be entitled to the same right to privacy.

Are you fine with people video taping cops while they are doing their job?

 

[reinoe]

because otherwise you'd be recording large amounts of unneeded footage. there's other things that don't need to be recorded and kept on digital register, like sex crime survivors or child victims, etc.

Then record it all and then delete what's needed. Otherwise you get situations like this, where cops intentionally turn off their cameras so that they can kill people by shooting them in the back.

 

[MaggieD]

At a gas station you're on private property and the owner of that property is using cameras to protect his investment. There's nothing unreasonable or unconstitutional about that.

And where's a cop? Public property...no expectation of privacy. It is most certainly not unreasonable to protect the municipality from lawsuits. And protect an officer's job and reputation. They are already in use, so obviously, they pass muster.

 

[reinoe]

There is no privacy in public. A gas station has no reasonable cause to video my comings and goings thru their front door. Yet they fo it.every single time at every single gas station. Same with most retail establishments.

Think about that: police are held to a lower standard of accountability than a McDonald's cashier or Walmart people greeter.

 

[EMNofSeattle]

Then record it all and then delete what's needed. Otherwise you get situations like this, where cops intentionally turn off their cameras so that they can kill people by shooting them in the back.

The idea this officer toggled off his camera to fulfill a homicidal urge to kill someone is pure speculation on your part.

 

[Bodi]

because otherwise you'd be recording large amounts of unneeded footage. there's other things that don't need to be recorded and kept on digital register, like sex crime survivors or child victims, etc.

At the conclusion of every incident the suspect and the cop AND the cops boss should get a say if they want the recording kept or not... delete the rest.

 

[Bodi]

The idea this officer toggled off his camera to fulfill a homicidal urge to kill someone is pure speculation on your part.

We hear that a violent encounter was not recorded because the officer "forgot" to turn on the camera or because the camera was turned off, often enough that it doesn't sound like speculation any more.

 

[Lutherf]

Hacking a cops body camera while he's wearing it? Hmmm, that's a new one. lol

What motive would someone have besides the cop to hack his body camera? How would the cop know it was hacked by someone else?

But for argument sake...lets pretend the cop thinks his body-cam is or was being hacked...at that point he turns it over to the department and gets another one before going back on duty. So now what excuse would he have to remove his body-cam?

If a cop's camera is on and streaming all the time then there is the potential that not only his personal information (ie. phone call with the wife) but also information regarding the general public will be exposed. What if the camera picks up the computer screen while he's running a warrant check?

Try this on for size, a cop responds to a traffic accident where a victim was ejected and had their head crushed. There's no reason that should become a public record. Here's one that happened to me. I was investigating possible damage to an aircraft we had on static display. The hatch was open and when I approached I could hear voices inside. Turned out that there were three kids in there hanging out (probably more than that). One of the kids was a 15 year old female. As she raised her arms so I could visually check her waist her sweatshirt pulled up and her tits popped out. There's no reason for that to be public either.

Perhaps the most dangerous aspect of all cops wearing cameras all the time is that people like you and many others in this thread would use that streaming to scour the feeds for absolutely anything the cops did wrong and then sue the department. It would put an incredible chill on the ability of the cops to perform their duties and would likely cost the taxpayers of the municipalities millions of dollars every year in idiot legal expenses.

 

[Chomsky]

Yep. There is no valid reason against body and dash cams... or for filming cops yourself. Only dirty cops benefit from no cameras.

My kids are late teen and early twenties, and their tech savvy friends are now starting to cell cam video their police encounters as a group. I guess it's a college thing.

I considered doing this and haven't decided, but may just start my phone recording while leaving it in my pocket during the contact, so I have an inobtrusive audio record of the event. This is exactly how the Chicago law against police recordings was found to be unConstitutional - it was via a cell phone set to record an audio recording of a stripper being forced to have sex with the local police, in return to them cutting her boyfriend lose. This seems like a reasonable method to record the interaction without inciting the officer's animosity.

But if I ever do openly record video and were to be questioned about it, I think I would just politely say "for both of our safety", while emphasizing "both" and being friendly and polite about it.

I suspect as the years go on and more and more recording takes place, the police stigma to being recorded will recede.

 

[Lutherf]

And where's a cop? Public property...no expectation of privacy. It is most certainly not unreasonable to protect the municipality from lawsuits. And protect an officer's job and reputation. They are already in use, so obviously, they pass muster.

Maggie, if you want to give the cops an option to wear a camera that's one thing but when cameras are not only mandated but the officer is to be penalized because at some point the camera didn't work or didn't pick up what the public wanted it to pick up is way outside the bounds of reason.

 

[Lutherf]

Are you fine with people video taping cops while they are doing their job?

I don't have a problem with that under most circumstances. There are situations where photographing the cops and streaming video of what they are doing is inappropriate and possibly dangerous. For example, if the cops are set up on a barricaded suspect I have no problem with them preventing people from filming them. In a case like that there's the possibility that someone filming is actually an accomplice of the suspect and that the video is being used to feed information to that suspect.

 

[polgara]

If a cop's camera is on and streaming all the time then there is the potential that not only his personal information (ie. phone call with the wife) but also information regarding the general public will be exposed. What if the camera picks up the computer screen while he's running a warrant check?

Try this on for size, a cop responds to a traffic accident where a victim was ejected and had their head crushed. There's no reason that should become a public record. Here's one that happened to me. I was investigating possible damage to an aircraft we had on static display. The hatch was open and when I approached I could hear voices inside. Turned out that there were three kids in there hanging out (probably more than that). One of the kids was a 15 year old female. As she raised her arms so I could visually check her waist her sweatshirt pulled up and her tits popped out. There's no reason for that to be public either.

Perhaps the most dangerous aspect of all cops wearing cameras all the time is that people like you and many others in this thread would use that streaming to scour the feeds for absolutely anything the cops did wrong and then sue the department. It would put an incredible chill on the ability of the cops to perform their duties and would likely cost the taxpayers of the municipalities millions of dollars every year in idiot legal expenses.

Greetings, Lutherf. :2wave:

Logical arguments! :thumbs: I'll be interested in reading the responses, pro and con.

 

[Bodi]

My kids are late teen and early twenties, and their tech savvy friends are now starting to cell cam video their police encounters as a group. I guess it's a college thing.

I considered doing this and haven't decided, but may just start my phone recording while leaving it in my pocket during the contact, so I have an inobtrusive audio record of the event. This is exactly how the Chicago law against police recordings was found to be unConstitutional - it was via a cell phone set to record an audio recording of a stripper being forced to have sex with the local police, in return to them cutting her boyfriend lose. This seems like a reasonable method to record the interaction without inciting the officer's animosity.

But if I ever do openly record video and were to be questioned about it, I think I would just politely say "for both of our safety", while emphasizing "both" and being friendly and polite about it.

I suspect as the years go on and more and more recording takes place, the police stigma to being recorded will recede.

Reasonable. I told my daughters when we are in the States and if I get pulled over to film the entire encounter. I will to and do exactly what you said... tell them it is for both our safety.

 

[Bodi]

Maggie, if you want to give the cops an option to wear a camera that's one thing but when cameras are not only mandated but the officer is to be penalized because at some point the camera didn't work or didn't pick up what the public wanted it to pick up is way outside the bounds of reason.

Obviously reasonable common sense would apply... if a camera is found to be faulty the cop would not be in trouble. I thought we were CLEARLY stating that when the cop "forgets" to turn it on or when the cop turns it off. That is 100% different from what you are arguing.

 

[Moot]

If a cop's camera is on and streaming all the time then there is the potential that not only his personal information (ie. phone call with the wife) but also information regarding the general public will be exposed. What if the camera picks up the computer screen while he's running a warrant check?

I don't think cop's body- cams live stream...if they stream at all. Nor do I think the body-cam's allow the cop to view the footage. He/she has to go back to the cop shop to do that. So it begs the question...how would he know his body cam was being hacked while he's wearing it?

