A deeply disturbing development regarding police

[kenny]

Cameras are everywhere now in the hands of the public, both still and video.
Everything is showing up on Youtube these days - including police abuse.
The police don't like this.

In some states it is now illegal to take still pics or video of police.
You can end up in jail for being on a public street taking pics of the public actions of your public servants.

I think this is a very very creepy development for America, land of the free.
I see sunlight as the best disinfectant.
If the police are following obeying the law then they have nothing to hide.

Story

 

[dragonfly411]

I do find that very disturbing. I''ve found some of the violent practices lately very disturbing as well.

 

[Amber St. Clare]

Date: 6/4/2010 2:53:40 PM
Author:kenny
Cameras are everywhere now in the hands of the public, both still and video.
Everything is showing up on Youtube these days - including police abuse.
The police don''t like this.

In some states it is now illegal to take still pics or video of police.
You can end up in jail for being on a public street taking pics of the public actions of your public servants.

I think this is a very very creepy development for America, land of the free.
I see sunlight as the best disinfectant.
If the police are following obeying the law then they have nothing to hide.

Story

+1

 

[Karl_K]

Scary isn''t it?

 

[HollyS]

As a law abiding citizen who has never committed a crime, and had always believed in supporting my local law enforcement, it has been very eye-opening in my adult life to realize that a quite ridiculous majority of our boys (and girls) in blue do not deserve our respect or admiration.

I speak from personal experience. This is not an opinion based upon recent news articles. My current frame of mind is to distrust them first and expect them to be a$$es, and then I''m rarely proved wrong.

I''ve personally known quite a few who eventually wound up on the other side of the bars; drug dealers, wife beaters, thiefs, etc. Guess they thought they could get away with it.

(SDL, I mean no disrespect to you.)

 

[FrekeChild]

Guess what though? Speaking as someone married to an academic who has repeatedly been rejected for his work studying police violence, no one will touch it. Violence against police? Sign them up! But police being violent towards the public? No bites.

The government (where a LOT of academic funding is coming from) isn''t going to say their currently system isn''t working. So his work remains unpublished, and probably will remain that way forever, unless someone takes a HUGE chance on it.

Sorry SDL, I know you don''t want to hear it, but its becoming a bigger and bigger concern among those who put the numbers together.

I personally think that public servants need more psych therapy, because I''m sure some of this violence from the police is a side effect of PTSD from the job, or a manifestation of being able to "get away with it because I''m a cop" but what do I know?

 

[movie zombie]

Date: 6/4/2010 6:59:28 PM
Author: HollyS
As a law abiding citizen who has never committed a crime, and had always believed in supporting my local law enforcement, it has been very eye-opening in my adult life to realize that a quite ridiculous majority of our boys (and girls) in blue do not deserve our respect or admiration.

I speak from personal experience. This is not an opinion based upon recent news articles. My current frame of mind is to distrust them first and expect them to be a$$es, and then I''m rarely proved wrong.

I''ve personally known quite a few who eventually wound up on the other side of the bars; drug dealers, wife beaters, thiefs, etc. Guess they thought they could get away with it.

(SDL, I mean no disrespect to you.)

my experience as well.

mz

 

[ksinger]

Date: 6/4/2010 7:12:22 PM
Author: FrekeChild
Guess what though? Speaking as someone married to an academic who has repeatedly been rejected for his work studying police violence, no one will touch it. Violence against police? Sign them up! But police being violent towards the public? No bites.

The government (where a LOT of academic funding is coming from) isn''t going to say their currently system isn''t working. So his work remains unpublished, and probably will remain that way forever, unless someone takes a HUGE chance on it.

Sorry SDL, I know you don''t want to hear it, but its becoming a bigger and bigger concern among those who put the numbers together.

I personally think that public servants need more psych therapy, because I''m sure some of this violence from the police is a side effect of PTSD from the job, or a manifestation of being able to ''get away with it because I''m a cop'' but what do I know?

