SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
The Associated Press reports that despite the rapid adoption of body cameras in major cities, policies do not typically require mandatory use of body cameras during uniformed "off-duty" side jobs:
When police officers in America's cities put on their uniforms and grab their weapons before moonlighting in security jobs at nightclubs, hospitals, and ballparks, there's one piece of equipment they often leave behind - their body camera. That's because most police agencies that make the cameras mandatory for patrol shifts don't require or won't allow body cameras for off-duty officers even if they're working in uniform, leaving a hole in policies designed to increase oversight and restore confidence in law enforcement.
Police departments contend that they have only a limited number of body cameras or that there are too many logistical hurdles and costs involved. But that argument doesn't sit well with those who say it shouldn't matter whether an officer is on patrol or moonlighting at a shopping mall. "As long as they have real bullets, they need to have the body cameras," said John Barnett, a civil rights leader in Charlotte, North Carolina, where shootings involving police have put use of the cameras under scrutiny.
An Associated Press survey of the 20 biggest U.S. cities found that nearly all have officers wearing or testing body cameras, but that only five - Houston; San Antonio; San Francisco; Fort Worth, Texas; and San Jose, California - have rules requiring them for uniformed officers working outside their regular hours.
Of course, even mandatory body camera policies are not perfect:
Houston's new Chief of Police Art Acevedo pledged to make some changes to the department's body-camera program after a KHOU investigation revealed it has fallen short of its promises. [...] "I want to make it very clear to our men and women that if they have a critical incident and they don't have that thing on, and without excuse or justification, they're going to have some significant consequences," Acevedo said.
That warning comes after KHOU 11 Investigates discovered several problems in the early months of HPD's body-camera program. The Harris County District Attorney's office identified more than 700 cases with missing or unaccounted body-camera video.
(Score: 2) by jmorris on Wednesday June 14 2017, @02:15AM (3 children)
No, cop need to be tried, convicted and serve his sentence. If you think rioting is ever the correct answer, YOU are the problem. At best, rioting or general revolution is an extreme form of redress to be resorted to only after all peaceful attempts at reform fail. Almost by definition, if rioting is actually morally justified it means civilization has failed and needs rebooting so that rioting can again be treated with grapeshot until cured.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 14 2017, @03:46AM (1 child)
Ah ok, a few years left then until we have to water the tree of liberty [brainyquote.com] again.
Seems it's been getting a bit thirsty lately.
(Score: 2) by jmorris on Wednesday June 14 2017, @04:53AM
Something like that. But even then the modern flavor of rioter should be shot by any decent folk and if we do end up 'watering the tree' we should use the general chaos to chlorinate the gene pool a bit.. It really doesn't matter what the situation is, burning your town down in a fit is simply dumb. Bluntly, I don't really like being forced to call them my countrymen because they are too dumb/insane to be permitted to live uncontrolled in any sane society. If you get mad as Hell, decide not to take it anymore and burn down the police station or courthouse I can at least understand that. I may or may not support it, but I can understand. I'd at least bother to read their manifesto before deciding if they should be shot. If BLM got super pissed and burned a white neighborhood it would mean #WAR but I could understand that. I could even respect them as an enemy. Getting mad at the police and burning the neighborhood you know you are going to have to live in afterward isn't even evil, it is too stupid for that.
(Score: 2) by http on Wednesday June 14 2017, @05:02AM
In case you haven't noticed, the police aren't enforcing the law - they're targeting particular demographics and particular crimes that the media portrays as proxy for those demographics. Selective enforcement is the problem, and it isn't meaningfully different from anarchy when you're on the receiving end. Rioting is on the list of reasonable responses, and while I wouldn't put it at the top, that's because I haven't been exceptionally victimized by police, or often. Frequent and/or egregrious targets will obviously have different priorities.
More simply, civilization has failed.
I browse at -1 when I have mod points. It's unsettling.