• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Body Cams Weren't Activated When Authorities Fatally Shot Louisville Man, Mayor Says

Josie

Josie

*probably reading smut*
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 25, 2010
Messages
57,629
Reaction score
32,177
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
Family IDs David McAtee: Man shot by Louisville police, National Guard


[FONT=&quot]LOUISVILLE, Ky. – Mayor Greg Fischer said Monday afternoon that police officers involved with National Guard personnel in the early morning shooting of the owner of a barbecue business had not activated their body cameras during the incident.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Fischer said Louisville Metro Police Chief Steve Conrad, who announced his resignation in May, has been fired, and a nightly 9 p.m.-to-6:30 a.m. curfew has been extended to June 8.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Gov. Andy Beshear ordered Kentucky State Police to investigate the fatal shooting by police and National Guard
personnel.

All police officers who didn't turn on their body cameras need to be removed from their job.

[/FONT]
 
Using soldiers as police is stupid.
 
It seems a bit early to be making that kind of determination, Josie. Different body cam systems have different settings and many need to be activated before they start recording. That's a privacy function so cops can't go around just picking up information on random people. If the incident kicked off out of the blue, as many such incidents do, then the cops would have been correct to respond to the shooting first and worry about recording second. The first goal should ALWAYS be public safety and responding to a shooting is definitely the first priority.
 
Lutherf said:
It seems a bit early to be making that kind of determination, Josie. Different body cam systems have different settings and many need to be activated before they start recording. That's a privacy function so cops can't go around just picking up information on random people. If the incident kicked off out of the blue, as many such incidents do, then the cops would have been correct to respond to the shooting first and worry about recording second. The first goal should ALWAYS be public safety and responding to a shooting is definitely the first priority.
Click to expand...

I dont care what their excuse is. And I hope the cops that fired gunshots get lifelong sentences. You cant just livefire into a crowd of protesters.
 
Lutherf said:
It seems a bit early to be making that kind of determination, Josie. Different body cam systems have different settings and many need to be activated before they start recording. That's a privacy function so cops can't go around just picking up information on random people. If the incident kicked off out of the blue, as many such incidents do, then the cops would have been correct to respond to the shooting first and worry about recording second. The first goal should ALWAYS be public safety and responding to a shooting is definitely the first priority.
Click to expand...

An "On" button is easy enough to hit.
 
What if it's no body cams because the soldiers have not signed consent to be recorded. Body cams are part of cops' contracts. I dunno if being recorded by civilian police while on duty is in a soldier's contract or the military's interest.
 
Lutherf said:
It seems a bit early to be making that kind of determination, Josie. Different body cam systems have different settings and many need to be activated before they start recording. That's a privacy function so cops can't go around just picking up information on random people. If the incident kicked off out of the blue, as many such incidents do, then the cops would have been correct to respond to the shooting first and worry about recording second. The first goal should ALWAYS be public safety and responding to a shooting is definitely the first priority.
Click to expand...

Yup all of them at the same time, suuurree...
 
Bodhisattva said:
An "On" button is easy enough to hit.
Click to expand...

Well, if you get shot while hitting your "on" button instead of returning fire then you can at least be comfortable in the fact that you were doing your part to provide the public with another voyeur video.
 
Lutherf said:
It seems a bit early to be making that kind of determination, Josie. Different body cam systems have different settings and many need to be activated before they start recording. That's a privacy function so cops can't go around just picking up information on random people. If the incident kicked off out of the blue, as many such incidents do, then the cops would have been correct to respond to the shooting first and worry about recording second. The first goal should ALWAYS be public safety and responding to a shooting is definitely the first priority.
Click to expand...

We know they were monitoring the protests. We know the protests have been violent in several parts of the country. Why wouldn't they already have their body cameras on when they had to know that this protest could also turn violent?
 
Josie said:
We know they were monitoring the protests. We know the protests have been violent in several parts of the country. Why wouldn't they already have their body cameras on when they had to know that this protest could also turn violent?
Click to expand...

Great question.
 
Josie said:
We know they were monitoring the protests. We know the protests have been violent in several parts of the country. Why wouldn't they already have their body cameras on when they had to know that this protest could also turn violent?
Click to expand...

Like I said, it's a privacy issue for the PUBLIC, not the cops. The cops have no business wandering through the crowd of a lawful protest, recording who is there and, potentially, using that data in some kind of facial recognition program.
 
Lutherf said:
Like I said, it's a privacy issue for the PUBLIC, not the cops. The cops have no business wandering through the crowd of a lawful protest, recording who is there and, potentially, using that data in some kind of facial recognition program.
Click to expand...