I''m curious Freke - is his research of recent stuff, or is it in a long historical context? Hubs and I were discussing this over dinner. Since he is 1)Mr. History and 2)spent 15 years in the gun business, his perspective on it is a bit different. Both further back - he says from his reading that police abuses consistent with the mores of the times have always been present (remember that the FBI could wiretap with impunity and no oversight for decades) - and maybe more first hand since he came in direct personal contact with many police in his gun days, which of course I realize is not necessarily indicative of the greater picture, but still -

I just think this very much may be yet another case of people simply becoming aware of how things have probably always been - of learning how the sausage is actually made, and not liking it, even though when they''re safe, they pretty much don''t complain or even pay attention to what may have been done to keep them that way. I mean has there been a time when police were all sweetness and light? Are the abuses today SO much worse than historical abuses, or are they consistent with abuses of power in any era?

 

[Irishgrrrl]

Wow, this creeps me out.

An excerpt from the article: "Most all-party-consent states also include an exception for recording in public places where ''no expectation of privacy exists'' (Illinois does not) but in practice this exception is not being recognized."

Huh??? Why the hell not???

It seems that the exception regarding recording in public places exists for a reason, so why is it not being recognized? This hits entirely too close to home, since Maryland is my home state and it''s one of the states that require all-party consent. I''m confused and POed!

 

[4ceRunner]

I believe it also has to with the fact that somewhere in the minds of most police men they are above the law because they serve the law. It doesn''t even have to be abuse. When have you ever seen a cop (lights off) following the speed limit? Why can cops out of district pull illegal u-turns whenever they feel like it? And now in many areas, there are so many cops/sq mile that they feel like they can get away with anything.

On the other side though no matter how they act or what they do, if they need my help I will not hesitate to help them. I even offered my pizza to one late one night because the pizza place was closed and I had the last one.

Cops are escalating their brute force to counter whats being done to them. In my area I can''t go a single night without hearing about a cop that has been shot and killed in a gun fight. But then again I have also heard stories of cops shooting people 40 times because they were pulling out their wallet.

The Shield that was on FX for awhile was a good example of the extremes that cops can get away with.

 

[arjunajane]

It is extremely concerning Kenny, and is not just a problem in the US.

We continually see a massive double standard with these things where I live - a civilian beats up a cop, the whole community is up in arms, writing letters, the entire police force is braying for blood - and the offender gets serious punishment. Now the officer in question is suing for a couple $mil compo.
A police officer is filmed kicking the crap through someone who is not defending themselves - and the commissioner defends their actions, 'they have such a difficult job to do'...not a valid excuse in my book.
The police officer gets a lesser punishment than the civilian. Do you think his compo lawsuit will succeed against the police - I don't.
Why?

Here, police are becoming more and more "precious" about their jobs; they are demanding that new laws
be introduced that people cannot swear, spit or anything else at a police officer that may be construed as abuse - and if a person does, they demand sentences of mandatory jail time for these actions.
Now, in my and my Fi's opinion when we discuss this proposed legislation - dealing with aggro offenders *is your job*! Swearing and spitting and whatever else should be considered a professional liability, and I'm positive they knew this would be the case when they joined the force. Moreover, you are trained and more than adequately provided with tools to defend yourself, and should be trained properly in conflict resolution
I *am not* condoning abusive behaviour toward police, I know it is a difficult job - but arresting offenders, and dealing with what comes along with those actions *is your job*.
Putting someone in prison for swearing at a police is a ridiculous proposition.

And if we do introduce these laws, what about other professions that deal with the public on dangerous terms? Ambulance officers, orderlies and nurses in hospitals who so often are attacked by or have to restrain people high on speed and extremely violent / abusive. The police often pick up these people from public places, and dump them on the hospitals as they cannot (will not?) handle them. Why is the work of these professions less valuable / important than the police, why shouldn't the same laws of protection be extended to them??

I know this is kind of a divergent rant Kenny, but this whole issue really gets me steamed.

What are the police where you live so worried about that they can't be filmed performing their job? It just smacks of the "above the law" attitude that gives police forces in many countries a bad name.
I seriously hope a similar law is not the next step here..

 

[Steel]

I do not condone the abuse of any fiduciary relationship and recognise that every type of personality is represented in each career choice; including the police. Some employees become poor choices for that role in the fullness of time and appropriate action should be taken where necessary.

I have the utmost respect for those in the emergency services who work a thankless job protecting and preserving with an unforgiving shift schedule I would love to see every critic try for just 1 year. Civility is not a natural instinct and many of us would not live our lives as we did yesterday and will today without these men and women doing their jobs. They make an active and real contribution to our daily lives. But that job is not conference calls with head office, sales trips out of state or power point presentations; they are body on body out with many who will use force or threat of force as a daily currency to get what they want. When another employee negotiates a 5% reduction in cost, a firefighter, ambulance worker or member of the police is trying to negotiate with a member of the public throwing stones at them; for no reason at all. I wish that the public in general knew about the daily jobs performed on a daily basis by emergency workers.

It irritates me and I regret that it has become possible now for subversive elements to choose the guise of protection of their rights as a weapon. I am sick of seeing video tapes of protests (for example) where one of the protesters is taping the officers requesting dispersal, taking such footage in such an aggressive and invasive manner where the purpose is not the documentation of events but a passive aggressive ''attack'' on the police. I make two points on this. The first being this; whilst based on previous results excessive force may be a concern, I believe that the intent of many (maybe not all) is to engineer a situation with passive aggressiveness in order that they have opportunity to record the suppression of the minority by force. The second, that I believe that respect must be shown, if you are asked to do something by a member of the emergency services it should be done post haste. If you disagree with it, make a complaint later; you never know the reason you have been asked to do something and it may well be in your best interest or the interests of another.

I started by saying that abuses have occured and I believe they continue to occur. But I have concern that fearmongering like this, will cause real harm. After all, if we do not trust and respect those in control of our civility then there is opportunity for anarchy to creep in.

What does it matter if real life is captured on film; it is how we behave that matters.

 

[Karl_K]

Date: 6/5/2010 7:38:04 AM
Author: Steal
I do not condone the abuse of any fiduciary relationship and recognise that every type of personality is represented in each career choice; including the police. Some employees become poor choices for that role in the fullness of time and appropriate action should be taken where necessary.


I have the utmost respect for those in the emergency services who work a thankless job protecting and preserving with an unforgiving shift schedule I would love to see every critic try for just 1 year. Civility is not a natural instinct and many of us would not live our lives as we did yesterday and will today without these men and women doing their jobs. They make an active and real contribution to our daily lives. But that job is not conference calls with head office, sales trips out of state or power point presentations; they are body on body out with many who will use force or threat of force as a daily currency to get what they want. When another employee negotiates a 5% reduction in cost, a firefighter, ambulance worker or member of the police is trying to negotiate with a member of the public throwing stones at them; for no reason at all. I wish that the public in general knew about the daily jobs performed on a daily basis by emergency workers.


It irritates me and I regret that it has become possible now for subversive elements to choose the guise of protection of their rights as a weapon. I am sick of seeing video tapes of protests (for example) where one of the protesters is taping the officers requesting dispersal, taking such footage in such an aggressive and invasive manner where the purpose is not the documentation of events but a passive aggressive ''attack'' on the police. I make two points on this. The first being this; whilst based on previous results excessive force may be a concern, I believe that the intent of many (maybe not all) is to engineer a situation with passive aggressiveness in order that they have opportunity to record the suppression of the minority by force. The second, that I believe that respect must be shown, if you are asked to do something by a member of the emergency services it should be done post haste. If you disagree with it, make a complaint later; you never know the reason you have been asked to do something and it may well be in your best interest or the interests of another.


I started by saying that abuses have occured and I believe they continue to occur. But I have concern that fearmongering like this, will cause real harm. After all, if we do not trust and respect those in control of our civility then there is opportunity for anarchy to creep in.


What does it matter if real life is captured on film; it is how we behave that matters.

Trust and respect is earned.
Sadly in this day and age it has been abused enough that caution is needed.
Locally there is one police force I have a lot of respect for.
They are well led and serve the people.
Another is filled with badge heavy jerks that I do not trust one bit.
They have settled billions of dollars in lawsuits with taxpayer dollars.
Another is in between but getting better under new leadership but the union is fighting them tooth and nail in cleaning it up.
Not all of them are bad of course but the default has to be caution because you don''t know which you are dealing with the good or the bad.

