Even if the wireless feeds are not yet feasible, I'd like to continue the debate about the expected privacy of police.

I think it is really important that the public is able to police the police or at least be able to watch what they are doing. It creates accountability. I never said anything about including sound but it would be nice to be able to see what they are doing in public.

Quote :

"Now suddenly people know if the police were called to your house, whether anybody was arrested or not. Trouble at home? Well now the internet knows, because it saw the police go to your house after reports of a domestic dispute."

can't people just stand out on the street and know this?

Quote :

"What is the advantage to being able to watch all of it at any time?"

The public have a right to observe police activity from a legal distance. This is just a modern expression of that right. The police work for the people but a lot of people in this country have gotten it twisted and think that the police rule the people.

Quote :

"It is the policy of the Seattle Police Department that people not involved in an incident may be allowed to remain in proximity of any stop, detention or arrest, or any other incident occurring in public so long as their presence is lawful and their activities, including verbal comments, do not obstruct, hinder, delay, or threaten the safety or compromise the outcome of legitimate police actions and/or rescue efforts. Officers should assume that a member of the general public is observing, and possibly recording, their activities at all times. I. Witnessing Stops, Detentions, Arrests and other Police Actions A. With the prevalence of digital cameras, cell phone cameras, etc. in existence, it is common for police incidents to be photographed by citizens as well as the media. Officer safety, the protection of the suspect or person being detained, including his/her right to privacy, and the safety of onlookers are the most important factors. With these factors in mind, officers shall recognize and obey the right of persons to observe, photograph, and/or make verbal comments in the presence of police officers performing their duties. B. Citizens, regardless of their intent to video and/or audio record an activity, may not enter any established marked and protected crime scene or a restricted area that would normally be unavailable to the general public. Officers and follow-up investigators will determine who enters or leaves a secure scene. C. In public areas, there is no distinction between citizens employed by news media organizations and those who are not. The existence of “press credentials” extends no special privileges to any citizen, nor does the absence of such credentials limit a citizen’s free access to record law enforcement activities while in public, under most circumstances. II. Bystander Filming of Officer-Suspect Contacts A. It is increasingly common for bystanders, who are not involved in any criminal activity, to record contacts between officers and citizens. Bystanders have the right to record police officer enforcement activities, except when: 1 The safety of the officer or the suspect is jeopardized. 2. Persons interfere or violate the law. 3. Persons threaten others by words or action, or they attempt to incite others to violate the law. B. Although a contact with citizens to obtain evidence is encouraged, officers will not detain citizens or seize their recorded media when that media contains video, still images or sounds associated with a crime. C. When recorded media is being sought from an uninvolved citizen, the first course of action should be a request for voluntary surrender of the media. This request and the citizen’s response should be documented. If the citizen surrenders the media they should be given a case number and the requesting officer’s name. D. If officers do not have sufficient authority to seize the media but think it may be of value to an investigation, then officers should advise citizens that a court order will be sought for the media and that it should not be tampered with, altered or destroyed, since it may be evidence of a crime."

these rights have been infrenged upon by the police. if the police control your right to observe them, they can take it away whenever convenient. we need to put that right back into public control

Quote :

"And for all these problems you get what, exactly? "

all of the things laid out in the above policy

9/24/2016 12:59:08 PM

Quote :

" you really have no idea what you're talking about"

9/24/2016 2:03:15 PM

i already conceded that in the first sentence and have moved on. Are you here to discuss solutions or just here to flame?

9/24/2016 2:15:44 PM

no, no one wants to discuss this topic with you

9/24/2016 2:20:44 PM

Quote :

" So why not use it? Why not store it in the cloud?"

Man, you really have no idea how things work do you? Do you think cloud storage and access is free in terms or price, computational, or network power?

9/24/2016 2:49:41 PM

Quote :

" i told you this motherfucker was a worthless piece of shit. should be fired on the spot."

9/24/2016 3:04:11 PM

Quote :

"most state hwp and large city pds already have internet in the cruisers."

Yes and it's terribly slow.

And another point, my car has to be at the PD for sometimes up to an hour to download all of my video.

9/24/2016 4:14:52 PM

https://twitter.com/alanblinder/status/779779618026971136

video will be released

9/24/2016 4:40:07 PM

but guyz its totally not because of the protests, protests don't accomplish anything guyz!!

9/24/2016 4:48:53 PM

Quote :

"Man, you really have no idea how things work do you? Do you think cloud storage and access is free in terms or price, computational, or network power?"

Well no, I found a few sites that offer cloud storage for ip camera streams and it was 350/mo for 1500gb. I cited that on the last page. again, I already conceded that the whole idea is still some years away from being easy to execute because of data charges so perhaps the conversation should shift to if we should do it when it becomes easy and cheap.

9/24/2016 5:52:26 PM

Quote :

"I found a few sites that offer cloud storage for ip camera streams and it was 350/mo for 1500gb"

That's not how it works.

9/24/2016 5:56:11 PM

Quote :

"can't people just stand out on the street and know this?"

No. They can see that the police have stopped at your house, but they don't know why.

And by the same logic, can't you just stand out on the street and observe what the police are doing?

Not all the time, no. The technology you are proposing makes it massively easier. It does the same thing for snooping on people that police interact with.

And I completely forgot about car insurance companies. You can bet your ass they'll monitor those feeds, looking for their clients' license plates, coming up with ways to increase rates for people who are pulled over but manage to avoid getting a record.

Quote :

"if the police control your right to observe them, they can take it away whenever convenient."

I fundamentally agree with you that citizens have the right to observe and record police actions in public, from a safe distance. But that is a world away from giving citizens the right to observe every second of activity, even just vehicular activity. If this were proposed for any other profession, you would be outraged. We would not countenance having live feeds of every medical procedure, for example, so that citizens could look out for malpractice.

9/24/2016 6:15:11 PM

I'd take livestreaming body cams on politicians though

9/24/2016 6:29:54 PM

^this reminds of the terrible novel The Circle by Dave Eggers:

Quote :

"Meanwhile, the Circle continues to develop a range of sophisticated technologies, including SeeChange: light, portable cameras that can provide real-time video with minimal efforts. Eventually, SeeChange cameras are worn all day long by politicians wishing to be 'transparent', allowing the public to see what they are seeing at all times."

9/24/2016 6:49:33 PM

Lol that video. Come on cops

9/24/2016 7:46:52 PM

Yea I thought it was pretty bad too. The dash cam one.

But he was allegedly smoking a blunt. Let the pearl clutching begin.....

[Edited on September 24, 2016 at 7:50 PM. Reason : And an ankle holster? Who the fuck wears those?]

9/24/2016 7:48:43 PM

Need to get some auto-stabilizers on those bodycams

9/24/2016 7:52:06 PM

what about an ankle holster?

9/24/2016 8:00:04 PM

NC has the shittest bodycams I've ever seen. I want to spend my tax dollars on cams better than that BS.

9/24/2016 8:01:18 PM

OH SHIT, WE GOT A BLUNT GUYS, TIME TO KILL THIS DUDE

9/24/2016 8:05:04 PM

Can someone give me a tl;dr version of the police's account as to why they started messing with that dude in the first place? They saw him get out of the car with a gun in his hand, then he got back in? Is that their story?

9/24/2016 8:07:32 PM

they were in plain clothes and saw him rolling a blount and holding a gun in his car so they ran to a phone booth and came back in full uniform to start giving him orders, one tried to breach the window and then scott got out.

9/24/2016 8:09:33 PM

I am surprised no one has posted the video here yet.

I watched it, that was plain murder. Of course they are saying they shot him because they thought they were in "imminent physical danger".

Yes, makes sense, considering he was many many feet away from them, not moving towards them, and there was a 4,000 lb obstacle between them and him.

9/24/2016 8:52:48 PM

Holy fucking shit, just watched the dash cam footage, dude was nonchalantly walking backwards, both hands at his side, if he had a gun in his hands, I couldn't tell, and they just straight up murdered him.

9/24/2016 9:06:07 PM

If he had a weapon, but yea this is a bad look

9/24/2016 9:34:33 PM

After seeing it, it is absolutely no wonder they didnt want to release it

9/24/2016 9:48:22 PM

Yeah this video shows no reason for deadly force. Why the fuck can't they use pepper spray or a taser first? Manslaughter charges are appropriate in this case

9/24/2016 10:08:55 PM

Even if the guy had a gun in his hand, which isn't clear from the video, there was nothing to justify shooting him

9/24/2016 11:12:25 PM

That video doesn't answer a ton of questions, in fact I have more. From what I understand, the body camera we are viewing isn't not the officer (he is in the red shirt @ the end of the video). Mr. Scott gets out, turns toward body camera officer and then something happens to make body camera officer move to his left and around the car. Based on pure speculation, I believe Scott looks at body camera officer and then tries to flee, not knowing that the he is fleeing towards another officer. The officer then shoots, because Scott is fleeing toward him and had just been armed with a handgun. That I believe is *reasonable enough to use deadly force.

