close

Privacy guaranteed - Your email is not shared with anyone.

Welcome to Glock Talk

Why should YOU join our Glock forum?

  • Converse with other Glock Enthusiasts
  • Learn about the latest hunting products
  • Becoming a member is FREE and EASY

If you consider yourself a beginner or an avid shooter, the Glock Talk community is your place to discuss self defense, concealed carry, reloading, target shooting, and all things Glock.

Making Police Officers wear Cameras

Discussion in 'Political Issues' started by EOS, Aug 20, 2014.

  1. EOS

    EOS

    4,387
    3,062
    May 30, 2012
    Central Kentucky
    Only if the officer has the proper authority to enter that residence per the constitution, of course.

    Will it solve all problems associated with law enforcement? Nope.
     
  2. Of course.


    Limited use now-a-days seem to show the vast majority of allegations against the police will be exposed as false.
     

    Last edited: Aug 22, 2014

  3. certifiedfunds

    certifiedfunds Tewwowist

    52,415
    4,774
    Apr 23, 2008
    Houston

    The "vast majority" but not all and one is too many. I'm sure the camera is a deterrent.




    Sent from my iPhone using Ohub Campfire
     
  4. NDCent

    NDCent Socially Inept

    3,723
    194
    Mar 19, 2010
    Ozarks
    Every swinging **** has one nowadays. No privacy anymore. I went to the doctor and had lab work, I swear 90% of the people had camera phones out playing with them in the lobby; old, young, kids, you couldn't pass gas anymore without someone getting the frown of the person sitting next to you on film. Hell, put them on everybody, if you don't have anything to hide, what's the difference. Voyeurism at its finest.
     
  5. ldb

    ldb NRA Life Member

    215
    5
    Dec 19, 2002
    Friendswood TX
    Maybe Bloombutt could spend his $50 million on body cameras for police instead of violating and attempting to defeat the Constitution.
     
  6. IhRedrider

    IhRedrider Not a walker

    535
    3
    Mar 28, 2011
    We could take down all the "red light cameras", and the cops can carry those around. Boom, problem solved. Your welcome.
     
  7. Mayhem like Me

    Mayhem like Me Semper Paratus

    18,267
    4,157
    Mar 13, 2001
    Not a chance
    You're sure, what proof do you have ,they just forget about it after a while don't even realize its on.

    Sent from my SCH-I535 using Ohub Campfire mobile app
     
  8. Mayhem like Me

    Mayhem like Me Semper Paratus

    18,267
    4,157
    Mar 13, 2001
    Not a chance


    Sent from my SCH-I535 using Ohub Campfire mobile app

    I want video even in chamber's.
     
  9. certifiedfunds

    certifiedfunds Tewwowist

    52,415
    4,774
    Apr 23, 2008
    Houston

    I don't have proof but I do have evidence. This officer conveniently turned hers off before shooting a man during a traffic stop. Clearly she was aware it was on if she turned it off.


    http://www.louisianaweekly.com/nopd-fails-to-report-shooting-by-officer/

    Damn the luck, huh?



    Sent from my iPhone using Ohub Campfire
     
  10. I would like to see "reality" shows such as COPS disappear from the screen, and have the media dis-invited from raids etc. Too much temptation to play for the camera rather than focus on the real job at hand.


    Posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire
     
  11. Mayhem like Me

    Mayhem like Me Semper Paratus

    18,267
    4,157
    Mar 13, 2001
    Not a chance
    Does the policy allow her to switch off on the way to the station if so its a habit and done everyday.

    I pull off my seatbelt every time I pull into a parking lot.my wife laughs her but off because I don't even do it consciously.



    Sent from my SCH-I535 using Ohub Campfire mobile
    pp
     
  12. Sgt127

    Sgt127

    3,127
    875
    Nov 5, 2002
    Texas
    HIPAA laws are a huge stumbling block to body worn cameras. From suicides, major accidents, fights, family violence calls etc. The video would be available through FOI requests. There are people who need medical attention. There privacy must be protected.

    I agree though, 95% of the time, the cameras help the Officer. Once departments start filing on anyone for making a false report and, Officers start suing people for making false accusations, I'll bet the number of complaints drop dramatically.
     