Good points.
 
Lutherf said:
Like I said, it's a privacy issue for the PUBLIC, not the cops. The cops have no business wandering through the crowd of a lawful protest, recording who is there and, potentially, using that data in some kind of facial recognition program.
Click to expand...

They already did that with traffic cams... They did it to be "rebellious" and were ordered that all cams were to be on.


On a seperate note: Whats with The Simpsons always predicting world topics?

 
dirtpoorchris said:
They already did that with traffic cams... They did it to be "rebellious" and were ordered that all cams were to be on.
Click to expand...

Traffic cameras are different because driving a car is a privilege, not a right. There can be and are significant restrictions regarding what one may and may not do while driving and that includes running red lights. It's the same reason that cops can use license plate scanners.

As far as the Simpsons...I really don't know what to tell you if you're getting your "insight" from a cartoon.

Since we're on the topic, however, would you be OK with cops just randomly stopping you and asking for ID if all you were doing is walking to the store or hanging out in the park at 3 in the afternoon? Would you consider that kind of thing to be an abuse of police power?
 
Josie said:
We know they were monitoring the protests. We know the protests have been violent in several parts of the country. Why wouldn't they already have their body cameras on when they had to know that this protest could also turn violent?
Click to expand...

Even more...why was it all of them? :roll:




This is the barely coherent and grammatically inept speech of a man who desperately wants to be able to claim that he "cured coronavirus."

That's it, in a nutshell. When we do get a handle on this crisis, he wants to be able to pull out footage and declare "I called it! I said use this! I said try this! I told them to do this, it was my idea!" He's just doing it with lots of stupid stuff because he doesnt want to miss an opportunity. He's afraid 'the big one' will be mentioned and he wont get credit for it.

It's all about declaring himself the savior of the cv crisis and we'll hear all about it, esp in his campaign. (Which is basically each of his press briefings these days) --- Lursa
Click to expand...
 
ecofarm said:
What if it's no body cams because the soldiers have not signed consent to be recorded. Body cams are part of cops' contracts. I dunno if being recorded by civilian police while on duty is in a soldier's contract or the military's interest.
Click to expand...
If you are in public, consent is not required.
 
Lutherf said:
Well, if you get shot while hitting your "on" button instead of returning fire then you can at least be comfortable in the fact that you were doing your part to provide the public with another voyeur video.
Click to expand...

I thought bodycams help gather evidence to be used against crooks.
Do the bodycams only work for voyeur videos now?

What about protection against wrongful accusations? Can bodycams still do that?
Or did they phase that out in favor of the voyeur video business you're on about?
 
ecofarm said:
Not for the public but as a state employee and by the state would seem so.
Click to expand...
It's not clear what you mean.

Are you saying that the govt has to get permission from everyone in the frame to film in public?
Traffic cams and all?

What about the bystanders in the bodycam videos? Release forms too?
 
Why can't they make a requirement that any case that has been called in, and is currently being investigated, must have body-cam activated just prior to arrival? Any deviation will face heavy fines or worse? In fact, dispatch could control that action remotely. It's not like just anyone is privileged to the recordings. The recordings should only be allowed public at a judge's order.

Turning on and off randomly at the discretion of officers, is rife with potential for misuse, IMO.

Can someone argue why this is a bad idea?
 
Last edited:
Simon W. Moon said:
I thought bodycams help gather evidence to be used against crooks.
Do the bodycams only work for voyeur videos now?

What about protection against wrongful accusations? Can bodycams still do that?
Or did they phase that out in favor of the voyeur video business you're on about?
Click to expand...

I understand that a lot of you want "justice" instead of "rights" but, fair warning, when rights are taken away justice usually gets quite ugly. We have, for most of the past week, been watching the result of exactly that kind of system.
 
Simon W. Moon said:
It's not clear what you mean.

Are you saying that the govt has to get permission from everyone in the frame to film in public?
Traffic cams and all?

What about the bystanders in the bodycam videos? Release forms too?
Click to expand...

A cop's employment contract includes consent to being recorded by state body cams. I would guess a soldier's does not include consent to civilian police recording them on duty because that would not be in the military's interest. A cop can't just go to someone's job and start recording them unless it's another cop.
 
Last edited:
ecofarm said:
"Some kind of facial recognition program" is not a good point.
Click to expand...

Police shouldn't be recording law-abiding citizens is the point he's making. I agree with him, but I also think there should be a stipulation that if you're monitoring a situation that you believe could become volatile, the cameras should be turned on.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom