Quote:
Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague
Sure I do. I just think it's a problem that's easily solvable by legislation. No, body cams are not FOIP-able on request, but are obtainable through a court-supervised process. No, body cam footage is not reviewed by third parties or anyone else unless there is an investigation into the officer's conduct or for use in a prosecution.
Obviously that's off the top of my head, but you have to think that it wouldn't be particularly difficult to come up with a regime to deal with this that doesn't allow officers to choose for themselves when they get to shut off the very thing that's there to oversee their conduct in interactions with the public.
The other, easier method is that if you're going to shut off your camera you need to declare, on camera before it's shut off, why you're doing it, and if you can't satisfy an inquiry that the shut-off was done properly and turned back on immediately afterwards, you should be severely reprimanded and on a second offense, fired summarily.
Either of those avenues would work.
|
To be clear, bodycams are not there to oversee conduct. They are there to collect evidence. I think that's the issue going forward, is that those that are anti-police can't see police in any other light - that they are all dishonest, heavy handed and morally corrupt. Thus, they see bodycams as a way to police the police. Roachmen is a great example of that. He's a self admitted police hater and likes to trot out his "Kaminski Argument" in every anti-police thread. Do we really want a guy like that setting the standard for what police can and can't do?
I, on the other hand, have had significantly different experiences with police. I thus trust them that they turn on their cameras to collect evidence when they are dealing with the public as policy dictates. Maybe they have eroded some of that trust or maybe it's just become fashionable to hate the police.