Police have undermined the promise of body cameras • Hacker News Board

Re: Police have undermined the promise of body cameras

#201

Post by bratbag » Thu, Dec 14, 2023, 8:46 PM UTC

manicennui wrote: post #65

crazygringo wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On the one hand, as a matter of principle -- absolutely. On the other hand, bodycams run out of batteries or the electronics glitch or automated video downloads get skipped, in ways that simply don't happen with paper notebooks or data stored in central databases. To assume that it's always a dereliction of duty is not going to be reasonable in practice . Like, for whatever reason my cell phone doesn't automatically…

It's curious how these problems are highly correlated with the police doing questionable shit.

Or are you just more likely to notice the overlap?

Re: Police have undermined the promise of body cameras

#202

Post by autoexec » Thu, Dec 14, 2023, 8:46 PM UTC

Aachen wrote: post #198

autoexec wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you think the cops are so bad, what about the criminals? The criminals don't have the power of the state behind them. We're supposed to hold police to a higher standard than criminals. > but if it were knowable then the citizen would have brought it to court rather than to the media, Why would you think that? Do you think that courts and lawyers are free? Most people in the US have to work to survive and live pa…

> Evidence doesn't always mean much when the police can investigate themselves and find they did nothing wrong Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe you're mixing up two mechanisms of law here: In criminal law, the police investigates and the public prosecutor brings the case to court. The police often has a discretion to not bring a case if they don't want to, or to indeed frame a case in their favor if they aren't…

The problem with civil cases is that you still need to have the money upfront (and accept that it will be very hard for you to win so you may never get compensated for those expenses) and then also overcome governmental immunity and qualified immunity

> Even as the proliferation of police body cameras and bystander cellphone video has turned a national spotlight on extreme police tactics, qualified immunity, under the careful stewardship of the Supreme Court, is making it easier for officers to kill or injure civilians with impunity. The Supreme Court’s role is evident in how the federal appeals courts, which take their cue from the high court, treat qualified immunity. In an unprecedented analysis of appellate court records, Reuters found that since 2005, the courts have shown an increasing tendency to grant immunity in excessive force cases – rulings that the district courts below them must follow. The trend has accelerated in recent years. (https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/usa-poli...)

Re: Police have undermined the promise of body cameras

#203

Post by greedo » Thu, Dec 14, 2023, 8:56 PM UTC

kkielhofner wrote: post #163

greedo wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You get to see the videos the police want you to see; the videos that reinforce the idea that cops are in a continual state of absolute danger despite all the occupational studies that show it's a relatively safe job. Copaganda...

I was hesitant to write this comment because even though I consider my stance fairly nuanced (with my comment reflecting that) dismissive statements like "copaganda" don't make for any kind of reasonable debate. But I'll try. When I was on a ride along and I watched a guy who just brutally beat his pregnant girlfriend (who was bleeding on the ground in the front yard) charge at us and end up rolling around on the gro…

By "Copaganda", I was referring to shows like COPS that only shows the dramatic moments, the YT channels that glorify police work, not the boring traffic stops, or the paperwork officers have to deal with. My dislike of this coverage is that it reinforces the self-image of cops as the only thing standing between the good guys and the bad guys, and that violence is accepted and encouraged as a standard useful tool. To me, violence (non-lethal or lethal) should be the last resort.

I did a ride along in the 80s and was paired with a deputy who worked a tough area. They wanted to show me the worst of the worst, so that in case I decided to pursue a career in LEO I would know what it could entail. My deputy only responded to what he felt were serious, exciting calls. Scared the crap out of me. But he was honest enough to say that most of his days weren't like the stuff I saw in my week. This wasn't a one day thing, but kind of a pre-screening thing for a LEO career. I'm not sure that an "ordinary citizen" can do this just to see what it's like anymore due to liability on the part of most police departments.

I too saw my deputy use force that I felt was uncalled for. And demeaning behavior towards people who were just hoping someone could help. He also did crap like speed whenever he felt like it, broke a million traffic laws when it wasn't necessary, and behaved like a stereotypical bad cop. Imagine how Hank Shrader acted in Breaking Bad. Everyone was assumed to be a scumbag and guilty of something.

I have family and friend in LE, and my neighbor has been a captain in our city since I moved here. And I have a coworker who used to be a CO at the state pen. Dealing with the inmates, etc can be corrosive. You see people at their worst.

But that's what they're paid to do. The system needs to address this as best as possible so that LEO (and COs) can cope with the stress and don't develop an "us vs them" attitude. My CO coworker talked about how a lot of the COs just loved to mix it up with inmates. And my LEO friends talk about how these jobs naturally attract people with either too much adrenaline/testosterone or an inability to control themselves under stress. But if you're LEO, you sure can't easily get psychotherapy.

I appreciate you telling your story, and reading my with a charitable mindset.

Re: Police have undermined the promise of body cameras

#204

Post by PH95VuimJjqBqy » Thu, Dec 14, 2023, 9:05 PM UTC

Aachen wrote: post #196

PH95VuimJjqBqy wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe you do understand the implications of filming a 10 y/o nude girl.

