|
A Fancy Bloke posted:SDPD wants body cams on when guns come out It would also inevitably be faulty. An extra link to the holster that activates the camera as a gun gets pulled out (whether a direct connection or wireless link, mechanical or electronic) provides an extra part of the camera that can fail to activate reliably....or conveniently "fail to activate" during a suspicious situation. It reminds me of all the efforts to create a gun that has fingerprint or handprint locks and will only fire for the officer holding it, but also never malfunctions and also activates so fast that the officer doesn't end up drawing and trying to shoot with a deactivated gun and doesn't need to be drawn and held in a specific way to let the reader actually work.
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2015 18:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 13:58 |
|
|
My Go Pro battery lasts like 4 hours for constant recording why don't they just use those and swap the batteries out mid shift?
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2015 19:08
|
|
|
serious gaylord posted:My Go Pro battery lasts like 4 hours for constant recording why don't they just use those and swap the batteries out mid shift? The first thing opponents to always-on cameras give is "It'll record people in moments that shouldn't be recorded, and that is a Bad Thing." The proper response is "Is it as bad as improperly investigated murder?"
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2015 19:24
|
|
|
chitoryu12 posted:It would also inevitably be faulty. An extra link to the holster that activates the camera as a gun gets pulled out (whether a direct connection or wireless link, mechanical or electronic) provides an extra part of the camera that can fail to activate reliably....or conveniently "fail to activate" during a suspicious situation. Dead Reckoning fucked around with this message at 19:32 on Oct 25, 2015 |
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2015 19:29
|
|
|
chitoryu12 posted:The first thing opponents to always-on cameras give is "It'll record people in moments that shouldn't be recorded, and that is a Bad Thing." Who cares? Perhaps if the police were under constant surveillance they'd be less likely to do all the loving shady poo poo they do?
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2015 19:33
|
|
|
Weeee http://www.cbsnews.com/news/chris-christie-black-lives-matter-murder-police-officers/
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2015 19:37
|
|
|
serious gaylord posted:Who cares? Perhaps if the police were under constant surveillance they'd be less likely to do all the loving shady poo poo they do?
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2015 19:41
|
|
|
Mr. Wookums posted:Weeee Got some quality comments in that article. I guess the police union is the one that Christie won't yell at.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2015 19:47
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:There is actually a pretty good argument against always-on cameras. If the footage is subject to FOIA or other disclosure, then TMZ can play full clips of every time a celeb (or anyone else) gets pulled over. If it isn't subject to public disclosure, would you be satisfied that it was an effective supervision mechanism? Even if it isn't, it cuts against community policing: people in rough areas will be much less likely to want to talk to the police if they know they are being recorded. Plus, would you be OK with your boss filming literally every single thing you did during the workday? These same problems apply to dash cams and society hasn't come apart at the seams. It's also not defacto legal for me to murder my boss.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2015 19:50
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:There is actually a pretty good argument against always-on cameras. If the footage is subject to FOIA or other disclosure, then TMZ can play full clips of every time a celeb (or anyone else) gets pulled over. If it isn't subject to public disclosure, would you be satisfied that it was an effective supervision mechanism? Even if it isn't, it cuts against community policing: people in rough areas will be much less likely to want to talk to the police if they know they are being recorded. Plus, would you be OK with your boss filming literally every single thing you did during the workday? Not only should it be public record, it should be streamed in real-time.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2015 19:52
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:There is actually a pretty good argument against always-on cameras. If the footage is subject to FOIA or other disclosure, then TMZ can play full clips of every time a celeb (or anyone else) gets pulled over. If it isn't subject to public disclosure, would you be satisfied that it was an effective supervision mechanism? Even if it isn't, it cuts against community policing: people in rough areas will be much less likely to want to talk to the police if they know they are being recorded. Plus, would you be OK with your boss filming literally every single thing you did during the workday? Do you think that's why police organizations are opposed to it?
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2015 20:03
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:There is actually a pretty good argument against always-on cameras. If the footage is subject to FOIA or other disclosure, then TMZ can play full clips of every time a celeb (or anyone else) gets pulled over. If it isn't subject to public disclosure, would you be satisfied that it was an effective supervision mechanism? Even if it isn't, it cuts against community policing: people in rough areas will be much less likely to want to talk to the police if they know they are being recorded. Plus, would you be OK with your boss filming literally every single thing you did during the workday? Was perfectly OK with it when I did development for a company that made coin counting machines. They had cameras on everything except the bathrooms (I hope). I think they had cameras all over the place at the Starbucks I worked at as a kid. I don't get why this is always brought up as a valid concern. Just do your job correctly. Is that so unreasonable?
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2015 20:04
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:Plus, would you be OK with your boss filming literally every single thing you did during the workday? lol
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2015 20:17
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:Plus, would you be OK with your boss filming literally every single thing you did during the workday? You mean like any job in retail/any handling of money? Don't want to be filmed all day? Don't take the job.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2015 20:20
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:There is actually a pretty good argument against always-on cameras. If the footage is subject to FOIA or other disclosure, then TMZ can play full clips of every time a celeb (or anyone else) gets pulled over. If it isn't subject to public disclosure, would you be satisfied that it was an effective supervision mechanism? Even if it isn't, it cuts against community policing: people in rough areas will be much less likely to want to talk to the police if they know they are being recorded. Plus, would you be OK with your boss filming literally every single thing you did during the workday? Literally none of these "reasons" outweighs the ability always-on cameras would have as an accountability tool.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2015 20:31
|
|
|
Lemming posted:These same problems apply to dash cams and society hasn't come apart at the seams. Dum Cumpster posted:Was perfectly OK with it when I did development for a company that made coin counting machines. They had cameras on everything except the bathrooms (I hope). I think they had cameras all over the place at the Starbucks I worked at as a kid. I don't get why this is always brought up as a valid concern. Also, let's not pretend like there isn't a difference between setting up cameras in a store where people work and monitoring a specific individual. Dead Reckoning fucked around with this message at 20:42 on Oct 25, 2015 |
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2015 20:34
|
|
|
serious gaylord posted:You mean like any job in retail/any handling of money? Don't want to be filmed all day? Don't take the job. yeah that's a ridiculously anti-worker stance. the reason body cams are necessary for police officers isn't that it's a great idea to spy on the working class, it's that police officers have proven themselves to be untrustworthy.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2015 20:36
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:Also, let's not pretend like there isn't a difference between setting up cameras in a store where people work and monitoring a specific individual. You mean like how rooms where money is counted and handled (even if only by one person every time) are constantly monitored by cameras to prevent theft? Because you don't inherently trust 100% of people enough to never commit a crime when given the unmonitored ability to do so?
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2015 20:41
|
|
|
Have it be always on while you're working. You're not working while you're taking a poo poo. They can take it off to go into the bathroom or take a break but are required to have it on when they're active. What's so crazy about that? I don't see the difference if you spend your entire time at work on camera with microphones on them. Dum Cumpster fucked around with this message at 20:44 on Oct 25, 2015 |
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2015 20:42
|
|
|
Like, let's not claim that unlimited surveillance of workers is alright because police officers keep shooting black people, please. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2015 20:43
|
|
|
Personally, I think that people who count money or otherwise handle large amounts of cash during work should be left unmonitored and be responsible for investigating themselves if money mysteriously goes missing.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2015 20:44
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:Except in this case the camera follows you into the bathroom, and when you go on break, and records every conversation you have with a co-worker, and your side of any personal phone calls you might receive. Unless you want the cops to be able to turn them off, that is. If you don't want every moment on the job to be subject to public scrutiny don't be a cop.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2015 20:44
|
|
|
botany posted:Like, let's not claim that unlimited surveillance of workers is alright because police officers keep shooting black people, please. But that's completely normal for a large portion of the workforce in America. If we aren't going to propose solutions that are based in the current reality of our society then I propose solving police corruption AND gun violence by giving everyone a basic living wage, free education, free addiction consoling, a functional mental health system, end the drug war, and a few others I can't think of off the top of my head.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2015 20:51