Shining light on police activities keeps them honest and should be the responsibility of all.
A well ran department has nothing to fear, jbt have everything to fear from being taped.
Unfortunately the trend has been away from peace officers and towards jbt activities.

This isn''t anything new here either a while back a police LT was taped doing it in a patrol car in uniform with a prostitute and they threatened to arrest the person who reported it if they didn''t turn over the tape.
He retired a captain, with that kind of leadership is it any wonder that department is out of control and has been for years?

 

[Steel]

Date: 6/5/2010 10:06:17 AM
Author: Karl_K

Trust and respect is earned.

Sorry to pick on one phrase, but I think it is essential to my point of view.

I accept that because enforcement is conducted by individuals there has and continues to be abuses, consequently on the whole I agree with your post (ETA: apart from the above quote, in this context), it would be hard not to.

But I do not believe it is prudent to pick and choose compliance. Trust and respect are the central issues but in this situation they must be objectively rather than subjectively applied. I believe that the subjective lack of trust and respect breeds and becomes a blanket objective disrespect for authority which is unacceptable and dangerous. Therefore there must be trust and respect for the authorities; unequivocally. Single issues can be raised afterwards.

 

[ksinger]

Again, I will ask the question, are the abuses of power of the police SO much worse than they have been in the past? Or again, are we now simply more aware of how the sausage has always been made, of perhaps what has always occurred? It''s kinda like the recent thead entitled something like "OMG...what is WRONG with the world?????" that ranted about the supposedly new "lack of human decency" and increase in natural disasters. The response there was people are pretty much what they''ve always been, and this is a geologically active planet and we have 24 hour news to skew our thinking and awareness of things.

I do not condone police brutality, but I do not believe that the police are so much worse in the last 10, say, then they have ever been.
For instance, one highway patrol officer my husband knew, told him that the highway patrol officers here in Oklahoma were not even issued handcuffs prior to WWII , because the expectation was that if you didn''t/couldn''t beat the guy into submission, you didn''t deserve to arrest him anyway. The cops were EXPECTED to administer some street justice. And this was back in those supposedly halcyon days of yore, when people were so much more civil and all.

Today the training, psych evaluations, and awareness is SO much better than in decades passed. How can the abuses be so much worse? Is this really REALLY a case of OMGOMGOMG the police are such a group of thugs THESE DAYS? Or is it people focusing (again) on the negative stuff that is so pervasive and so much more FUN to watch (gets the self-righteous blood flowing after all right?) than the time the cops went easy on someone''s kid for a drug arrest, or let you go when they could have given you a ticket. Or showed up right when you needed them.

I too worry that people with zero idea of what police actually deal with will be passing judgement or playing gotcha just to stir up trouble. My DH can tell all sorts of interesting stories about decent cops in the schools, and surmised that the most vocal critics probably have never had a cop for a friend, or hung out with them and heard tell of their world from THEIR perspective. What some call brutality is simply not mollycoddling either. I''m not sure being unduly polite to the kid who beat a woman to death with a golf club and then raped her dead body, or the kid who brought the gun to school where YOUR children would be at risk, would be the best approach. How would YOU handle it? I''ll take my chances of a creep cop, because the REAL creeps are out there, and they''re far worse.

As for the attempts to keep filming from happening, well, the cops need to get used to it just like everyone else. Privacy in ANYTHING is a thing of the past. Sadly, they will lose that battle eventually, along with the rest of us. But people need to get a stronger stomach. This stuff has been going on for a long time most likely, and while some is clearly wrong, some is not so clear at all, and to middleclass sensibilities, looks more brutal than necessary, when it isn''t.

 

[Steel]

Date: 6/5/2010 10:42:54 AM
Author: ksinger

Again, I will ask the question, are the abuses of power of the police SO much worse than they have been in the past? Or again, are we now simply more aware of how the sausage has always been made, of perhaps what has always occurred? It''s kinda like the recent thead entitled something like ''OMG...what is WRONG with the world?????'' that ranted about the supposedly new ''lack of human decency'' and increase in natural disasters. The response there was people are pretty much what they''ve always been, and this is a geologically active planet and we have 24 hour news to skew our thinking and awareness of things.

