I would have loved one. I even carried, at my own expense, a voice-activated micro cassette while on my traffic stops. I think the camera policies are the problem.
I don't doubt that some law enforcement want one, as long as THEY choose when it is turned on and off. That is the key thing not getting mentioned here.
Oh, it definitely would not have worked out *better* for him. That is admitting to bad judgement.....judgment that cost someone their life.
Last edited:
ESPECIALLY given his training and position within the department.
Probably because they get written up for using the "f" word, or damn, etc even when talking amongst themselves. Bad command can make it so the cops don't like them for reasons you wouldn't expect. And the funny thing about data is, you can get the results you want, if you ask the right questions of the right people. The article you are using is 4 years old, and refers to incidents a decade old, which means the technology, policies and procedures you are referring to and using is likely closer to 15 years old. A lot has changed since then, but this stuff is ridiculously expensive and takes time to roll out in large depts. Budget constraints, training, training budget all add up, and it moves at the speed of government. I can tell you that most are now activated automatically, and activate all cameras in the vicinity if the lights are turned on, a gun lock is activated, a gun or taser is unholstered, another camera nearby is activated, or a collision is detected. They can be manually activated by an officer and it will trigger the others nearby as well. An officer has 3 cameras minimum that can and do record without their activation/interaction. They don't "choose" not to turn them on.
Also, the info from your own linked article contradicts your statement that police are not in favor of them. It states no less than 3 times that police generally support them. "The George Mason study also described an unanticipated result of the cameras: Officers increasingly value them as a tool for evidence collection and protection. "
You're casting a wide net and judging an entire group of people based on the actions of a few, which is ironic.
Yeah, not sure about the cursing part. Personally, while working I wouldn't be doing that in casual or business conversations anyway but it varies among people.
If OKC's are truly activated automatically, I'm glad to see that there has been some lessons learned in that regard about 'selectively activated' body cams. If they don't 'choose' to turn them on as you say, at least there have been some lessons learned on that based on unethical behavior by some in the past.
No, the article doesn't contradict my statement. I read the whole article and I am fully aware of the George Mason study part. That is part of the reason I chose to include the article, as it sadly lends itself to the possibility that some law enforcement want body cams, *as long as* they can activate them selectively. I do appreciate you making my point for me.....I had actually hoped someone would point that out. I'm glad you did; thank you for that....it helped prove my point better than I could have on my own.
As far as the 'casting the net too wide' accusation....I'm fully aware that not all law enforcement personnel are like that. But enough have been historically that is is clearly a huge issue.
Last edited:
Yeah, but a lot of these guys don't keep up on training, went through the motions, aren't gun guys etc. I mean, Barney Fife could have been an instructor for Mayberry. Doesn't make him an expert, he's just the guy that sent to a class that one time. Hell, look at the Navy Commander shooting a rifle with the optic on backwards. How many people with him, and himself had been "trained" on firearms? Another example I just remembered. A local dept had an officer shot in the leg while stacked outside a home making entry (Tac team), the second officer in the stack was one of their instructors, and a tac team officer to boot, so arguably more training, or time on the trigger than most other dept instructors.
Yeah ... But he was an instructor for CLEET. I'm gonna stand by my comment. He, of all people in the LE community of Oklahoma, given his position (which apparently was his ENTIRE identity given what I've seen and heard), deserves (and rightfully should be) held to that higher standard.
I have seen people argue that cops "don't deserve" to be held that higher standard when off duty. ********. He has the training and has been taught how to handle himself in situations much more problematic than being cut off (or flipped off and called a bad name) in traffic and THIS is how he chose to respond?? Yeah, nope. He's gonna get jail time. And he deserves every damned bit of it. IMHO, of course.
In my opinion, this guy’s bio screams “ I have a huge ego”.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
-
-
Tornado/storm damage areas: Oklahoma AG enacts price gouging law for 12 counties
- Latest: OK Corgi Rancher
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