Try this on for size, a cop responds to a traffic accident where a victim was ejected and had their head crushed. There's no reason that should become a public record. Here's one that happened to me. I was investigating possible damage to an aircraft we had on static display. The hatch was open and when I approached I could hear voices inside. Turned out that there were three kids in there hanging out (probably more than that). One of the kids was a 15 year old female. As she raised her arms so I could visually check her waist her sweatshirt pulled up and her tits popped out. There's no reason for that to be public either.

Again...the cop's body cam's don't live stream. So you can forget that excuse.

Out of respect and privacy for the victims...the police don't usually release videos of smashed heads and private body parts without blocking out the faces and private body parts. Again, that's not a good excuse for removing the body cam.

Perhaps the most dangerous aspect of all cops wearing cameras all the time is that people like you and many others in this thread would use that streaming to scour the feeds for absolutely anything the cops did wrong and then sue the department. It would put an incredible chill on the ability of the cops to perform their duties and would likely cost the taxpayers of the municipalities millions of dollars every year in idiot legal expenses.

That's the stupidest excuse of all. Good luck to the cop that tries to use that excuse for not wearing a body cam.

 

[Bodi]

I don't have a problem with that under most circumstances. There are situations where photographing the cops and streaming video of what they are doing is inappropriate and possibly dangerous. For example, if the cops are set up on a barricaded suspect I have no problem with them preventing people from filming them. In a case like that there's the possibility that someone filming is actually an accomplice of the suspect and that the video is being used to feed information to that suspect.

They hold people back in those circumstances and we are talking about speeding stops, asking for ID at an immigration post, etc.

 

[apdst]

If the body-cam shows a scuffle before hand...then it might be a reasonable defense that it wasn't the cops fault that the body camera fell off...or malfunctioned. If it was the later that could easily be proven by examining the body-camera itself. If was the former then the body-cam would still show what led up to the altercation.

What if there's no, "scuffle", and the body-cam malfunctions? Then what?

 

[apdst]

...and how often does that happen? Probably not much at all or we would be hearing about it.

Let's not pretend that any of this equipment is 100% reliable.

 

[Lutherf]

I don't think cop's body- cams live stream...if they stream at all. Nor do I think the body-cam's allow the cop to view the footage. He/she has to go back to the cop shop to do that. So it begs the question...how would he know his body cam was being hacked while he's wearing it?


Again...the cop's body cam's don't live stream. So you can forget that excuse.

Out of respect and privacy for the victims...the police don't usually release videos of smashed heads and private body parts without blocking out the faces and private body parts. Again, that's not a good excuse for removing the body cam.

That's the stupidest excuse of all. Good luck to the cop that tries to use that excuse for not wearing a body cam.

I thought it was you that brought up streaming but I guess it was Chomsky - http://www.debatepolitics.com/breaking-news-non-msm/260737-cops-kill-leave-their-body-cameras-turned-off.html#post1066176438
Anyway, it was something proposed in this thread.

As far as how the cop would know the stream was being hacked...he probably wouldn't but if an individual or a group did manage to hack the cameras that would likely become evident over time as cops found less and less perps in the vicinity after complaint calls. Criminals are funny that way, when they know the police are on their way they generally take off.

You guys are all talking about cops being required to wear cameras all the time so that the public can monitor them. This whole thing is based on the presumption that cops are generally corrupt and that the public must go to great lengths to protect themselves from that corruption. What would the point be for the cops to have everything they do videotaped and then give the cops exclusive access to that tape?

 

[apdst]

Exactly. The camera gets ripped off the cops chest in a fight, the perp goes free and the cop gets hooked up. Hooray for America!

The camera just up and stops working? I'm sure these cameras have a life span, just like any other piece of technology.

What I see, is The Constitution thrown right out the window when it comes to officer involved shootings. But, then again, that's the Left's ultimate goal.

 

[Bodi]

Let's not pretend that any of this equipment is 100% reliable.

Is somebody pretending that? **** em up apdst!!