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 Range
Law & Order
Why Bodycams are a Bad Idea
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="Rez Exelon" data-source="post: 3567883" data-attributes="member: 5800"><p>I don't think there needs to be perfect execution and judgement, but I do think that there need to be an expectation that when in doubt the individual cop will not be the judge and executioner. In my work, if I have a reasonable expectation that something I am about to do (even if I need to do it) is going to break stuff, I am not going to move forward without a plan to, at minimum, minimize risk. I can't eliminate risk, but I can minimize it, or push the job to a timeframe with lower impact cost. Same basic concept here --- you can't eliminate the fact that lethal force may be used in a situation, but you can attempt to minimize it. </p><p></p><p>Circling back to the thread topic --- what are we seeing? That even WITH the bodycams the pictures of events painted by LEO's are often times "rosy at best" right? But people keep believing their side without fact checking it, and when they do look under the hood we see incidents like this. How much of this was going on BEFORE the cameras? If they are this brazen now while being recorded, what was happening before that? That's a contributing question to why this stuff matters so much more now, because of the implication that in the past so much lying could have happened. </p><p></p><p>As far as lawsuits go, I heard an interesting idea --- the city wouldn't pay out a lawsuit --- the union would. That's an interesting thought experiment.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Rez Exelon, post: 3567883, member: 5800"] I don't think there needs to be perfect execution and judgement, but I do think that there need to be an expectation that when in doubt the individual cop will not be the judge and executioner. In my work, if I have a reasonable expectation that something I am about to do (even if I need to do it) is going to break stuff, I am not going to move forward without a plan to, at minimum, minimize risk. I can't eliminate risk, but I can minimize it, or push the job to a timeframe with lower impact cost. Same basic concept here --- you can't eliminate the fact that lethal force may be used in a situation, but you can attempt to minimize it. Circling back to the thread topic --- what are we seeing? That even WITH the bodycams the pictures of events painted by LEO's are often times "rosy at best" right? But people keep believing their side without fact checking it, and when they do look under the hood we see incidents like this. How much of this was going on BEFORE the cameras? If they are this brazen now while being recorded, what was happening before that? That's a contributing question to why this stuff matters so much more now, because of the implication that in the past so much lying could have happened. As far as lawsuits go, I heard an interesting idea --- the city wouldn't pay out a lawsuit --- the union would. That's an interesting thought experiment. [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Range
Law & Order
Why Bodycams are a Bad Idea
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom