Yesterday I watched a web cast by Rick Smith, CEO of Taser on their sister company’s AXON product. Scared the hell out of me. After the scary big-brother technology he presented, he goes on to tell the audience that the time is short to get going so that they can use stimulus package money. And they are set up to help departments to apply for and justify these investments.
Watch and worry: TASER
What are you worried about???
B
Watch the video, then ask again. I even have an LEO acquaintance who thinks this goes too far.
Ok… I watched it… So what scares you???
Inquireing minds want to know???
B
Government growing beyond our consent had become a lumbering giant, slamming shut the gates of opportunity, threatening to crush the very roots of our freedom.
State of the Union Address, Feb. 4, 1986
Ronald Wilson Reagan
Nuts
From the ruins of Bastogne, Dec. 16, 1944
Brig. Gen. Anthony C. McAuliffe
If you are referring to the Axon technology, tell me what is the problem here? If you are in contact with an officer, your contact will be recorded. The officer will be on his best behavior and if you fear that he is violating your constitutional rights, that also will be recorded. There is absolutely no infringement on your rights when an officer uses a camera. You are in a public contact with a law enforcement official and there is no expectation of privacy in such a setting.
The video camera gives a full account of the events of a contact for not only the front line enforcer(the officer), but a first hand account for the judiciary to review. This is a very efficient, very constitutionally fair, and factually clear method of taking the events as they occured and helping a judge or jury to see what happened first hand. Both the officer, and the contact will be more protected from injustice than without recording devices.
If you fear a fair and effective justice system, then perhaps you venture too close to the wrong side of the law.
Marcus ,The Founding Fathers would disagree with the last sentence in your post
Well said Marcus
We are a nation founded on the rule of law. Without fair, and effective enforcement of the law…then it is worthless. The founders were very adamant about the preservation of a Republic and a Republic works by a system of checks and balances and a foundation of law. The electorate, the Legislative branch, the Judicial branch, and the Executive branch must adhere to the rule of law in order for the Republic to remain intact. Here’s a nice little video that gives a good explaination:
http://www.wimp.com/thegovernment
If the electorate does not like one law or the other, then the voting process allows the electorate to change out the Legislative branch of the government with representatives that will better fufill the public’s wishes. Unfortunately, the voters don’t realise how important these elections are. The idea that resisting the rule of law makes you some kind of a George Washington or Benjamin Franklin is a false premise in my opinion. If you wish to live and prosper within the boundaries of this country, then you are also expected to respect the foundation of this country…law.
You should anticipate that every word spoken and event transpiring in a public place, or a private place you’ve allowed others to access or been allowed to access, is recorded by some sort of AV device. Conduct yourself accordingly, and take some comfort in the fact that those deploying it will likely do the same.
Patrol-based video recording has convicted offenders and exonerated the innocent. Further, it’s produced an unprecendented level of accountability to the public. Moving the AV gear from the car to the person is a logical progression.
Some will wail and cry that “big brother” is watching. Many of the same will wail and cry that big brother wasn’t watching when it would suit them.
Looks like pretty cool technology. What do you think the reaction of LEO would be if I got one, put it on and followed various patrol officers and detectives around all day? Do you think they would be happy to see me? Maybe mug for the camera and dance a little jig?
No, realistically I would expect to be ordered to turn it off, detained, charged with various bogus things like obstruction of justice, unauthorized recording and whatever else they can come up with. This has already happened with hand held video cameras in various jurisdictions across America.
Why would LEO do these things? Don’t they know that we are a nation founded on the rule of law?
The short answer is that this tool can be misused just like any other tool. Any cop understands that. For the same reasons that cops don’t want themselves to be recorded 24/7, non-cops don’t want to be recorded in their day-to-day activities. I guarantee you that if I was interacting with an officer wired up with a Taser cam, he would get the least cooperation from me as possible.
“Yes Sir, No Sir, May I leave now Sir.”
I wouldn’t act like that because I am an evil lawbreaker, I would act like that because I’m a human being.
Video recording can be a useful tool. Dash cams do an excellent job of helping to decipher what goes wrong in a traffic stop. The Taser Cam might be great for doing the same thing on a no-knock raid. But if every patrol officer has one running all the time, he is not going to get the time of day from anyone he meets.
I do not want to live in a society where I have to worry about state operated video surveillance everywhere I go. The UK already has that kind of surveillance. They have already “given up an essential liberty for temporary security”
As far as a Fair and Effective justice system, when you can show a 100% fair and effective justice system, I’ll be happy to reexamine my ideas about video surveillance. But thanks for the underhanded accusation about being a crook.
Gringop
I call BS on you brother.
You posted 18 minutes after he requested you watch the video, yet the video is 54 minutes long.
If you’re not going to bother digesting the material before arguing your point, your opinion doesn’t mean much.:rolleyes:
I have not watched the video, but if it’s made by TASER, I expect it to be too expensive and break shortly after purchase.
As to video recording every officer contact, I work for an agency that has a mobile AV system in every marked car and issues a digital tape recorder to every officer. We have very few complaints.
I have been exonerated from an internal use of excessive force complaint because of our mobile AV system.
I know that when a defendant presents in court, he is usually sober and dressed in his Sunday-go-to-meeting best. It’s nice for the judge and jury to see what a drunk, drugged jerk he was at the time of the crime.
As to the guy who thinks he won’t talk to the cops now: Did you ever think that what you said would not be memorialized in some fashion? Better a video recording that captures what you actually say, than the faulty memory of a patrol officer.
fruitjacket
You just earned yourself a 3 day time-out for disrespect to an M4C moderator. Choose your words more carefully next time.
Deleted.
When I read the thread title, I was getting amped up to rant on our adoption of something like the British have…where so much of the public space is under video surveillance.
What I saw in that video wasn’t big brother…as anything the camera would catch would have happened in front of an officer anyway. This seems good for both citizen protection and officer accountability.
In a great many of those cases, and having arrested a self-appointed “watchdog” or two, the people doing the recording were interfering, obstructing, endangering officers, or were otherwise committing some sort of offense. It’s all in how you do it.
But if every patrol officer has one running all the time, he is not going to get the time of day from anyone he meets.
That was the same empty argument many made when patrol car cams hit the streets. Folks eventually forgot that they’re there, even when it’s right in front of them.
I see both sides of the argument. Frankly I think that the officer is at the biggest risk. Citizens have far more leeway for getting into trouble that LEO’s do, or at least so it seems
have to agree with fruitjacket on that one. video is 53 minutes long and the two responses by the mod are 16 minutes long, and he said he watched the video. If an opinion is based on viewing partial evidence, then the opinion isn’t valid.
respect is earned, not granted by fiat.