|
|
|
Dum Cumpster posted:But that's completely normal for a large portion of the workforce in America. how the gently caress is that a good thing
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2015 20:53
|
|
|
botany posted:how the gently caress is that a good thing What's so bad about it? e: like, every job I've had has had cameras pretty much everywhere but the bathroom and every experience I've had with them has been to the benefit of employees. bango skank fucked around with this message at 21:09 on Oct 25, 2015 |
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2015 20:59
|
|
|
botany posted:how the gently caress is that a good thing It's not good but it's pretty drat far down the list of bad things.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2015 21:24
|
|
|
Jesus the police are whiny babies. I work in the short line railroad industry. Their are cameras in the locomotives as well as black boxes that record speed and every move you make. Their gps in the company vehicals to make sure you don't idle too long. The FRA as well as company inspectors will literally hide in the bushes and film you working for "effecency tests" looking for violations. If you work any retail job then cameras are on you all the time. We aren't asking the police to do anything special that everybody else doesn't already deal with. But in their minds, the police know that in order to "keep america safe" you have to be able to break the rules. You gotta rough up or even kill a few "undesirables". The average liberal voter just doesn't have the stomach to face what needs to be done.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2015 22:45
|
|
|
Look I don't want my debate over whether Shakira or Jessica Beal is hotter to be recorded for posterity, so you're just going to have to trust me when I tell you I had to waste a little boy because he pulled a gun on me.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2015 00:50
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Look I don't want my debate over whether Shakira or Jessica Beal is hotter to be recorded for posterity, so you're just going to have to trust me when I tell you I had to waste a little boy because he pulled a gun on me. We shouldn't be held to the same standards as retail employees when it comes to accountability, we're special.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2015 01:11
|
|
|
I like the argument that 'real 'police work is just so untolerable to the community, that if they were to actually witness it they may disagree with the way in which they are policed. An every day citizen is incapable of understanding what it's really like out there, eventhough they're the exact same street we live our lives on, absent the ability to hose down a pregnant lady with chemical weapons because she was 'furtive'.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2015 01:16
|
|
|
Dum Cumpster posted:Have it be always on while you're working. You're not working while you're taking a poo poo. They can take it off to go into the bathroom or take a break but are required to have it on when they're active. What's so crazy about that? chitoryu12 posted:You mean like how rooms where money is counted and handled (even if only by one person every time) are constantly monitored by cameras to prevent theft? Because you don't inherently trust 100% of people enough to never commit a crime when given the unmonitored ability to do so? That still isn't the same thing as individualized surveillance. You'd have a point if they followed the cashiers around when they left the room in case they stuffed cash down their pants.SedanChair posted:If you don't want every moment on the job to be subject to public scrutiny don't be a cop. ... "We need to recruit more minority candidates with high intelligence, excellent physical fitness, and good people skills." WorldsStrongestNerd posted:Jesus the police are whiny babies. I work in the short line railroad industry. Their are cameras in the locomotives as well as black boxes that record speed and every move you make. Their gps in the company vehicals to make sure you don't idle too long. The FRA as well as company inspectors will literally hide in the bushes and film you working for "effecency tests" looking for violations. If you work any retail job then cameras are on you all the time. We aren't asking the police to do anything special that everybody else doesn't already deal with.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2015 01:26
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:Problem is, people ITT don't want them to be able to turn the cameras off when they're taking a poo poo, lest they turn it off while beating a minority. The police need to react at a moments notice and have to make life or death split-second decisions. High speed, low drag if you will. Making sure this equipment is functional and always available saves lives. This is the problem with you sovereign citizen, amifreetogo types... thinking your precious 'rights' come first when there's an entire community to think about.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2015 01:35
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:Problem is, people ITT don't want them to be able to turn the cameras off when they're taking a poo poo, lest they turn it off while beating a minority. I know. I'm saying the cameras can be always on and they can be taken off during breaks. Seems like a simple solution. So of course no government would want to do it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2015 01:39
|
|
|
Dum Cumpster posted:I know. I'm saying the cameras can be always on and they can be taken off during breaks. Seems like a simple solution.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2015 01:48
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:That seems like a reasonable, if cumbersome, proposal. I'm still undecided if making the footage subject to public disclosure without a subpoena is a good idea. What's the typical staying power of a TMZ muckraking story? If FOIA requests couldn't be submitted for two weeks after a video was captured, would that be enough time for the celebrity news cycle to move on to a different topic?
