The Law Enforcement Officer Thread

It is likely a mix of things. A big part though I think is the extensive ease we can document, share, and spread any piece of news or an event. It used to take a lot more effort to get any piece of news out there. These days anyone with a camera phone, access to the net, and a blog(or other similar platform) can become a reporter. Many modern phones and tablets provide all of that in one system.

Today any one of us could witness an event and record it on devices common to the public at large. We can then in less then ten minutes write up a quick summary and put the event directly into public space in immediate public view.

The problem is there is no coordinated filtering or documentation for many of these. No water marks or verifiable time stamps. We don't always get every scrap of footage, all the pictures, or even the full story from both sides. Not every witness shows what they saw and everyone has a bias one way or another. Unless you capture the vast majority of an event from start to finish someone could easily miss something important. There is also the problem of frequent editing of various pieces of footage to support one point of view over another.

Cops were much much worse before the creation of Social Media and even worse before and during the civil rights movement.

Specifically because they could get away with it without the masses knowing. Nowadays everything is on TV or social media and stories just go viral.

edited 20th Apr '15 8:26:00 PM by Memers

At a certain point the cops could summarily execute just about anyone and get awa with it (sadly they often still do). Especially if they were minorities or on the political fringe. Things have improved, though not enough.

edited 20th Apr '15 8:29:54 PM by Rationalinsanity

Memers:There is that too. A story gets passed around and can get mixed up with every telling as everyone subjects it to their individual point of view.

edited 20th Apr '15 8:30:24 PM by TuefelHundenIV

Yeah I quickly realized how short-sighted my comment was, but apparently not deleted fast enough for some of you not to see it.

Still, it just feels like we're hearing about these kinds of stories every day nowadays. It's depressing, especially since the prevalence of cameras seemingly hasn't deterred some of them from excessive force.

The deterrent effect of cameras or being observed is limited. This is true for everyone period. If someone is determined to undertake a certain action they will not care of they are seen by cameras or even other people. They are good at deterring casual problems though. Cameras are an useful tool but not a panacea.

It does, however, solve the problem of not knowing whether the officer truly used excessive force or not.

No it doesn't actually. Unless you get everything from start to finish and have a clear and unobstructed view of what is going on the video footage can leave out key moments or facts. This is especially true with just one source of video. That isn't including malfunctioning equipment, corrupted data, and camera unfriendly environment conditions.

This. You'll often see videos of supposed "brutality" that ONLY show the physical conflict itself, or a yelling cop who's clearly had a build up to the current point, without showing what happened before.

There are plenty of cases where there is actually excessive force being used, of course, but some want to make every case they can into an example of how terrible all police are.

edited 20th Apr '15 10:10:54 PM by Joesolo

Even something as simple a video or pictures taken from the wrong angle can omit something by merely being in the wrong position.

This sums up my point rather well.◊

edited 21st Apr '15 12:46:19 AM by TuefelHundenIV

A valid point, but the brutality is still being done even if the video comes in halfway through the incident. Two wrongs (that is, whatever the suspect did and whatever the cops did in retaliation) don't make a right.

Example: There was a story recently about a man in California who was beaten repeatedly when they caught him after a lengthy chase. This beating was completely unnecessary because after being caught, the man went into surrender position, yet the cops continued to assault him. Just put the guy in handcuffs and be done with it.

The point is that entirely justified force can look like brutality when you only see the last bits of the fight, where the cop wins and gets a belligerent and violent suspect to stay down so that he can cuff him. Overt brutality is still brutality, but without context, any use of force a police officer ever commits looks like brutality.

This is the benefit of dashboard cams and vest cams, in my opinion: we don't have to rely on shaky civilian footage that may not have captured the whole picture or have a very clear angle on what transpired.

edited 21st Apr '15 7:01:56 AM by TobiasDrake

I would love the cops to be camera'ed.

To me, the benefits both to the public and the police officer himself are worth more than the risks.

Just because something looks scary to the public doesn't mean it is wrong legally. But at the same time, if you're a cop just doing their job and doing it right, then you have nothing to worry about except having an objective little witness protecting your ass.

Exactly, if cops have nothing to hide they have nothing to fear.

I know you're being ironic but I agree with that sentiment just as much here as in the Privacy thread.

The testimony of a vest cam may not always be perfect but it's a damn sight better than the warped opinions of biased witnesses and fellow officers who may be more loyal to their brothers than the law.

edited 21st Apr '15 8:19:50 AM by TobiasDrake

I live in London, I actually don't have a problem with cameras everywhere, it makes the city a dam site safer and I actually don't do anything on the streets that I have to hide (well beyond putting my PIN into cash points).

The Texas House's open carry bill also includes a provision which would bar officers from stopping people solely for possessing a gun.

That I approve of.

Dozens of employees at the Harris County, Texas jail were fired after after an investigation found that jailers were neglecting prisoners.

Yup, looks like Freddie Gray got taken for a nickel ride.

The fact that cops still shove suspects into vehicles and fail to secure them basically amounts to petty cruelty. There is no practically reason to not secure them, unless sadism is the end goal.

edited 25th Apr '15 6:02:34 PM by Rationalinsanity

It's about roughing up non-compliant suspects without laying a hand on them - a more sophisticated version of having them 'fall down the stairs'. As the fact that the practice has its own nickname suggests, it's not all that uncommon.

Buzzfeed looks at the practice's specific history in Baltimore.

edited 25th Apr '15 6:16:27 PM by Iaculus

http://www.cnn.com/2015/04/27/us/baltimore-unrest/index.html

Looks like the protests are getting even more intense, up to 7 officers have been seriously injured, mostly by thrown objects.

Sounds less like a protest, more like a riot. Just hope nobody does a "Bloody Sunday" moment.

edited 27th Apr '15 2:07:41 PM by Greenmantle

Apparently, criminal gangs are now threatening the police.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/jersey-city-new-jersey-police-face-gang-threat-after-shootings/