Use of force DROPS DRAMATICALLY when police forced to wear cameras.

I can speak from experience here when I say that simply having your beating filmed is not enough to guarantee justice. I was beaten in a police department while about 8 officers joined in and the dispatcher watched while all of this was being filmed. Somehow that footage disappeared . I was denied access to an attorney and family and was held in solitary for over a week til my wounds healed before being allowed to see a judge. I don't trust this footage as long as the police and crooked DA's and judges have access to it as well to aid in covering for their buddies. In the end charges were dropped but only after they made damn sure I had no way to prove their wrong doing or demand justice.

I do happen to know that many police cars use wireless to transmit their video footage from their cars to a central location at some stations when they drive in. I think this idea should be expanded on and the videos should be maintained by an independent agency.

ATTENTION!!



--------------------------------------------

This just in........


Children behave better when parents are watching!!!!

That is all.

reply to post by VeritasAequitas

Look, I'm all in favor of a surveillance State.

So long as its us monitoring THEM.

Originally posted by ownbestenemy
While good news, my questions stem from the following: was appropriate use of force abated because of the cameras? Did officers who were forced to wear them, feel they should "hold back" in fear of such a study as this? While the use of force should be the very last option of any person, including officers, did this modify behavior badly?

I can understand your concern; you fear that the officers may start "pussyfooting" around while doing their duties and may put themselves or the public in danger rather than use force in a situation where it would be necessary or appropriate.

There is nothing in this (rather limited, I'll admit) study to indicate that anything like that happened. They even mention that officers were caught on video using force during the study, just not as much as the non-camera wearing cops.

I think the balance of power has shifted to such an extent that, even if it causes "pussyfooting" on the part of the officers, it would be worth it. It has come to the point that the public is starting to fear the police more than the criminals. Police abuse has been going on unchecked for too long and something needs to be done to bring it under control.

If this does cause a problem with "pussyfooting" then, eventually the police will overcome this reluctance through better training as they become more accustomed to having their every move watched.

IMO, police using too little force is to be much preferred over them abusing their authority and using too much.

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000

Originally posted by Wertdagf
reply to post by FortAnthem

 

This could also mean that 88% were false complaints which were deterred because of the recordings.

Oh, wait this is ATS! We have to assume all law enforcement are in league with Satan.

I was actually thinking along similar lines. If not false complaints, then outright dumb behavior that would otherwise have happened, making police response necessary ..if not for the cameras the bad guys can see too. Unless killing the cop to get the recording is the plan (and is the recording even on the cop or sent to the car?) then anything stupid will be the main exhibit at a very short trial and enough people a cop comes into regular contact with would know that, too.

That would be as much a deterrence to anyone who had been into the system before as it would be the cop who doesn't need his own stupid moves on tape, IMO.

Watching the UK version of 'Cops', where there is a film crew with them on the beat has shown me that none of those arrested gave a da*n. First they shout abuse at the camera person, then they still try to escape, insult the Police and kick and scream. I could not see any better behaviour by those arrested at all, but I did see the Police pulling themselves together a little more. In one clip, the officer was about to punch the detained [who actually deserved it but that is another thread] but didn't as he remembered the camera was there. This wasn't a violent cop though, he was just human [ the perp had just thrown a young officer onto the curb who lay unconscious and bleeding].
In short: Yes I think it is a good idea to have cameras for the Police and no, I don't think it makes any difference to actual criminals.

Seems everyone here is jumping at the chance to put surveillance directly on the officers...

Let me be the first to say that this idea, if followed through to include all of the police forces everywhere, would backfire with unintended consequences that could make things much worse than they are now, and move the NWO agenda one giant step forward.

The only answer is a culture of law enforcement that keeps itself in check. Getting there could be hard, but not impossible. Putting cameras on the cops gives them power as well, which can also be abused, especially when our rights seem to be disappearing on a daily basis. Believe me when I say, this is not the answer.

I have supported the use of cop mounted cameras for some time now. I have been actively trying to get my department to not only order them for every officer, but to make a SOP/DGO to make it mandatory to wear them.

I too believe that it would truly decrease the amount of police abuse issues. To me there is no question. However one poster is right, there is tech that allows the video to be transmitted wireless to a server at the PD when an officer pulls in. IMHO only a small percentage of cops are bad/corrupt. However I do acknowledge that there are some bad ones and having an independent entity handle the video would be a good idea.

Also it does protect the offcer as well! I know most of the prejiduce, blanket statement making, ATS cop bashers won't believe me but people make up complaints about us all the time! I have been the victim of false complaints on multiple occassions. The most recent one was not a use of force issue but from a women who said I criticzed her for having tattoos. The funny thing is I never met this women in person. I only had a phone conversation with her. Oh and I have tattoos on every arm and leg (half sleeve on my right arm). When my supervisor confronted her with the lie she hung up the phone.

I have also been complained on for "roughing" up a student when searching them for a gun. This complaint came from not only the student, but from his grandmother. They said that I grabbed him by the shoulders and slammed him face first against the gym wall. The funny thing is they didn't know there was video of the incident. So when they were shown that I simply cuffed him and searched him never even going near a wall they got pissed and dropped the complaint.

So in closing I think this should absolutely be a requirement. Not only does it protect the citizen, but the officer as well. Both equally important things.

Why spend the money on something that could reduce abuses when there are so many Bearcats and surplus armor and weapons to buy?

Also I think educating the public on police procedure/use of force is very important too. Let's face it there are cop bashers that think everytime a cop has to use physical force it's abuse. Police work is not always pretty.

That's why when people talk about mythical good cops, I don't believe them. The forces are dedicating budgets to bigger weapons and more armor so they are safer. Cameras and systems to run them for public safety aren't usually on the shopping list.

