Two NYPD Cops Charged for Kidnapping Teen, Cuffing Her, Then Raping Her in Their Van

a reply to: TrueBrit

Yes necessarily.

The biggest reasons that BWCs don't record continuously is a) battery power and b) storage space. Both of those cost money.

Using NYPD as an example: NYPD has a sworn strength of about 35,000 officers. I have no idea what their schedule is like, but using a lowball number let's say on any given day 15,000 of those officers work an eight hour shift. That's 120,000 hours of video, per day, that needs to be stored.

So, not only do you have to purchase BWCs that are capable of running beyond eight hours a day, you have to have storage capability for hundreds of thousands of hours of video data per week. Which costs money.

None of which touches on a cop's expectation of privacy while he or she is taking a dump or talking to his or her spouse while on their break.

a reply to: Shamrock6

Go pros have a high capacity battery option, which permits twelve hours of continuous use.

The cloud has space in it. The money is not as important as preventing cops from getting away with the things they arrest others for.

And as for cops expectations of privacy, well... perhaps they do not belong in the job, unless they are willing to endure these things. Unless one loves justice more than oneself, perhaps one ought to be in a different line of work?

a reply to: TrueBrit

"The money is not important" is not any kind of an argument. The money has to come from somewhere. That isn't up for debate. Kinda like how you can't just wave a magic wand to make guns disappear, you can't wave a magic wand to make money not an issue.

And, to be frank, the "argument" that you shouldn't go in to law enforcement unless you're willing to be recorded taking a # is borderline retarded.

a reply to: Shamrock6

No, what is borderline retarded, is having a nation with a military budget so large that everything else going on in the country takes a back seat, while vital investment in things like maintaining moral quality of police officers, ensuring highest degrees of training, and ensuring that nothing that happens off the job, happens off the record, go completely ignored, undone, undealt with, and STILL officers are not held to the same standards, leave alone the proper, higher standard that citizens should expect from officers of the law.

THAT is ALL that matters. It IS as simple as waving a wand... over the military budget, to make it smaller, and promote spending in other areas.

a reply to: TrueBrit

Neat.

Get flapping with that wand then.

I'm really not interested in debating why the military budget is as big as it is. You tried to make it seem as if it's some supremely easy thing to get every cop in the country fitted with a continuously recording bodycam. I presented information to the contrary. The defense budget is completely irrelevant to that, because the fact remains that the defense budget is what it is, and isn't what it isn't.

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: Shamrock6

No, what is borderline retarded, is having a nation with a military budget so large that everything else going on in the country takes a back seat, while vital investment in things like maintaining moral quality of police officers, ensuring highest degrees of training, and ensuring that nothing that happens off the job, happens off the record, go completely ignored, undone, undealt with, and STILL officers are not held to the same standards, leave alone the proper, higher standard that citizens should expect from officers of the law.

THAT is ALL that matters. It IS as simple as waving a wand... over the military budget, to make it smaller, and promote spending in other areas.

So letme get this straight your plan to improve local police forces is have the feds pay for it? I think having the federal government run anything especially the police would be a disaster. Government would destroy our police forces in record time all the while riding around in their new antipersonel carriers.

This is what happens when a population does nothing to reign in abusive authority. You all talk the talk from behind your computers but do NOTHING in real life to keep your authorities in check. You all hope someone else is going to do it.
The way the world is going, this type of abuse will only increase as police powers increase and the officers themselves feel and become untouchable.
DON'T lay ANY blame on anyone, until you yourselves have done something other than complain on your keyboards.

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: Shamrock6

No, what is borderline retarded, is having a nation with a military budget so large that everything else going on in the country takes a back seat, while vital investment in things like maintaining moral quality of police officers, ensuring highest degrees of training, and ensuring that nothing that happens off the job, happens off the record, go completely ignored, undone, undealt with, and STILL officers are not held to the same standards, leave alone the proper, higher standard that citizens should expect from officers of the law.

In principle, I completely agree with you on the above. It's embarrassing when we live in what's arguably the most prosperous country to have ever existed yet can't take care of the poorest amongst us and having a failing, archaic infrastructure from bridges and highways to our ancient electrical grid that makes isn't highly susceptible to opportunistic terrors attacks yet our annual Military budget outspends the 6 next largest Militaries on Earth combined. It's an embarrassment to be quite honest

THAT is ALL that matters. It IS as simple as waving a wand... over the military budget, to make it smaller, and promote spending in other areas.