I believe you don't, because there are none in a normal case, such as when it's as part of your legitimate job Perhaps that's not common knowledge? It's not illegal to have pictures of nude children insofar as I know laws in various countries. What's illegal presumably everywhere is if there are sexual suggestions (or more than suggestions), which presumably would not be the case in your example Also, police has to h…

this is the internet, where saying a thing doesn't make it true.

have at your claims good sir.

Re: Police have undermined the promise of body cameras

#205

Post by eightysixfour » Thu, Dec 14, 2023, 9:18 PM UTC

I’ve always thought the obvious play here in a capitalist driven society is to require police officers to have private insurance. Insurance companies would quickly land on:

1. No camera, no insurance

2. A national registry for individual officer history

Having exclusive use of legal force needs some kind of counter balance. Not sure what else could do it.

Re: Police have undermined the promise of body cameras

#206

Post by Broken_Hippo » Thu, Dec 14, 2023, 9:23 PM UTC

PH95VuimJjqBqy wrote: post #114

Broken_Hippo wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You already have this to an extent - how many people touch your medical records? I can look up people's past addresses online, it isn't all that private - which is fine for most folks, but bad for folks getting stalked. Heck, I worked at a landline phone company 25 years ago and they used the last 4 numbers of a social security number to verify everyone. Think about this every time you talk to a utility: That underpa…

I don't think you understand the risks you're talking about. For example, people have been blackmailed over psychiatric records from their childhood.

Anyone determined can already do that. A quick google search pulled up examples - most of the first page results were folks breaking into mental health facilities data. Which makes sense: Why would you sift through loads of mundane police footage when you can just look at the care center's records?

The risk would remain about the same. Most folks aren't gonna do this, and those that want to already can.

And we could lessen it by being more accepting and forgiving and not making things like mental health struggles a source of shame.

Re: Police have undermined the promise of body cameras

#207

Post by maxwell » Thu, Dec 14, 2023, 9:32 PM UTC

danaris wrote: post #190

maxwell wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How about we just go back to expanding the House based on population instead of keeping it static at 435 forever? We're approaching a million constituents per representative. Corruption seems a mathematical certainty.

That would genuinely make a huge positive difference (though it would not, of course, fix the whole system, since the House is not the only place with problems). There's no need, in this day and age, to have the entire House of Representatives meet physically in one building.

Agreed.

Let's go fully remote, sell off most federal property in DC, and retrocede Washington back to Maryland (like Alexandria County back in 1846), dissolving DC and draining the swamp for good.

Then we can take proposals for creating a District of Lincoln or Roosevelt for meetings and events closer to the center of population, e.g. Kansas City (near mean center) or the confluence of the Mississippi and Ohio (near median center).

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/04/zoom-congr...

Re: Police have undermined the promise of body cameras

#208

Post by HDThoreaun » Thu, Dec 14, 2023, 9:36 PM UTC

aaomidi wrote: post #39

btbuildem wrote: post #22

> And so as policymakers rushed to equip the police with cameras, they often failed to grapple with a fundamental question: Who would control the footage? Instead, they defaulted to leaving police departments [..] with the power to decide what is recorded, who can see it and when. I think it's incredibly naive to portray this as a "defaulting" or "failing to grapple with a fundamental question". I am 100% certain "wh…

Why are we negotiating with police for this anyway? And if the police union is threatening to strike, then who cares. Those cops are not the ones we want anyway. Rehire.

If we dont give them what they want they stop working and crime increases. It happens every couple years in my city when the police are negotiating their contract. Having zero police is no acceptable to voters and would lead to losing re-election for almost every politician that tries to lock them out.

Re: Police have undermined the promise of body cameras

#209

Post by HDThoreaun » Thu, Dec 14, 2023, 9:38 PM UTC

eightysixfour wrote: post #205

I’ve always thought the obvious play here in a capitalist driven society is to require police officers to have private insurance. Insurance companies would quickly land on: 1. No camera, no insurance 2. A national registry for individual officer history Having exclusive use of legal force needs some kind of counter balance. Not sure what else could do it.

We've tried this, the police refuse.

Re: Police have undermined the promise of body cameras

#210

Post by PH95VuimJjqBqy » Thu, Dec 14, 2023, 9:40 PM UTC

Broken_Hippo wrote: post #206

PH95VuimJjqBqy wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think you understand the risks you're talking about. For example, people have been blackmailed over psychiatric records from their childhood.

Anyone determined can already do that. A quick google search pulled up examples - most of the first page results were folks breaking into mental health facilities data. Which makes sense: Why would you sift through loads of mundane police footage when you can just look at the care center's records? The risk would remain about the same. Most folks aren't gonna do this, and those that want to already can. And we could…

Do you know why the thieves broke into the mental health facilities?

because many of them put patient records in physical safes. Do you know why they don't put them online?

yeah, exactly.

What you've basically said is "it's ok because someone could break into a police station to get that material anyway!".

Or to apply this in another way.

I should be ok with other men sleeping with my wife because she might get raped anyway.

it's such a ridiculous line of thought. The fact that someone somewhere is willing to enter into criminality to do it doesn't imply we shouldn't endeavor to prevent it.