I do not condone police brutality, but I do not believe that the police are so much worse in the last 10, say, then they have ever been.
For instance, one highway patrol officer my husband knew, told him that the highway patrol officers here in Oklahoma were not even issued handcuffs prior to WWII , because the expectation was that if you didn''t/couldn''t beat the guy into submission, you didn''t deserve to arrest him anyway. The cops were EXPECTED to administer some street justice. And this was back in those supposedly halcyon days of yore, when people were so much more civil and all.

Today the training, psych evaluations, and awareness is SO much better than in decades passed. How can the abuses be so much worse? Is this really REALLY a case of OMGOMGOMG the police are such a group of thugs THESE DAYS? Or is it people focusing (again) on the negative stuff that is so pervasive and so much more FUN to watch (gets the self-righteous blood flowing after all right?) than the time the cops went easy on someone''s kid for a drug arrest, or let you go when they could have given you a ticket. Or showed up right when you needed them.

I too worry that people with zero idea of what police actually deal with will be passing judgement or playing gotcha just to stir up trouble. My DH can tell all sorts of interesting stories about decent cops in the schools, and surmised that the most vocal critics probably have never had a cop for a friend, or hung out with them and heard tell of their world from THEIR perspective. What some call brutality is simply not mollycoddling either. I''m not sure being unduly polite to the kid who beat a woman to death with a golf club and then raped her dead body, or the kid who brought the gun to school where YOUR children would be at risk, would be the best approach. How would YOU handle it? I''ll take my chances of a creep cop, because the REAL creeps are out there, and they''re far worse.

As for the attempts to keep filming from happening, well, the cops need to get used to it just like everyone else. Privacy in ANYTHING is a thing of the past. Sadly, they will lose that battle eventually, along with the rest of us. But people need to get a stronger stomach. This stuff has been going on for a long time most likely, and while some is clearly wrong, some is not so clear at all, and to middleclass sensibilities, looks more brutal than necessary, when it isn''t.

To answer your question: No

As for the highlighted text; thank you, that is part of what I was trying so poorly to articulate.

 

[Karl_K]

Date: 6/5/2010 10:30:33 AM
Author: Steal

Date: 6/5/2010 10:06:17 AM

Author: Karl_K


Trust and respect is earned.

Sorry to pick on one phrase, but I think it is essential to my point of view.


I accept that because enforcement is conducted by individuals there has and continues to be abuses, consequently on the whole I agree with your post (ETA: apart from the above quote, in this context), it would be hard not to.


But I do not believe it is prudent to pick and choose compliance. Trust and respect are the central issues but in this situation they must be objectively rather than subjectively applied. I believe that the subjective lack of trust and respect breeds and becomes a blanket objective disrespect for authority which is unacceptable and dangerous. Therefore there must be trust and respect for the authorities; unequivocally. Single issues can be raised afterwards.

The police have no more inherent authority than anyone else.
They however have been granted a limited authority by the people in specific and limited circumstances.
When that is exceeded it becomes a police state and it is the duty of all free people to resist with all means necessary to secure the unalienable rights recognized by the constitution of the US and mentioned in the declaration of independence.

From the declaration of independence:

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,"

 

[ksinger]

Date: 6/5/2010 12:34:41 PM
Author: Karl_K

Date: 6/5/2010 10:30:33 AM
Author: Steal

Date: 6/5/2010 10:06:17 AM

Author: Karl_K


Trust and respect is earned.

Sorry to pick on one phrase, but I think it is essential to my point of view.


I accept that because enforcement is conducted by individuals there has and continues to be abuses, consequently on the whole I agree with your post (ETA: apart from the above quote, in this context), it would be hard not to.


But I do not believe it is prudent to pick and choose compliance. Trust and respect are the central issues but in this situation they must be objectively rather than subjectively applied. I believe that the subjective lack of trust and respect breeds and becomes a blanket objective disrespect for authority which is unacceptable and dangerous. Therefore there must be trust and respect for the authorities; unequivocally. Single issues can be raised afterwards.

The police have no more inherent authority than anyone else.
They however have been granted a limited authority by the people in specific and limited circumstances.
When that is exceeded it becomes a police state and it is the duty of all free people to resist with all means necessary to secure the unalienable rights recognized by the constitution of the US and mentioned in the declaration of independence.

From the declaration of independence:

''We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,''

Karl, I''m sure you don''t want this thread pulled for verboten political discussion, which the above clearly is. I was not discussing this from a political perspective, rather a historical one. ARE things worse today than in times past, or is our awareness of it the thing that has changed? It would be better to discuss our cultural refusal to really look at and DEAL with the conditions and people who may actually contribute to what we middle Americans see as extreme measures and reactions on the part of the police, but which may not actually be.

Here''s one for you - middle school. Stolen bike - actually ended up as 2 stolen but I digress. One set of young gangbangers on one side, another on the other. School cop shows up. No cuffs, but businesslike - questioning each kid. The ones involved, in the squad car, others over there on that bench, because we aren''t through just yet. No brutality, but he isn''t exactly pleading with them to answer either. He''s being a COP. (Hubs is watching this from a distance so as to not get in the way, but can hear what''s going on) One teacher decides that the cop is not treating these kids "respectfully enough" and goes up and gets in the cop''s face, with all sorts of appeals to her free speech and blah blah. The cop, exasperated, says rather mildly considering, "Ma''am, you are impeding this investigation, I need you to stand (points) over THERE." She stands her ground and then gets in his way a bit MORE, ending up kinda chest-butting the man. He promptly arrests her. Now, is he a bad cop abusing his power, or is she a complete idiot for getting in the man''s way when he was trying to do his job?

 

[kenny]

The issue here is not whether bad things happen, or how often.

The issue is the police forbidding photography by the public.

 

[Steel]

Storm: I understand your point and don''t feel that it is becoming political so I would like to follow up with you if you will indulge me. I admit that I am more familiar with our Bunreacht na hEireann, 1937 than your Declaration of Independence however the point at issue is generally comparable. And (thank you for waiting) my point is this:

"...The police have no more inherent authority than anyone else.
They however have been granted a limited authority by the people in specific and limited circumstances.
When that is exceeded it becomes a police state and it is the duty of all free people to resist with all means necessary to secure the unalienable rights recognized by the constitution of the US and mentioned in the declaration of independence.

''We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,'' ..."

Your unalienable rights; equivalent to our fundamental rights are guaranteed SAVE in accordance with law (over here). These rights therefore are not absolute, our Constitution self limits as previously mentioned referencing statues but also referencing that old chestnut ''the common good'' or ''public interest''. The point being that there are more limits on these natural rights than there are confirmations of their protection. So I cannot agree that there is any ''right'' much less a duty to resist restrictions on a perceived public freedom.

Kenny: I support this ban.

Mods: I can''t see this as political but if you do feel free to remove my post. I won''t be offended.

 

[packrat]

I don''t think there should be issue w/the public making videos..however, I wonder about things being taken out of context. We don''t carry video cameras around w/us 24/7, so who is to say what happened *before* the camera got turned on? At some point it seems to me that people want license to do whatever/whenever/however they please regardless, and police be damned. Our police cars have cameras that start the second the cherries come on.

We had a huge issue in town a few years ago where a couple who had been pulled over for drunk driving were screaming brutality and lawsuits were flying everywhere. The video was set up at the station for the public to view at any time-some people *clearly* saw unforgivable brutality by this officer. Others *clearly* saw an officer doing his job. It''s all about perception and reality.

If I''m walking leisurely down the street window shopping and a cop comes flying out of nowhere and gives me a ninja kick to the face and beats me into submission b/c I jaywalked against the light..yeah I''d have to go with excessive use of force. If I''m stopped and don''t comply w/the officer, I don''t see why he can''t force me to do what he wants me to do. Would it be better for him to stand there and wait for me to pull my hand out of my pocket and hope I don''t have a gun in my hand, or should he *assume* I do and act accordingly?

