Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Showing Original Post only (View all)The Cops Should Always Be On Camera [View all]
For the past 12 months, police officers in Rialto, California, have been wearing cameras while on duty as part of a pilot program. Its expensive to mount a camera on every uniformed cop, but the idea is that by recording all the interactions between officers and civilians and suspects, cops will behave better and complaints against the department will be quickly resolvedif someone makes a claim about being mistreated, it can be easily proved or disproved by a look at the tape. The experiment seems to be going well, and starting September 1, all 66 uniformed officers in Rialto will wear them. Complaints against the department have gone down 88 percent over the course of the year-long study while the use of force by officers declined by more than half, implying that cameras really do benefit both police and civilians. Indeed, a New York Daily News article highlighted the case of Rialto cop Randy Peterson, who was cleared of an excessive-force allegation lodged against him by a mentally disturbed man thanks to his body camera.
But not all departments are as forward-thinking as Rialtos, or as concerned with the future of police accountability. On August 12, when the New York Police Departments stop-and-frisk policy was ruled unconstitutionally racist, the judge pointed to Rialto as an example of how to make cops accountable while ordering the NYPD to institute a similar program. The cops arent happy about this, and Mayor Michael Bloombergwho generally supports surveillance when it comes to monitoring the civilian populationcalled the idea a nightmare. NYPD Commissioner Ray Kelly also sounded dubious, saying that these body cameras have only been tried in much smaller cities than New York (Rialto has about 100,000 people). And its true that since these body cameras cost $900 a pop, outfitting all of New Yorks 35,000 uniformed officers might prove fiscally impossible.
Cops generally object to being filmed even when it doesnt cost their departments money. Its easy to find footage on YouTube of cops objecting to being filmed by civilianssometimes violently, sometimes with illegal arrests. Websites like Photography Is Not a Crime and Copblock are devoted to filming police, reporting on incidents where cops violate the civil rights of people who try to do so, and encouraging everyone to keep a close eye on law enforcement. Youll even hear horror stories of people in states with restrictive wiretapping laws like Indiana and Massachusetts facing criminal prosecutions for trying to record the cops. The charges are usually eventually dropped, but the question remains: Why, if they arent doing anything wrong, are the police so afraid of being filmed?
http://www.vice.com/read/the-cops-should-always-be-on-camera
But not all departments are as forward-thinking as Rialtos, or as concerned with the future of police accountability. On August 12, when the New York Police Departments stop-and-frisk policy was ruled unconstitutionally racist, the judge pointed to Rialto as an example of how to make cops accountable while ordering the NYPD to institute a similar program. The cops arent happy about this, and Mayor Michael Bloombergwho generally supports surveillance when it comes to monitoring the civilian populationcalled the idea a nightmare. NYPD Commissioner Ray Kelly also sounded dubious, saying that these body cameras have only been tried in much smaller cities than New York (Rialto has about 100,000 people). And its true that since these body cameras cost $900 a pop, outfitting all of New Yorks 35,000 uniformed officers might prove fiscally impossible.
Cops generally object to being filmed even when it doesnt cost their departments money. Its easy to find footage on YouTube of cops objecting to being filmed by civilianssometimes violently, sometimes with illegal arrests. Websites like Photography Is Not a Crime and Copblock are devoted to filming police, reporting on incidents where cops violate the civil rights of people who try to do so, and encouraging everyone to keep a close eye on law enforcement. Youll even hear horror stories of people in states with restrictive wiretapping laws like Indiana and Massachusetts facing criminal prosecutions for trying to record the cops. The charges are usually eventually dropped, but the question remains: Why, if they arent doing anything wrong, are the police so afraid of being filmed?
http://www.vice.com/read/the-cops-should-always-be-on-camera
A shout out to DU's own Carlos Miller! BOOYAH!
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
17 replies, 2348 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (23)
ReplyReply to this post
17 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Another question is: When cops are filmed doing something wrong, why aren't they prosecuted?
AnotherMcIntosh
Aug 2013
#1
Sometimes they are and with film more often, that's why they opposed being on camera
Bluenorthwest
Aug 2013
#4