Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
LEOs be careful out there.
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="pritch" data-source="post: 2683740" data-attributes="member: 30299"><p>Panties twisted much? I'm not opposed to the idea of officers wearing body cameras, I was just pointing out an area of potential concern. Post-Miranda, post-arrest statements by a suspect are hardly the same as every single word uttered by an officer over the course of an entire shift, before an incident, and potentially over the course of several prior shifts via discovery. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>You are suggesting an entirely new and incredibly onerous standard of "accountability" </p><p>To be applied to police officers. Every word uttered during the course of a day, from flirting with a waitress at Starbucks or answering a cell phone call from his ex-wife should hardly become part of the "official record." </p><p></p><p>It may be that departments have come up with appropriate ways to address this, but acting like the concern isn't valid a cops have no right to privacy is a tad extreme. I'm inclined to think that if officers have the discretion to turn the camera off whenever they want, the public will be legitimately suspicious. On the other hand, requiring an unbroken recording of a whole shift is unrealistic. Another possibility would be to legislatively limit access to recordings in some fashion.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="pritch, post: 2683740, member: 30299"] Panties twisted much? I'm not opposed to the idea of officers wearing body cameras, I was just pointing out an area of potential concern. Post-Miranda, post-arrest statements by a suspect are hardly the same as every single word uttered by an officer over the course of an entire shift, before an incident, and potentially over the course of several prior shifts via discovery. You are suggesting an entirely new and incredibly onerous standard of "accountability" To be applied to police officers. Every word uttered during the course of a day, from flirting with a waitress at Starbucks or answering a cell phone call from his ex-wife should hardly become part of the "official record." It may be that departments have come up with appropriate ways to address this, but acting like the concern isn't valid a cops have no right to privacy is a tad extreme. I'm inclined to think that if officers have the discretion to turn the camera off whenever they want, the public will be legitimately suspicious. On the other hand, requiring an unbroken recording of a whole shift is unrealistic. Another possibility would be to legislatively limit access to recordings in some fashion. [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
LEOs be careful out there.
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom