Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
Mechazawa

Police Body Cam Footage No Longer Public In NC

Recommended Posts

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/north-carolina-police-camera-footage_us_57850a43e4b0ed2111d7952a

What the fuck? I am wondering how long before they just outright ban public filming.

There was also this: http://countercurrentnews.com/2015/09/police-shoot-recording-man/

I can't wait to leave the US - and I'm *white*. We are getting near some orwell type shit around here.

They have also initiated a nice piece of rubbish called "Blue Alert", which I am positive will only be used for good...

I may rag on the EU, but one good thing about the EU is rampant police murder doesn't seem as common. In the US, police literally mow folks down on video in public and nothing what so ever happens.

Share this post


Link to post

Think about why it is good for it to not be public.

If I were a criminal, I would love to get my hands on that footage. It would help me learn the patrol habits of the officers. That information alone would give me an idea of when would be the most opportune time and place for me to say...steal a car, rob somebody, sell drugs...take your pick.

Also...what exactly do you have against Blue Alert? Do you have the same issue with the Amber Alert? Why or why not?

Edits: Omitted combatant statements to make a more discussion based statement.

Share this post


Link to post

WAPO has some great resources on this.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/national/police-shootings-2016/

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/national/police-shootings/

You can break it down by everything. Age, Race, Gender, Weapon and so on. Please use this to reaffirm whatever world view it is you have while also ignoring the rest of the data that contradicts that world view.

Go 2 it.

Share this post


Link to post
TraceOfSpades said:

Think about why it is good for it to not be public.

If I were a criminal, I would love to get my hands on that footage. It would help me learn the patrol habits of the officers. That information alone would give me an idea of when would be the most opportune time and place for me to say...steal a car, rob somebody, sell drugs...take your pick.

Also...what exactly do you have against Blue Alert? Do you have the same issue with the Amber Alert? Why or why not?

Edits: Omitted combatant statements to make a more discussion based statement.


Aside from the actual threat in this country being police officers who murder people, the issue with blue alert is that it will essentially be "let's spam/smear this persons name and image all over without any real evidence or anything, just based on a hunch".. they already murder people based on a hunch. It is like what the media does, but without editors. They could instantly criminalize and defame anyone at any time.

Their body cam footage should be public. Not only that, it should be live streamed publicly, so that anyone at any time can monitor their behavior. We pay their paycheck, we should see exactly what they are up to at all times so long as they are on duty. 100% public monitoring. You can already see their patrols by simply watching an area for a few days. If someone wants to rob a store they just watch the area around the store for a week. Boom, you have all of the intel you need about patrols.

Don't want it live streamed publicly? Then it should be at least monitored by a third party non-governmental agency. Preferably non-American.

The reason is is that even before anyone is tried in America, as soon as they go to intake, their picture, birth information, full name, and alleged crime are all totally public information and its updated live. Even if nobody is ever tried, their information is still there and still associated with their record. It boggles the mind why people who are not even tried are defamed in such a way, but the police, whom we pay, get to keep their information hidden. It is absolutely astounding. Now, they want to even keep evidence that can be used against their crimes hidden.. the whole purpose of body cams was for the public to have evidence against the police in case of police brutality.

Intake database for my county: http://www.shelby-sheriff.org/injail.html

Nice links tarnsman.

Share this post


Link to post
Mechazawa said:

the issue with blue alert is that it will essentially be "let's spam/smear this persons name and image all over without any real evidence or anything, just based on a hunch"

[citation needed]

EDIT: I mean it could certainly be abused, but I'm not a fan of jumping to conclusions.

Share this post


Link to post
Mechazawa said:

Aside from the actual threat in this country being police officers who murder people, the issue with blue alert is that it will essentially be "let's spam/smear this persons name and image all over without any real evidence or anything, just based on a hunch".. they already murder people based on a hunch. It is like what the media does, but without editors. They could instantly criminalize and defame anyone at any time.

Their body cam footage should be public. Not only that, it should be live streamed publicly, so that anyone at any time can monitor their behavior. We pay their paycheck, we should see exactly what they are up to at all times so long as they are on duty. 100% public monitoring. You can already see their patrols by simply watching an area for a few days. If someone wants to rob a store they just watch the area around the store for a week. Boom, you have all of the intel you need about patrols.

Don't want it live streamed publicly? Then it should be at least monitored by a third party non-governmental agency. Preferably non-American.

The reason is is that even before anyone is tried in America, as soon as they go to intake, their picture, birth information, full name, and alleged crime are all totally public information and its updated live. Even if nobody is ever tried, their information is still there and still associated with their record. It boggles the mind why people who are not even tried are defamed in such a way, but the police, whom we pay, get to keep their information hidden. It is absolutely astounding. Now, they want to even keep evidence that can be used against their crimes hidden.. the whole purpose of body cams was for the public to have evidence against the police in case of police brutality.

Intake database for my county: http://www.shelby-sheriff.org/injail.html

Nice links tarnsman.


1. "The actual threat in this country is police officers who murder people"

According to this page, in 2015, 1,886 people were killed by the police. Just this year so far, according to this site, 8,922 have been murdered. We haven't even finished 2016 and already we have have nearly pentupled that. Also, ask yourself, how many pf the people shot by police do you think deserved it? I'd wager most of them. Unfortunately we only ever hear about the ones where the details are sketchy. Why? Because "Local cop kills bad guy who deserved it" won't get the ratings.

All of that being said...how can anybody say that cops who murder people are the real threat?

Even better, according to this site, which has statistics to support the notion, more whites are killed by the police than blacks.

2. I'd like to see where you get the idea that the police will use "blue alert" to defame somebody who hasn't earned it. From what I've read, Blue Alerts will be issued to people who have killed or severely injured an officer.

3. I'd love to see where you think you can get funding from for a 100% public monitored police force. Hell, why don't we just use this magic technology to monitor everyone's activities? Right? Or is that getting too "Orwell" for you when the tables get turned?

Share this post


Link to post
TraceOfSpades said:

1. "The actual threat in this country is police officers who murder people"

According to this page, in 2015, 1,886 people were killed by the police. Just this year so far, according to this site, 8,922 have been murdered. We haven't even finished 2016 and already we have have nearly pentupled that. Also, ask yourself, how many pf the people shot by police do you think deserved it? I'd wager most of them. Unfortunately we only ever hear about the ones where the details are sketchy. Why? Because "Local cop kills bad guy who deserved it" won't get the ratings.

All of that being said...how can anybody say that cops who murder people are the real threat?

Even better, according to this site, which has statistics to support the notion, more whites are killed by the police than blacks.

2. I'd like to see where you get the idea that the police will use "blue alert" to defame somebody who hasn't earned it. From what I've read, Blue Alerts will be issued to people who have killed or severely injured an officer.

3. I'd love to see where you think you can get funding from for a 100% public monitored police force.


1. Because you can do things to ensure you are not a target to random criminals. Where you live and how you present yourself is a huge factor. You can't protect yourself from police; even if they are trying to murder you, if you fight back it is automatically your fault.

2. They haven't caught the guy obviously, so what ever they say will be a vague description at best, like what the police *already do*. You know "random black guy, white shirt, blue jeans, red jordans", and than anyone who fits that description is automatically a suspect by police and force will be used against them. If it is anything like amber alerts, then it will go even further, they can just pick from a whole list of people in their records and say "he did it", blast that information and its a closed case.

3. Cut police funding. Police do not need tanks and Humvees and military gear. Cut military funding. Cut payroll funding in the government. Lots of places. We do not need a militarized police force, we have a military for that. We have swat teams for that. The police in this country are about as truastable as Mexican police. Sorry man. Tis the truth.

Share this post


Link to post

Hahaha, wow. You think OUR police are militarized? Try going to Brazil, pal.

Cut funding from the police and the government...just because you're a whackjob who thinks the police are out to get you? Hahaha

Also..."We have SWAT for that"...you do realize that SWAT are just police officers with some special training, right? Nobody is a full time SWAT member.

If this is what you mean by a "tank"...



...that doesn't even fire artillary. That is just an armored vehicle used for mobtype situations. Do you see any turrets on there? Any machine guns? No? So what's the real problem here?

People like you are exactly why the police need to be heavily armed. Idiots want to riot and destroy shit every time "the big bad police" shoot somebody and it gets national attention because you never grew up past your rebellion stage.

Why don't you go for a jog in Ford Heights, IL. You won't find a police station there. Let me know how you like it.

Also...if they Blue Alert somebody, they have the information. Just like when a missing person is amber alerted...they have a photograph and a name for the person. You're incredibly ignorant if you think Blue Alert is going to be used as a "hit list* of sorts.

I will be bowing out of this debate now, though. I really don't see either of us making any headway with the other.

Share this post


Link to post

It's not a matter of cutting police funding, it's more a matter of making sure everything they do is accountable in a court of law and they aren't equipped with combat weapons except in extremely dire situations, imho. Obviously the US has a pretty big problem with selling all the surplus military gear to police departments, but I think this is not a new problem, it has been going on since at least the early 1980s. I don't agree with it. Originally it was a measure designed to fight organized crime but now they bust out the heavy duty equipment just because they can and they want to make sure it doesn't get rusty. Otherwise their department won't get the next latest-and-greatest, barely used assault gear from the next surplus sale.

Share this post


Link to post

What's the issue with police being better armed than the criminals? Handguns have terrible accuracy and I'd rather have the thugs taken out with precision and not "officer shoots 20 bullets to kill one idiot" kind of thing.

Share this post


Link to post

a) It's impossible for police to be better armed than criminals in the USA. You can buy any kind of gun or rifle you want or modify something into be a very deadly semi-automatic. Very few restrictions at all. It puts a lot of cops in danger.

b) Thugs are not the only ones who are victims of gun violence.

c) Police should have all the resources they need to keep themselves safe, but not all the resources they need to oppress neighborhoods or strike fear into the populace.

Share this post


Link to post

I wanted to stay out of it...but seriously dude? Cops should be armed enough to defend themselves, but not armed enough to strike fear in people...so...criminals being afraid of the police is bad? Criminals are more likely to go after people they are less afraid of. Your idea literally would just perpetuate violence against cops and people in general.

Fuck that. If people don't want to be afraid of the police tbey shouldn't break the fucking law.

Common fucking sense people...how about trying to disarm just the criminals instead of law abiding citizens and police officers?

Share this post


Link to post
rileymartin said:

Handguns have terrible accuracy and I'd rather have the thugs taken out with precision and not "officer shoots 20 bullets to kill one idiot" kind of thing.

Why would common police ever need a gun that doesn't have terrible accuracy? At least, in this context of "terrible accuracy" apparently means "has an effective range of 50m."

If the situation legitimately requires a sniper, then it's a situation for the SWAT. The entire purpose of the SWAT is to deal with criminal situations that basically require military-grade expertise in armed combat, after all.

If a police officer has such poor aim that they could conceivably kill nineteen civilians to bring down a single criminal, then they're the last person that should be called to an active crime scene. What's needed in this scenario isn't better weapons - the standard issue guns are accurate enough - it's an individual actually trained to use them to a competent degree.

TraceOfSpades said:

Fuck that. If people don't want to be afraid of the police tbey shouldn't break the fucking law.

I agree with this. Which is why I think we should fix the fact that law-abiding citizens are afraid of the police.

TraceOfSpades said:

Common fucking sense people...how about trying to disarm just the criminals instead of law abiding citizens and police officers?

I legitimately don't see why if you did, there'd be any reason for citizens and police to even have guns in the first place.

Share this post


Link to post

^Precisely. Unfortunately, that thought is as nice as it is unrealistic. Criminals will get guns whether they are illegal to own or not. They're criminals. Laws clearly don't matter to them.

Share this post


Link to post
TraceOfSpades said:

I wanted to stay out of it...but seriously dude? Cops should be armed enough to defend themselves, but not armed enough to strike fear in people...so...criminals being afraid of the police is bad?

You'd make a great cop, because you automatically equated people to criminals without the slightest pause.

Share this post


Link to post
TraceOfSpades said:

If I were a criminal, I would love to get my hands on that footage. It would help me learn the patrol habits of the officers. That information alone would give me an idea of when would be the most opportune time and place for me to say...steal a car, rob somebody, sell drugs...take your pick.

Someone dumb enough to need to "study" cam footage of police in order to be able to commit petty crime likely doesn't have the wherewithal to go through with any of this in the first place.

Like some asshole is really gonna make hundreds of public record requests of specific cam footage, and watch all of it, just so he can sell some dime bags. Come on.

Share this post


Link to post
TraceOfSpades said:

Also, ask yourself, how many pf the people shot by police do you think deserved it? I'd wager most of them. Unfortunately we only ever hear about the ones where the details are sketchy. Why? Because "Local cop kills bad guy who deserved it" won't get the ratings.

Deserved it? Now I get that in some situations it's just too dangerous to try to grab someone alive (risks to police or to hostages) but generally the rule of law means that people are entitled to a trial before they are sentenced to death.

TraceOfSpades said:

All of that being said...how can anybody say that cops who murder people are the real threat?

When cops murder people, they get away with it. It doesn't matter how much evidence there is that the death was unnecessary, the cop will get at most a minor reprimand.

When criminals murder people, they don't (unless they've perfectly covered their tracks).

TraceOfSpades said:

Even better, according to this site, which has statistics to support the notion, more whites are killed by the police than blacks.

