|
SedanChair posted:Body cameras have been put into service in some jurisdictions. However, in most (all?) cases police unions have secured the right for officers to turn the cameras off as they please Ars Technica has a two part article last week about cameras: http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/06/candid-camera-part-1-five-times-video-footage-showed-police-misconduct/ http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/06/candid-camera-part-2-four-times-that-video-evidence-exonerated-cops/ I found this bit especially interesting: """According to a study conducted by the Rialto, California Police Department, after wearable video cameras were introduced to the town's police force in February 2012, public complaints against officers plunged 88 percent compared with the previous twelve months, and officers' use of force fell by 59 percent. This despite officers' increased interactions with the public compared to the previous year, according to the study.""" This is obviously a win for everybody involved. You can tell you're dealing with the bad type of police when they fight against always-on cameras. I think cameras, along with massively increased accountability and real punishments, are realistic measures that would go a long ways to fixing issues. Every cop in the OP of this thread and in the first Ars article I linked above should be behind bars. It's telling that in every single one of the stories in that article, not a single officer was convicted of wrongdoing. They didn't even lose their jobs.
|
#
¿
Jun 29, 2014 17:24
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 14, 2024 17:19 |
|
|
ToxicSlurpee posted:allowing the public to film the public actions of police and forbidding the police from seizing cell phones in those situations would be a good start This is already the case. In fact, getting arrested for that is a pretty good way to get a ton of free money.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 29, 2014 19:50
|
|