However, as east as it sounds, it's not just waving a magic wand here. You're talking about 10th amendment issues and States rights vs. Federal involvement in what is a localized, in this specific case, City issue. We can't just have the federal government taking over city police departments as it comes with it a own host of problems. I've seen it first hand in nearby Schenectady where the DoJ essentially took over their cities PD due to multiple human rights and constitutional rights violations. And then the other side of that coin is that Fedetal Agencies are just a star notorious for their corruption and graft as their localized small city counterparts. If you think that the FBI, DEA, ICE or NSA to name
Just a few are free of rights abuses and insane levels of corruption we may not have much to discuss lol. Especially when those very agencies justify their funding by increasing arrests and prosecutions, whether those arrests and prosecutions have an iota of merit or not. Once it becomes about federal dollars, it
Becomes a matter of too many mouth and not nearly enough teets.

What would be more beneficial would be to narrow the disparity and make the LEO's more accountable. The tax payers are the only ones who lose here because while the crooked cops are on paid administrative leave pending an investigation, we pay their salaries and then when they're found guilty in a civil suit, we pay yet again. There's no liability or personal stake for the LEO's and even when there is plenty of incriminating evidence, their union reps and attorneys still drag it through the mud, blame the victims and whine about how tight their jobs are as public servants. And it's nothing but BS. If they were actual public servants, they wouldn't be kidnapping 18 year old girls at gun point, handcuffing them and forcing them to perform vile sex acts on them. They are many things but public servants...
Not even close. They serve only themselves. Every cop that stands by them, everynunion tep and every attorney fighting for their acquittal should be equally liable. Until there isn't personal liability, they will continue to act with impunity because there are zero repercussions for their actions. More federal dollars isn't going to change that other than to have a larger pool of tax dollars for them to evade charges with.

a reply to: dragonridr

No. The Feds simply hand the money that comes from not over spending on defence contracts anymore, to the local P.D., then the local P.D. purchases the damned cameras and storage space required, and runs the damned system as it ought to be. That is not the same thing, in the least, nor is it the same as the Feds "running" a police department in any way, shape or form.

a reply to: peter vlar

I am not suggesting that the Federal government have any power over the police department at all, just that they should damned will give them some funding, without central government oversight. Oversight of the spending of that money should be by a citizen panel, organised by local authorities for the purposes of preventing that money being spent on anything which speeds militarisation. That way, it only gets spent on things which actually improve the quality of policing by way of correctly connecting the flaws in policing, with the funding to cover their correction.

a reply to: Shamrock6

Using NYPD as an example: NYPD has a sworn strength of about 35,000 officers. I have no idea what their schedule is like, but using a lowball number let's say on any given day 15,000 of those officers work an eight hour shift. That's 120,000 hours of video, per day, that needs to be stored.

Not all that data needs to be stored, the only data that needs to be stored is when an incident occurs. I'm not talking about the many daily interactions, I'm mean the ones that go pair shaped, when an incident occurs a report is made and subsequently video is kept and stored.

Sure that doesn't cover the dirty ones who do not call in and or report an incident but I would imagine they are few and far between.

a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

Let me see if I understand: have cops wear BWCs that record continuously but that only upload information in case of some sort of interaction? I don’t really see how that solves anything because that’s essentially how it works now.

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed
a reply to: Shamrock6

Using NYPD as an example: NYPD has a sworn strength of about 35,000 officers. I have no idea what their schedule is like, but using a lowball number let's say on any given day 15,000 of those officers work an eight hour shift. That's 120,000 hours of video, per day, that needs to be stored.

Not all that data needs to be stored, the only data that needs to be stored is when an incident occurs. I'm not talking about the many daily interactions, I'm mean the ones that go pair shaped, when an incident occurs a report is made and subsequently video is kept and stored.

Sure that doesn't cover the dirty ones who do not call in and or report an incident but I would imagine they are few and far between.

Problemisyouwouldhave to store everything you wouldnt know there was an incident until later. Forexample in this case until a lawyer filed the suit the police didnt know.policeinvestigations can happen weeks after the incident.

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: dragonridr

No. The Feds simply hand the money that comes from not over spending on defence contracts anymore, to the local P.D., then the local P.D. purchases the damned cameras and storage space required, and runs the damned system as it ought to be. That is not the same thing, in the least, nor is it the same as the Feds "running" a police department in any way, shape or form.

So your suggestion is the federal govt give money to local police??? Well they do that all ready thats usually about half of the police budgets. They receive federal state and local funds. The largest is the federal dollars in most policedepartments there are exceptions however like beverly hills.

Instead of trying things that wouldntwork the police departments should hold supervisors accountable for the people under their command. They are the first lineof defence in finding and removing bad police officers. Whenever a cop is suspended a supervisorshould be as well.

a reply to: dragonridr

And the trouble is, that this amount appears to be too little to handle the cost of the very necessary body cameras, and the storage capacity to run them on all officers during every moment of their duty cycle.

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: dragonridr

And the trouble is, that this amount appears to be too little to handle the cost of the very necessary body cameras, and the storage capacity to run them on all officers during every moment of their duty cycle.

Thats because the cost could put another 100 officers or more on the streets. The expenses would kill their budgets and if they received more money they spend it on hiring and equipment and training. Reminds me of clinton Bill wanted to add 100000 officers. Feds gave more money states spent it to buy new police cars. The problem is supplying video storing it man hours for maintaining it and the contracts for repairing them out weigh there usefulness. Cops easily learn how to keep the camera pointed in the wrong direction. And when there is an incident your videos is of the street or the sky or another officers back. Go look at the body cams they released in vegas then tell me they would be usefull. One of them i saw was 5 min of staring at a curb.

Not to mention the expenses would be in the trillions of dollars range.

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

Let me see if I understand: have cops wear BWCs that record continuously but that only upload information in case of some sort of interaction? I don’t really see how that solves anything because that’s essentially how it works now.

The camera is rolling and recording, you could even go as far as to have it on a loop , if nobody is shot, or arrested and ends up dead somewhere between pick up and drop off, no need to store the info, right ?

Surely most interactions between police and civilians have no dramas, on the odd occasion when it does go wrong you don't press the button that deletes it.

If the delete button is pressed fair to say that someone has something to hide.

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

Let me see if I understand: have cops wear BWCs that record continuously but that only upload information in case of some sort of interaction? I don’t really see how that solves anything because that’s essentially how it works now.

The camera is rolling and recording, you could even go as far as to have it on a loop , if nobody is shot, or arrested and ends up dead somewhere between pick up and drop off, no need to store the info, right ?

Surely most interactions between police and civilians have no dramas, on the odd occasion when it does go wrong you don't press the button that deletes it.

If the delete button is pressed fair to say that someone has something to hide.

Then what do you do 3 weeks later when the person files a law suit?

originally posted by: dragonridr

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

Let me see if I understand: have cops wear BWCs that record continuously but that only upload information in case of some sort of interaction? I don’t really see how that solves anything because that’s essentially how it works now.

The camera is rolling and recording, you could even go as far as to have it on a loop , if nobody is shot, or arrested and ends up dead somewhere between pick up and drop off, no need to store the info, right ?

Surely most interactions between police and civilians have no dramas, on the odd occasion when it does go wrong you don't press the button that deletes it.

If the delete button is pressed fair to say that someone has something to hide.

Then what do you do 3 weeks later when the person files a law suit?

So freddy gray his lawyer would have filed a case 3 weeks later and no information or video ? Eric garner was that his name the guy selling the cigarettes illegally, surely your can see the problem here, the cases that are filed weeks later are generally not major issues, compared at least to someone getting in the wagon and winding up dead back at the station.

The video recording are not for someone suing the police weeks later because they were unhappy with their treatment, the video is the to record major incidents that result in either the death and injury of cops and or civilians.

a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

I’m still not following how this solves anything.

One, that’s essentially how body cams work now.

Two, the overwhelming majority of interactions don’t result in death. By a massive majority. And the overwhelming majority of complaints are not about situations that resulted in death.