Yes, in absolute terms. But it just so happens that the white population is statistically also quite larger than the black population, and when you make these statistics proportional to population then black people become over twice more likely to be killed by police than white people.

TraceOfSpades said:

2. I'd like to see where you get the idea that the police will use "blue alert" to defame somebody who hasn't earned it. From what I've read, Blue Alerts will be issued to people who have killed or severely injured an officer.

We have had a perfect example recently. The police merely called him a "person of interest" which is a formulation specifically designed not to call him a "suspect", but that didn't change anything.

Mechazawa said:

3. Cut police funding. Police do not need tanks and Humvees and military gear.

They don't get these things out of funding, they get these things because they are military surplus that the army doesn't know what to do with. There were thousands of MRAPs ordered for the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, and even with just abandoning 2/3 of them back there, they still have more than they can put into storage at home, so giving them away to police departments was the alternative to selling them for scrap metal.

rileymartin said:

What's the issue with police being better armed than the criminals? Handguns have terrible accuracy and I'd rather have the thugs taken out with precision and not "officer shoots 20 bullets to kill one idiot" kind of thing.

That's not a good way to look at it. First, it's not because you've got a sniper rifle that you'll be a sniper; you need to put a lot of training into precision shooting, and there's a limited time budget for policemen as they have other things to do, including other forms of training. I'm sure you'd be fine with cops being only trained to shoot people and not trained into actual police work, but fortunately for society that's not how it works. That's why there are SWAT teams which don't do regular police duty, and regular police isn't supposed to do SWAT stuff.

Furthermore, what does "better armed" mean? You could have a Police Air Force dropping bombs (and why not nuclear bombs?) on places where they suppose some criminals are, and using guided missiles to take out cars going over the speed limit, but honestly it doesn't seem like a good idea. They need arms that are appropriate to their duty, and to leave situations needing more firepower to units created to handle such cases.

Share this post


Link to post
TraceOfSpades said:

so...criminals being afraid of the police is bad?

Civilians being afraid of police is bad. Criminals being afraid of police murdering them in the street when it's a judicial system's role to provide sentencing and punishment is bad. When you're in a position of power like police officers are, and when you have access to dangerous firearms like police are, then they need to be monitored and held accountable for their actions.

TraceOfSpades said:

1. "The actual threat in this country is police officers who murder people"

[...] how many pf the people shot by police do you think deserved it? I'd wager most of them. Unfortunately we only ever hear about the ones where the details are sketchy. Why? Because "Local cop kills bad guy who deserved it" won't get the ratings.

Yeah, the reporting of police brutality is the most unfortunate aspect of police brutality. Maybe incidents of violence by the police on people who don't deserve it gets reported more because it's the job of the police to fucking protect the society it serves in. And that society's taxes go towards their training and operation.

Share this post


Link to post

Thanks for clarification on the surplus stuff.

Two of the issues with "just don't commit crimes" is:

1. Nobody actually knows all of the laws and what is illegal, even the cops. The law is pretty obfuscated. That is why it is always better to not speak when the cops confront you. Use your rights to speak to a lawyer first because they know the law. It is very possible to accidentally break laws, but you are not excused because you didn't know it was a law. So you ask for a lawyer to help you examine the situation. Before even doing that you ask if you are being detained, and if they say no, just say good day officers and walk away. They cannot keep you if you aren't being detained.

2. Even if you aren't breaking the law, all a cop needs to arrest you is "reasonable cause", which is basically anything.

This is why people fear cops.

Share this post


Link to post
Tarnsman said:

WAPO has some great resources on this.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/national/police-shootings-2016/

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/national/police-shootings/

You can break it down by everything. Age, Race, Gender, Weapon and so on. Please use this to reaffirm whatever world view it is you have while also ignoring the rest of the data that contradicts that world view.

Go 2 it.


Enough with the rhetorical bullshit, clearly you do the same exact thing.

EDIT: Every case must be investigated; if they are guilty, that's for the court to decide. We don't need racial arsonists fanning the flames in this country.

dethtoll said:

I see TraceOfSPades has been chuggin' the Kontra Kommando Koolaid.


I see you have been drinking hater-aid.

Share this post


Link to post
TraceOfSpades said:

Cut funding from the police and the government...just because you're a whackjob who thinks the police are out to get you? Hahaha
...
People like you are exactly why the police need to be heavily armed. Idiots want to riot and destroy shit every time "the big bad police" shoot somebody and it gets national attention because you never grew up past your rebellion stage.

You don't do yourself any favours by immediately leaping to personal insults so early in the conversation. It looks immature and gives the impression you have nothing better to stand on. If you're right then you should be perfectly capable of finding the facts you need to argue your point in a more respectful way.

Share this post


Link to post

This whole argument is pretty childish. People who are skirting the lines of criminality and getting shot for it are not martyrs.

Share this post


Link to post
On 7/13/2016 at 11:37 AM, 40oz said:

This whole argument is pretty childish. People who are skirting the lines of criminality and getting shot for it are not martyrs.

*deleted*

Edited by Seele00TextOnly

Share this post


Link to post
Kontra Kommando said:

We don't need racial arsonists fanning the flames in this country.


Bro this is why "political correctness" has taken over the country. Because anytime someone might agree that there is a bit too much grievance mongering and virtue signaling about issues and that maybe we should have less of a 1 sided discussion on them, there are people like you who respond to the very desire for a conversation by calling people "racial arsonists". Again I go back to the justice departments report on the Michael Brown shooting. Yes, it fully debunked "hands up don't shoot" but it also proved a clear systemic problem with the policing of Ferguson that created a culture of tension and animosity that needs to be addressed. Simply saying "see I told you Michael Brown was a thug you need to stop fanning the flames of racism" doesn't help anyone. It's telling a large group of Americans that their concerns are irrelevant and they need to shut up.

Share this post


Link to post
Tarnsman said:

Bro this is why "political correctness" has taken over the country. Because anytime someone might agree that there is a bit too much grievance mongering and virtue signaling about issues and that maybe we should have less of a 1 sided discussion on them, there are people like you who respond to the very desire for a conversation by calling people "racial arsonists". Again I go back to the justice departments report on the Michael Brown shooting. Yes, it fully debunked "hands up don't shoot" but it also proved a clear systemic problem with the policing of Ferguson that created a culture of tension and animosity that needs to be addressed. Simply saying "see I told you Michael Brown was a thug you need to stop fanning the flames of racism" doesn't help anyone. It's telling a large group of Americans that their concerns are irrelevant and they need to shut up.


Wrong, political correctness is a tool of ideological subversion that has created hostile division in this country. The Democrats try to capitalize on this to gain power. What kind of a conversation can be had by riots, and people shouting at police and anyone with a different opinion?

Share this post


Link to post
Kontra Kommando said:

Wrong, political correctness is a tool of ideological subversion that has created hostile division in this country. The Democrats try to capitalize on this to gain power. What kind of a conversation can be had by riots, and people shouting at police and anyone with a different opinion?

Calling statistics "racial arsonism" and refusing to have a conversation about evidence that's presented to you is shouting down anyone with a different opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
esselfortium said:

Calling statistics "racial arsonism" and refusing to have a conversation about evidence that's presented to you is shouting down anyone with a different opinion.


...really, could it be that most of those shootings happened in high crime poverty-stricken areas? Areas that high amounts of violent crime and gang membership? This was about ignoring facts to spin a narrative.

Share this post


Link to post
Kontra Kommando said:

...really, could it be that most of those shootings happened in high crime poverty-stricken areas? Areas that high amounts of violent crime and gang membership? This was about ignoring facts to spin a narrative.


I already linked you statistics showing zero coloration between crime rate and police shootings. You're complaining about people ignoring facts to fit their narrative while literally doing that, every single thing I linked you has been a pretty fair thing. I'm not spamming you Salon articles saying white people are given millions of dollars by the cops while black people are genocided. I'm linking comprehensive studies that show that police brutality impacts most Americans but it impacts certain Americans (poor black people) more. I thought "facts don't care about your feelings" was what the right was all about.

Share this post


Link to post
Tarnsman said:

I already linked you statistics showing zero coloration between crime rate and police shootings. You're complaining about people ignoring facts to fit their narrative while literally doing that, every single thing I linked you has been a pretty fair thing. I'm not spamming you Salon articles saying white people are given millions of dollars by the cops while black people are genocided. I'm linking comprehensive studies that show that police brutality impacts most Americans but it impacts certain Americans (poor black people) more. I thought "facts don't care about your feelings" was what the right was all about.


Really, than I guess that makes you a liar when you read some of the descriptions of the shootings. Crime has a lot to do with these incidents.

Here's some statistics for you,

https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/leoka/2011/officers-feloniously-killed/officers-feloniously-killed#disablemobile

Offenders that have killed police in 2011.

"43 of the alleged offenders were white, 29 were black, 2 were American Indian/Alaskan Native, and 1 was Asian/Pacific Islander. The race was not reported for 2 offenders."

Edit: crime and poverty is the problem. Nothing will ever get fixed if we continue to screw people out of opportunities, while the Democrats continue to eliminate jobs.

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×