Fascist Pigs

It's easy to bang on officers for using force, but you HAVE to cut them some slack. Any run they go on or respond to could result in their death. Their DEATH. When I get a call from my desk I am not worried that someone will ambush me with guns when I get there.

I believe being recorded results in both the police officers AND THE CITIZENS being calmer and less prone to violent actions. How many cases out there do you think there are where criminals bait a cop and then later claim they were victims of abuse?

Tables.

Oh how I love when they turn.

This does get the conspiratorial mind thinking, however.

One has to ask, is this a push to get the anti-surveillance state folk to jump on the Big Brother bandwagon? They watch our lives with voyeur eyes, and now they watch themselves. Seems fair, right?

Depends on how susceptible these cameras are to “inconvenient malfunction.” We shall see.

Great thread Fort...although I had to laugh when you used the term "pussyfooting".....your avatar is doing some pretty fancy foot work....love it.....

88% decrease in citizen complaints of excessive force certainly is DRAMATIC, and sure seems to suggest these cameras are a great idea and should be mandatory in all police departments. If the reality has become that police are expected to be "bill collectors" now...and use quotas to generate revenues for the State based on punitive laws that don't impose threat to the general public, then we at the very least have a right to not be bullied, harassed and harmed in this 'extortion" process.

It's no surprise the cops involved in this study were less then enthusiastic, it must take a lot of mental gymnastics to justify this inanity, and when confronted with citizens who rightly challenge their abuse of power, like most people they become defensive, only with a cop it has a greater potential to become violent.

It reminds me of confronting a teenager when they get caught doing something wrong, oh my the tantrums, a sure indication they KNOW they are wrong, thankfully most people grow out of this behavior because at some point they learn it's not the right way to behave.

Originally posted by WeRpeons
It's clear when people know they're on camera, their behavior changes dramatically. It not only applies to police officers, but also people in other professions.

In psychology I believe its called the Hawthorne Effect i.e. a change in behaviour as a result of being studied/observed.

reply to post by Hecate666

This wasn't a violent cop though, he was just human [ the perp had just thrown a young officer onto the curb who lay unconscious and bleeding].
In short: Yes I think it is a good idea to have cameras for the Police and no, I don't think it makes any difference to actual criminals.

You had a cop down, unconscious by the direct actions of the bad guy they were holding right there? The cop was STILL down and out cold? Yet...your cop was only fighting the urge to punch the punk?

I have to say, in some ways British police baffle me because I've spent every day of my life under and around cops who are armed to the teeth with access to as much more as one could ever imagine needing in an emergency. They use force when kind words would do more ....and woe be the fool to hurt a cop here. Oh..that'll be the last rational thing a guy likely remembers for a day or two ...waking in Hospital. lol... (only half kidding of course)

...on the other hand, I respect your cops all the more for it. It's so easy, obviously, to keep chewing the cud of paranoia, once started ...and it just adds more and more armor, weapons and hostility to face the shadows than could ever be made sense of. Your side doesn't sound like they have really started down that road for street cops yet.

I hope they never do in the same way our side has.

This hardly a surprise.. it brings accountability into the picture.. they have to think about procedures rather than just acting tough..

It's like the situation in new york, the kid kept getting stopped and searched for no reason.. the cops would man handle him, so when he saw the police the last time he started recording on his phone and stuck it in his pocket.. you could hear just how horrible the police were behaving.. Had those officers been forced to wear a camera then the situation wouldn't have happened..

When it comes to police it's always your word against theirs unless you have a witness to back you up.. and they will almost ALWAYS believe the cop over you.

When the officer is wearing a camera, it will keep the behaviour of all involved on a more formal level. Yes it will protect the officer as well. He/she will get better behaviour out of those he is in contact with.

The problem is that the camera scrutinises ALL who come into view. The incedents where people are stopped and harassed will sky rocket, and the bad apples will use the camera as an excuse to pry into business that they have no reason to pry into. An extra set of eyes at all times means that a cop can look at something that would normally be off limits to him. He can use the excuse that he was only passing by, and noticed some "evidence of a crime" and now will not be accused of infringing on the rights of the public.

At least in the Drug war, there are cases every year, that origionally start as a "traffic stop" that turns into an arrest. But it has been shown that government organisations are actually tracking that individual without warrants, and the "pre-investigation" never even makes it into court. Now with the aid of cameras on every officer, the amount of evidence that comes in as "suspicious activity" will bloom into something that we cannot imagine now.

And then we will start to see recordings that have been manipulated, but since it is big brother...

Folks, I don't think this is something we should be pushing for, just think about it. Do we really want to move into a world where even more is monitored than already is???

Again, I think the answer is in creating a cop culture where officers have to keep each other in check. If there is anything we need to be talking about it is how we nurture that idea.

Originally posted by jjkenobi
It's easy to bang on officers for using force, but you HAVE to cut them some slack. Any run they go on or respond to could result in their death. Their DEATH. When I get a call from my desk I am not worried that someone will ambush me with guns when I get there.

I believe being recorded results in both the police officers AND THE CITIZENS being calmer and less prone to violent actions. How many cases out there do you think there are where criminals bait a cop and then later claim they were victims of abuse?

I do not have any sources right now to back this up but it is easily verifiable that officers kill more people than officers killed by people. I used to work for a large police charity that would give money to the families of police officers who had been killed in the line of duty. In some states we never had a pay out in others no more than 2 or so in 10 years. I think the threats to police are exaggerated.

Good idea,

Also works both ways, so now when the police are abused by some offenders, they are justified in using the taser.

This could possible save on the law suits being filed as well.

2Nd