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2015 02:27
|
|
|
Grundulum posted:What's the typical staying power of a TMZ muckraking story? If FOIA requests couldn't be submitted for two weeks after a video was captured, would that be enough time for the celebrity news cycle to move on to a different topic? On a list of problems with having bodycams on cops that warrant discussion I'd put this at approximately 9000th place
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2015 02:31
|
|
|
I think you're spending entirely too much time worrying about unaccountable murders of poors, and not giving the insignificant petty famous problems of the richest country's most affluent and pampered people enough weight. Is it really worth stopping murders if it means we might know Lindsey Lohan got a speeding ticket? E: This thread is loving hilarious. Only because of the novel ubiquity of cameras in everyone's pocket do we have a prayer of finding out when a cop shoots someone in the back and plants a weapon on him, but eh whatever who cares about that, think of the unfathomably rich and cosseted celebrities who might be briefly embarrassed when they break the law! VitalSigns fucked around with this message at 03:22 on Oct 26, 2015 |
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2015 03:18
|
|
|
Not just celebrities, after further thought. In a situation where all police encounters are filmed you bet your rear end I'm telling my local political parties to Hoover up all video of the opposing party's members during traffic stops or anything else. Suddenly that "Bush's daughters killed a man while DUI" or "Malia was playing beer pong" has video to go along with it and can be used in attack ads. And poo poo, storage is cheap so you do this to everyone from the local level up. By the time someone makes it to the national level, there is almost sure to be video of them or family members on a hard drive that can be pulled out, possibly mischaracterized, and placed into ads on behalf of the campaign, PACs, or the party apparatus Edit for clarity: I'm in favor of always-on bodycams on police. But there are absolutely sure to be unintended consequences beyond the intended ones (e.g. having video of possible rights violations).
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2015 03:35
|
|
|
Who gives a poo poo. This is already the case now that everyone has cameras in their pockets all the time, the only solution is to turn the clock back to 1996. It's perfectly legal for anyone who strolls by and sees a cop talking to Sandra Bullock in a public place to whip out a phone and start recording, as it should be since that's the only reason we have proof of things like the SC cop murdering a guy and planting a taser on him. E: I'm not opposed to a broader discussion of privacy and what that means in an era of nearly-universal cameras, but I don't see any way of dealing with it other than adjusting to the new situation and getting over our narrow-minded hypocritical obsession with puritanism. There's no feasible way to ensure you can never be recorded in a public place or even at private events at other people's houses. We're just finding out that pretty much everyone plays a little beer pong once in their lives, lots of people smoke pot, lots of people get silly and foolish at parties, most people's phones are filled with enough private nudy pictures of themselves and their SO to commit seppuku if they got out. Really I think this is a good thing. Rather than how things used to be: destroying people's lives and professional careers when something we all do comes out by random chance while we all bloviate about how we would never do such a thing (while secretly glad it wasn't our secrets that came to light), we can just say "so what, getting a speeding ticket or playing some beer pong doesn't make them any worse an engineer/teacher/politician/actor than they were yesterday, hell there's worse than that on my facebook". My sister had to go back a decade through all her pictures and untag herself from any event where she's so much as holding a martini at a dinner with friends because education is still so hypocritically puritanical that she could be shitcanned if some Reverend Mrs Lovejoy parent sees them and decides wrecking my sister's career is a good opportunity to play miss morals and pretend for her friends that she's never tasted a drop of the devil's brew. The way we take unrelated harmless personal recreation and use it against people socially and professionally is so ridiculous and the more commonplace photos of kegstands and bongs become the better imo. VitalSigns fucked around with this message at 04:35 on Oct 26, 2015 |
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2015 03:50
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 13:58 |
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:"If you don't want your every moment to be subject to public surveillance, don't become a cop. gently caress you, pig." I never said anything about recruiting people to sell out their communities. That's something cops are worried about, not me.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2015 06:12
|
|