  13. certifiedfunds

    certifiedfunds Tewwowist

    52,415
    4,774
    Apr 23, 2008
    Houston

    If officers can sue citizens then citizens should be able to sue officers and they (officers) should be held personally liable as well.

    Like any other profession. Accountability all the way around.


    Sent from my iPhone using Ohub Campfire
     
  14. hey.. I have a another idea... how about making all "trouble makers" wear cameras ?
     
  15. Dukeboy01

    Dukeboy01 Pretty Ladies!

    2,735
    463
    Apr 30, 2000
    Lexington, KY
    My department is finishing up testing and the rumor is that patrol officers will be getting body cams at some point in the near future. Of course, we were supposed to move to a "cloud" storage system for all of our digital evidence. That was three years ago, so we'll see.

    Personally, I don't have a problem with it. It will cut down on complaints and vindicate officers way more than it condemns them.

    That said, here are a few problems that will need to be worked out.

    1. Cost. Here's a link to TASER's camera system, the AXON.
    http://info.taser.com/free-axon-bod...m_term=axon flex cost&utm_campaign=AXON-Trial

    MSRP is $399.00. The larger your agency, the larger your initial outlay. My department has 550 sworn officers. Giving all of us one will cost $219,000. In the grand scheme of things, that's not that much but it ain't nothing either.

    2. Storage and retention. Which encounters with citizens will be recorded? The easy answer is "All of them." How long will we keep it? The easy answer is "Forever." Is that going to be practical in real life? That also brings up my next point.

    3. Privacy concerns. If the policy is to record all citizen encounters in which official police action is taken, them you're going to be catching victims at their worse. You come home to find a burglar has broken in and ransacked your wife's panty drawer. Video of her unmentionables will now exist forever. Should that information be available as part of a Freedom of Information request? Let's imagine that you said some pretty racist things to the cops about the people you suspect of burglarizing your home. (It happens.) Now lets imagine you're famous. Is TMZ going to be able to get a copy of you raving about the (insert racial epithet here) who ripped off your stuff?

    4. The camera still won't catch everything. If/ when we get body cameras, the word is that we'll be wearing them mounted on our chests. They'll record a lot, but only what's facing them. In a situation like Ferguson, if the officer had been wearing a camera when he was first making contact with the suspects and was attacked while in the car, then all we'd probably be able to see is the steering wheel and part of the dash.

    All of these issues can be resolved, but we need to have an open and honest discussion of the potential problems.
     
    Last edited: Aug 22, 2014
  16. Which is why I'm in favor of cameras that can't be turned off except by supervisors or when the LEO returns to the stationhouse (ie bathroom breaks). This will cut down on allegations that LEOs intentionally turned off their cameras.
     
    Last edited: Aug 23, 2014
  17. Agreed.

    When officers get equal rights as citizens to sue as plaintiffs, officers will embrace body cams.
     
  18. Bren

    Bren NRA Life Member

    42,075
    8,938
    Jan 16, 2005
    Kentucky
    I think he was trying to imply that the reason cameras will show the police to be right 99.999% of the time, is that they will be afraid of getting caught, rather than because they are already right 99.999% of the time.

    He learned all about the police by watching television.

    I know - "blah, blah, blah, even if I'm not a cop I can have an opinion, blah, blah." But the fact is, undeniably, an opinion formed without the correct information is not a valid opinion.
     
  19. Bren

    Bren NRA Life Member

    42,075
    8,938
    Jan 16, 2005
    Kentucky
    Why? Anything the judge does that has any official effect has to be done on the recording or in writing.
     
  20. Bren

    Bren NRA Life Member

    42,075
    8,938
    Jan 16, 2005
    Kentucky
    What?

    Citizens sue officers thousands of times a day. They are virtually always sued in their individual capacity - otherwise the 11th Amendment or state sovereign immunity would prevent the suit.

    This is what I mean about people who have opinions, but didn't base them on any facts.

    In many cases, there are statutes that require the government to pay if the officer acted within policy. Otherwise, there would be no police and people like you would have nobody to call for help. Most officers I represent do not have a statute like that and some of them can, literally, expect to be named in hundreds of lawsuits over their career - we just rely on winning every time.
     
    Last edited: Aug 23, 2014