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

reply to post by FortAnthem

Do self conscious people behave more "morally" as though they're on camara? Broadly speaking, is there a circuit in the brain that causes us to become more critical of ourselves?

Of course, justice depends on the community forming a common definition. People may not know what the definition is or may have their own. So we do need camaras...

Here's a purview on the subject of prejudiced self assessment:
starcasm.net - STUDY We are actually less attractive than we think...
www.apa.org - Why we overestimate our competence...

first of all your avatar is awesome. second, S&F

Maybe suspects were more well behaved when the cops were wearing cameras than those that weren't.

They really need to do a third study. what happens when the cop is wearing a dummy camera? The cop will know it's fake but not the suspects. Are the suspects more co-operative?

Originally posted by stormcell

They really need to do a third study. what happens when the cop is wearing a dummy camera? The cop will know it's fake but not the suspects. Are the suspects more co-operative?

The first time they get a complaint about police brutality and the victim demands the tape of the incident and all of a sudden, oops, there ain't one.

It'll make the department look like they're covering up for the bad cop by "losing" the evidence.

Not a good idea at all. :shk:

I'd like to see one cam on the glasses, one cam mounted to each shoulder, and one that was mounted somewhere on the chest in the Kevlar. One camera isn't enough.

I love this concept of LEO's wearing cameras, but I think the study should include a group of officers who historically used force and officers whose track record showed less force used on the job along with a group of randomly chosen officers. One more thing, the officers used in the study have to work the shift/area that is equal in terms of coming across criminals, danger, risk factor,

Originally posted by stormcell
Maybe suspects were more well behaved when the cops were wearing cameras than those that weren't.

They really need to do a third study. what happens when the cop is wearing a dummy camera? The cop will know it's fake but not the suspects. Are the suspects more co-operative?

There was a mall security guard who got his 15 mins of fame for taking no B.S. and kicking gang members and drug dealers out of the mall. In an interview he said his greatest tool was his camera. Nobody in their right mind wants to be recorded doing something wrong whether you're a cop, criminal, or an average citizen. Of course you have some people that act like an a-hole towards cops and some might become more enraged if a cop told them they were being recorded.

Originally posted by defcon5

Originally posted by Wertdagf
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.

More likely it stops the sarcastic remarks that police use to push people into a confrontation with them. They are experts are being smug smart asses when they think they can get away with it. Wearing these forces them to treat everyone with an amount of professional courtesy, common decency, and politeness.

Yes it does, "to protect and to serve" where did that one go??

Originally posted by defcon5

Originally posted by Wertdagf
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.

More likely it stops the sarcastic remarks that police use to push people into a confrontation with them. They are experts are being smug smart asses when they think they can get away with it. Wearing these forces them to treat everyone with an amount of professional courtesy, common decency, and politeness.

Damned straight. If you work at the mall, in a fast food place, in a big warehouse and in thousands of other businesses, your every move is being recorded and watched by your employers via cameras. It's only fair that such an important job should be supervised by the public (law enforcement being paid by our tax dollars and all).

Forcing them to be held accountable for everything they do is the only way to go here. We're talking about saving lives (less violence) and saving jail space for those who really deserve to be there. That video should be streamed to a separate watch dog agency in order to prevent bad cops from covering for each other by making incriminating videos disappear. I know that corruption can reach these agencies as well, but it will be a little harder to accomplish.

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.

Good, then both sides win! Cops are protected from false allegations and people are protected from False Cops. I say cameras for everybody!

I can see contradictions here - melting 2 common arguments into 1...

The assumption is that more police cameras on police officers = less police crime.
(Although we don't know this.)

So it's ok for a police officer to have a camera attached onto them.

Does this mean it's ok for the police to install cameras in areas to prevent crime?.

Limbo

I suggest that cameras should be mandatory equipment then.

Where cameras are plainly visible in a store, home, etc..., crime is dramatically reduced as well.

I'm sure there's no connection.

More cameras.. just what we need.

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.

So we've now determined that the civilians knew about the cameras and further more they knew which officers had them?

Originally posted by TorqueyThePig
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.

edit on 16-8-2013 by TorqueyThePig because: (no reason given)

Most people understand that police sometimes have to detain/restrain individuals but when 2 grow men throw grandmas and pregnant women to the ground because they raised their voice or some other expression of dissent it is not right. This either means the police themselves have been trained to view every citizen as a potential enemy which is just statistically wrong or the recruiting procedures, oversight, and administrators are wrong for allowing hot heads (or perhaps its roid rage?) to become officers in the first place. I am not even mentioning the just outright incidents of abuse like taking people to back rooms/alleys , turning off the camera and other gross abuses. Clean up your own house if you want people to respect you again.

Why do you think Bloomberg is having such fits over the judge suggestingthis for nNYC.

Obviously recording public servants actions while on duty for the public is an amazing idea, and may force all of them into doing their jobs properly. But such a system needs real oversight, it cannot be trusted to the same departments being monitored, but an independent organization must be created solely for monitoring public servants. A branch of intelligence could be dedicated to this alone, a revolving door sort of institution. A bunch of techies making sure all the data is being stored and is labled in such a way that it can be easily found once any questionable activity happens - or a citizen/witness/suspect files a claim, a review board should then be assembled similar to how we assemble jury duties; maybe some purposeful selection - i.e. one cop who knows how hard it can be, and someone who just hate cops because of bad experiences with them in the past. And then a bunch of people with minimal experience with the law. They go over the footage, the written statements, etc. Provided there were a few honest people in the system of public servitude, then the tools would be in place to enable these people to stand up and report someone who is doing wrong. However, if the institution were to become grounded in the same employees, they would become tempted by the same things that corrupt those who act in self-interest instead of public-interest now.

Of course no public servant is going to be lobbying for this "MUH PRIVACY, MUH FREEDOM, MUH CONSTITUTION". The only time any of those things matter is when there's the threat of inconvenience for someone powerful.

Originally posted by votan
More cameras.. just what we need.

A camera should be on any civil servant who has the power of life and death in his/her hands. That kind of responsibility has to come with checks and balances.

Originally posted by votan
More cameras.. just what we need.

Right? I was just thinking of the implications of such. Where does it end?

Next thing you know the cops are lobbying for dashcams in every car for the same effect to slow everyone down etc.. then we find out they're hacking them and on and on it goes.