I don't know if I'd call cam-phones a bona fide "layer of oversight" in regards to the police. It's not as though there's a lot of cam-phone footage out there being used to vindicate proper police actions in the same way dashboard cameras are used.
Or if it is, it's not getting a million hits on YouTube.
- Forums
- Cross Site
- The Asylum
- Unemployed Comments on the WSJ
Unemployed Comments on the WSJFollow
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
Cops have more authority, so of course there is a greater level of scrutiny. My job does not entitle me to exert physical or even deadly force at my discretion, so there is less need to have video evidence of what I do.
It's possible that having cameras on them only escalates matters, but if they can't handle that level of stress what the hell are we letting them in uniform for? It's a stressful job, I sympathize with them, but I do hold them to a higher standard and they absolutely need to be held accountable for their actions.
It's possible that having cameras on them only escalates matters, but if they can't handle that level of stress what the hell are we letting them in uniform for? It's a stressful job, I sympathize with them, but I do hold them to a higher standard and they absolutely need to be held accountable for their actions.
Majivo wrote:
We submit to things we don't like every day because it's necessary.
Being taped by random people is "necessary"?
Majivo wrote:
That's no reason to remove that layer of oversight though.
There's no way to remove this from happening, and I never suggested doing that even if it were possible.
Ehh, ad hoc, casual observation and recording is obviously not formal oversight in an institutional sense. I couldn't think of a better word for it.
AT ANY RATE, my point is that knowing others may be watching is not the worst thing to happen to policing. Cops do have a lot of power, and generally speaking a lot of autonomy. I'm not heartbroken if they hesitate to bust someone's chops because some interested bystander might have a cell phone.
AT ANY RATE, my point is that knowing others may be watching is not the worst thing to happen to policing. Cops do have a lot of power, and generally speaking a lot of autonomy. I'm not heartbroken if they hesitate to bust someone's chops because some interested bystander might have a cell phone.
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.
CountFenris wrote:
Majivo wrote:
We submit to things we don't like every day because it's necessary.
Being taped by random people is "necessary"?
No, but way to miss the point, which was that just because the officer in question might not 'like' it isn't a good enough reason to prevent it from happening.
CountFenris wrote:
Majivo wrote:
That's no reason to remove that layer of oversight though.
There's no way to remove this from happening, and I never suggested doing that even if it were possible.
No, there isn't, that's true. And yes, you didn't explicitly suggest it; but it was sort of implied by the fact that you were arguing against it that you would prefer it not happen.
To address other comments, yeah, oversight isn't the right word here, but I'm not sure what is. It certainly adds some accountability, though. Unfortunately cell phone cams get a bad rap because no one is bothering to put the videos of police doing their jobs properly on Youtube. In the interests of an informed populace though, and a police force that isn't unnecessarily brutal, I find it hard to argue against the people who use them.
Majivo wrote:
No, but way to miss the point
I feel pretty comfortable that you missed the point of all my posts on the subject. Next time concentrate harder.
CountFenris wrote:
Majivo wrote:
No, but way to miss the point
I feel pretty comfortable that you missed the point of all my posts on the subject. Next time concentrate harder.
I'm pretty sure you're both a couple of IQ points shy of functioning. Next time take each other to the can and remember to mind the stepchildren.
Sage insights from Mr. CountFenris.
Kavekk the Ludicrous wrote:
Sage insights from Mr. CountFenris.
Your irony underwear is showing.
I figure it's pretty much impossible to undershoot when dealing with this particular poster.
Kavekk the Ludicrous wrote:
I figure it's pretty much impossible to undershoot when dealing with this particular poster.
So he's orca fat then?
His Excellency MoebiusLord wrote:
Kavekk the Ludicrous wrote:
I figure it's pretty much impossible to undershoot when dealing with this particular poster.
So he's orca fat then?
I imagine the odour, at least, is comparable.
Recent Visitors: 396
All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (396)
- Forums
- Cross Site
- The Asylum
- Unemployed Comments on the WSJ
© 2024 Fanbyte LLC