General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsThis White House Petition For a ‘MIKE BROWN LAW’ Would REQUIRE Cops to WEAR A CAMERA On Duty
A new petition on the Whitehouse.gov site has reached more than the necessary number of signatures to receive an official response from the government. The petition is calling for the creation of a, Mike Brown Law, which would require officers active on duty to wear a helmet or body camera that would record their interactions with the public at all times. The idea is not new. In 2012, Rialto, California adopted a policy essentially the same as the proposed Mike Brown Law. The city began requiring police officers on duty to start wearing small cameras that could be attached either to an officers sunglasses or collar. The cameras cost about $900 dollars each. They can hold up to 12 hours of full color footage and upload their footage via a cloud system. After one year researchers found that after requiring the Rialto police to wear the cameras complaints against officers from citizens dropped by 88% and use of force dropped by 59% of the policy yields similar results on a nation-wide basis. Mike Brown or many of the nearly 5,000 other Americans killed by the police between 2003 and 2009 could still be alive today had a nationwide policy that produces a 59% use of force decrease.
The idea is very popular. In just six days the petition has received approximately, 123,000 signatures. The threshold a petition must receive to have an official response from the Obama administration is 100,000 signatures in 30 days. The language of the petition reads as follows,
http://www.addictinginfo.org/2014/08/19/camera-petition-cops/
Hoyt
(54,770 posts)Uncle Joe
(58,356 posts)Thanks for the thread, Segami.
oldandhappy
(6,719 posts)Stellar
(5,644 posts)There can never be enough signatures for something so important.
The camera was something that Obama started here in Chicago once they get people in the Police station. But the Police - the guy that carries a gun - should where them everywhere he goes.
Hoyt
(54,770 posts)The only negative I can see is that some policefolks might not last long with them. I think everyone would benefit.
Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)Recursion
(56,582 posts)I'm for police always having cameras, but that's the one big concern I have.
Hoyt
(54,770 posts)I agree, stuff shouldn't end up on Facebook. Perhaps have some panel allowed access in event of a challenge.
Recursion
(56,582 posts)But, like I said, that's literally the only downside I can think of, and it seems pretty manageable. And, hell, there's probably even some truth to the cops' claim that it positively affects suspects' behavior too. So much the better.
Hoyt
(54,770 posts)leftyohiolib
(5,917 posts)Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)tavalon
(27,985 posts)Sure, it's reached the threshold, but let's send this one to the moon. It's right action.
hedda_foil
(16,373 posts)blkmusclmachine
(16,149 posts)Hoyt
(54,770 posts)Nazi Germany. A data recorder is an easy way to prevent some of this stuff.
Stellar
(5,644 posts)Thanks for sharing.
951-Riverside
(7,234 posts)When will people get it through their thick heads that cameras mean nothing when cops are never held accountable?
Take a moment to watch these videos...
...NOT ONE COP WAS HELD ACCOUNTABLE! NOT A SINGLE F*CKING ONE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!