this post was submitted on 14 Dec 2023
97 points (96.2% liked)

politics

19097 readers
3774 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Police boosters insist that police violence and corruption are the result of "a few bad apples." As the saying goes, "a few bad apples spoil the bushel." If you think there are just a few bad cops on the force, then you should want to get rid of them before they wreck the whole institution. Bodycams could empirically identify the bad apples, right?

Well, hypothetically. But what if police leadership don't want to get rid of the bad apples? What if the reason that dashcams, tasers, and pepper spray failed is that police leadership are fine with them? If that were the case, then bodycams would turn into just another expensive prop for an off-Broadway accountability theater.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 32 points 11 months ago (2 children)

It wouldn't be too hard to create a system that records everything the cop does... and transmit it to a storage facility in which that specific cop has no ability to delete would be simple. Incredibly simple.

the idea that a cop gets to choose what the body camera records and that it was a failure of the camera is an intentional narrative to protect bad cops. normal americans live under constant scrutiny (not just by cops, but by everyone.)... they should have more, not less.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 11 months ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 12 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

First offense, 72 hour unpaid leave. And better hope there’s no complaints because not wearing it is reasonable suspicion.

Second offense? Goodbye.

(And this is why I’m all for spending hikes for cops. Improved recruiting means better ability to fire shitty cops. Oh, that and better training in how to not kill people, and stuff.) (it’s really too bad that cops go and spend all that funding in armored tanks, and stuff…)

[–] [email protected] 4 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

First offense, 72 hour unpaid leave. And better hope there’s no complaints because not wearing it is reasonable suspicion.

Second offense? Goodbye.

That's the key. You can do a lot with technology, but many problems are not solvable with technology alone.

It does not matter how safe or reliable bodycams work if there are no repercussions for not wearing or disabling them. But since american cops are not even held accountable if they straight up murder people, nobody should be surprised that bodycams "don't work" in a system like this.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Will not be long till we all have cams on us while we work.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

most retail already do. and... there's no need for office types when they can literally see what you're doing on the screen.

Office buildings, usually have something, too, above the cubicles.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 11 months ago

I can see them eventually wanting personal cams with audio. Will happen.