I remember years ago I was dating this guy and we went to a neighboring town to see a movie. As we were walking up to the theater, a car came to a screeching halt in the no-parking area right in front, and 3 cop cars pulled up behind and on both sides. Cops jumped out, guns drawn, screaming for the guy to get out, put your hands up etc..when he did he kept saying "What''d I do? What''d I do?" and ducked back in the car-he was tackled and thrown to the ground. Like, bounced on the ground by his face. People were screaming about this "poor boy" and he was hollering he didn''t do anything ow ow you''re hurting me get off me. The crowd was ready to attack the cops.

Sounds kinda brutal eh? If that was this day and age and someone had a camera, there''d be some people crying brutality. Turns out, this guy had drugs and guns (not just a bb gun or a .22-these were assault weapons) and had been a busy bee beating and raping women and was on the run. When he ducked back in the car, those weapons were right there-what are the odds he was going to come back out w/his license and registration? But nobody standing there knew any of that-all we saw was a guy who acted like he didn''t have a clue what the problem was being thrown on the ground.

You can make a video and make it show anything you want. Nobody''s going to put disclaimers on it when they put it on youtube. "This guy molested and savagely beat a 2 year old girl-but jeez, look at how mean this cop is to him! He has rights too!"

I was taught to respect people-in uniform, out of uniform, the guy who takes my garbage and the guy working the counter at McDonalds. Yes, respect should be earned, but it''s also a 2 way street. If you treat people respectfully and they treat you like crap, then yeah, I can see not respecting them. But to be disrespectful of someone right off the bat, doesn''t make sense to me.

People in all walks of life across the spectrum have been caught doing bad things. Does that mean they''re all bad and we should be automatically distrustful of them when we really have no reason to be?

 

[ksinger]

Date: 6/5/2010 2:20:34 PM
Author: packrat
I don''t think there should be issue w/the public making videos..however, I wonder about things being taken out of context. We don''t carry video cameras around w/us 24/7, so who is to say what happened *before* the camera got turned on? At some point it seems to me that people want license to do whatever/whenever/however they please regardless, and police be damned. Our police cars have cameras that start the second the cherries come on.

We had a huge issue in town a few years ago where a couple who had been pulled over for drunk driving were screaming brutality and lawsuits were flying everywhere. The video was set up at the station for the public to view at any time-some people *clearly* saw unforgivable brutality by this officer. Others *clearly* saw an officer doing his job. It''s all about perception and reality.

If I''m walking leisurely down the street window shopping and a cop comes flying out of nowhere and gives me a ninja kick to the face and beats me into submission b/c I jaywalked against the light..yeah I''d have to go with excessive use of force. If I''m stopped and don''t comply w/the officer, I don''t see why he can''t force me to do what he wants me to do. Would it be better for him to stand there and wait for me to pull my hand out of my pocket and hope I don''t have a gun in my hand, or should he *assume* I do and act accordingly?

I remember years ago I was dating this guy and we went to a neighboring town to see a movie. As we were walking up to the theater, a car came to a screeching halt in the no-parking area right in front, and 3 cop cars pulled up behind and on both sides. Cops jumped out, guns drawn, screaming for the guy to get out, put your hands up etc..when he did he kept saying ''What''d I do? What''d I do?'' and ducked back in the car-he was tackled and thrown to the ground. Like, bounced on the ground by his face. People were screaming about this ''poor boy'' and he was hollering he didn''t do anything ow ow you''re hurting me get off me. The crowd was ready to attack the cops.

Sounds kinda brutal eh? If that was this day and age and someone had a camera, there''d be some people crying brutality. Turns out, this guy had drugs and guns (not just a bb gun or a .22-these were assault weapons) and had been a busy bee beating and raping women and was on the run. When he ducked back in the car, those weapons were right there-what are the odds he was going to come back out w/his license and registration? But nobody standing there knew any of that-all we saw was a guy who acted like he didn''t have a clue what the problem was being thrown on the ground.

You can make a video and make it show anything you want. Nobody''s going to put disclaimers on it when they put it on youtube. ''This guy molested and savagely beat a 2 year old girl-but jeez, look at how mean this cop is to him! He has rights too!''

I was taught to respect people-in uniform, out of uniform, the guy who takes my garbage and the guy working the counter at McDonalds. Yes, respect should be earned, but it''s also a 2 way street. If you treat people respectfully and they treat you like crap, then yeah, I can see not respecting them. But to be disrespectful of someone right off the bat, doesn''t make sense to me.

People in all walks of life across the spectrum have been caught doing bad things. Does that mean they''re all bad and we should be automatically distrustful of them when we really have no reason to be?

Yeah, the camera never lies does it?

You stated pretty well how I feel about it.

And we could discuss the idea that anyone has a right to photograph me/hound the hell out of me with a camera any time. I saw a video on FB where a guy had a video camera, and his friend was gigging a woman in a coffee shop - a woman who was clearly not happy at being filmed - about her religious views. She got quite agitated and started cursing the guy, and tried to get him to stop, but he kept on and on. Now, this was NOT a nice woman at that moment in time, her beliefs as stated on the film were truly anathema to me personally, but as this guy chased her out the door with the camera, I could only feel sorry for her. And wonder what might have happened if she had been more stressed and even less stable. It could have ended very badly for all involved.

 

[kenny]

There are examples of people abusing telephones, and using them to commit crimes.
There are controversial uses of telephones, like telemarketing.

Shall we ban telephones?

Sure there will be borderline cases.
So?

I think if police are obeying the laws they should have nothing to hide and welcome cameras since they can only document their proper conduct.
America is getting like Germany in the 1930s where the state is assuming more and more power, and thinking it is above the law.

 

[Steel]

Date: 6/5/2010 2:43:35 PM
Author: ksinger
Yeah, the camera never lies does it?

You stated pretty well how I feel about it.

And we could discuss the idea that anyone has a right to photograph me/hound the hell out of me with a camera any time. I saw a video on FB where a guy had a video camera, and his friend was gigging a woman in a coffee shop - a woman who was clearly not happy at being filmed - about her religious views. She got quite agitated and started cursing the guy, and tried to get him to stop, but he kept on and on. Now, this was NOT a nice woman at that moment in time, her beliefs as stated on the film were truly anathema to me personally, but as this guy chased her out the door with the camera, I could only feel sorry for her. And wonder what might have happened if she had been more stressed and even less stable. It could have ended very badly for all involved.

Great point: illustrating how the presence of a camera added another element to an already hostile situation. Now I don''t feel that police would object to passive filming however like in this instance it has become that active filming can be a form of aggression.

 

[kenny]

I think harassing strangers with a camera is wrong.

I think documenting public servants on duty to ensure they do not abuse their power (which has happened in the past) is right.

Totally different things.

 

[ksinger]

Date: 6/5/2010 2:52:50 PM
Author: kenny
There are examples of people abusing telephones, and using them to commit crimes.
There are controversial uses of telephones, like telemarketing.

Shall we ban telephones?

Sure there will be borderline cases.
So?

I think if police are obeying the laws they should have nothing to hide and welcome cameras since they can only document their proper conduct.
America is getting like Germany in the 1930s where the state is assuming more and more power, and thinking it is above the law.

Get that penknife out to make a new notch on your belt for getting a thread removed. I''m sure it''s not far off.

 

[kenny]

Discussing government is not the same as discussing politics.

 

[Steel]

Date: 6/5/2010 3:02:24 PM
Author: kenny
I think harassing strangers with a camera is wrong.

I think documenting public servants on duty to ensure they do not abuse their power (which has happened in the past) is right.

Totally different things.

What about the public harassing public servants with a camera? Is that wrong?

 

[packrat]

And if people would obey laws and rules, they wouldn't need to worry about cops.

ETA I kinda am of the mind that things can escalate to "Let's get our camera and tick this cop off and see what he does" like little kids egging each other on. You poke any dog w/a stick long enough and hard enough and I bet he's gonna get ticked.

 

[ksinger]

Date: 6/5/2010 3:11:30 PM
Author: kenny
Discussing government is not the same as discussing politics.

Seriously? Well, by all means, continue on then.

(starts timer)