*I didn't say practical or tactical or right or awesome or boom headshot, just that under the law it's reasonable.

Feel free to flame, twist my words, etc

9/24/2016 11:22:54 PM

The latest CMPD presser was saying he was a safety concern because he had a blunt in the neighborhood and he may have had a gun.

I agree with those calling for manslaughter. Dude was not charging at anyone and they shot him about 5 times.

[Edited on September 24, 2016 at 11:31 PM. Reason : better]

9/24/2016 11:28:44 PM

Video is here for those looking for it: http://www.nytimes.com/video/us/100000004669386/police-footage-of-charlotte-shooting.html

9/24/2016 11:42:54 PM

Quote :

"Based on pure speculation, [it was a good shoot]"

Why even speculate to that extent? Wait a minute I think I know the answer to this one...

Quote :

"just that under the law it's reasonable"

Which law is that?


Edit: Wait did we just watch the same fucking video? How in the fuck was that dude threatening anyone while he was walking backwards, which is when he got shot? Even if he had a gun in his hand I didn't see him raise it [while he was walking backwards towards the officers]



[Edited on September 25, 2016 at 12:01 AM. Reason : ]

9/24/2016 11:51:10 PM

Quote :

"Based on pure speculation, I believe Scott looks at body camera officer and then tries to flee,"

Are you fucking kidding me??? The entire thing is on tape, he is slowly backing up, there is absolutely ZERO evidence of him trying to flee, just slowly backing up, transitioning into immediately getting murdered

9/24/2016 11:57:24 PM

Quote :

"he is slowly backing up, there is absolutely ZERO evidence of him trying to flee, just slowly backing up, transitioning into immediately getting murdered"

Agreed. I don't know how in the fuck our resident police officer isn't discussing that dash cam video that shows the dude slowly backing up until he's shot dead, and instead is focusing on some shakey AF bodycam video that doesn't show shit.

9/25/2016 12:00:50 AM

Quote :

"Wait did we just watch the same fucking video?"

. I had only seen the body camera video when I posted that. I would like to retract my prior post, but will save my commentary for the morning and have watched it a few more times.

[Edited on September 25, 2016 at 12:05 AM. Reason : ...]

9/25/2016 12:04:10 AM

Its completely obvious to me that the situation must have been disorienting/confusing/scary/nuts especially to someone who had suffered a traumatic brain injury. He probably didnt know what the hell to do and was totally panicked but tried to remain calm with his actions by being deliberate and slow in his movements. Very sad that the police officers didnt attempt de-escalation tactics at all. Another unnecessary police killing. Certainly not as cut-and-dry as Tulsa but there should definitely be charges against the officer who fired the shots. At least they attempted to aid the man.


[Edited on September 25, 2016 at 12:14 AM. Reason : a]

9/25/2016 12:10:27 AM

^^ Watch that dash cam footage a few more times and tell me how that dude was a threat. It's definitely important to not knee-jerk into forming a complete bias-confirming opinion from a single video (except in obvious Officer Slager type situations), but I'm trying pretty fucking hard to not do so in this situation. Somebody tell me why I shouldn't.

Quote :

" I would like to retract my prior post"

I respect you, and I truly appreciate you sharing your behind the blue wall perspective here, but your earlier "good shoot" take here is as unobjective as our resident criminal defense attorney turned prospective politician's Facebook posts.


[Edited on September 25, 2016 at 12:24 AM. Reason : V Did you watch the videos released today? I'm not sure it matters.]

[Edited on September 25, 2016 at 12:26 AM. Reason : But in general, we don't know yet. I'd have to lean towards yes, but who the fuck knows given the fact that our police have a rich and storied history of planting evidence.]

9/25/2016 12:12:31 AM

haven't been paying attention to this story. was there a gun in his hand when they shot him or do we not know?

9/25/2016 12:16:36 AM

It's not clear in the video, but what is clear is that his hands were by his side and he was moving slowly backwards and not a threat

9/25/2016 12:24:27 AM

http://americanmilitarynews.com/2016/09/breaking-video-charlotte-police-release-multiple-shooting-videos-firm-statement-refuse-to-be-intimidated-absolutely-had-a-gun/?utm_medium=facebook&utm_campaign=alt&utm_source=asmdss

YouTube video links there

9/25/2016 12:28:00 AM

As someone else here said, I can see why they didn't want to release that video [Yay Protesting! Turns out that shit works.]

[Edited on September 25, 2016 at 12:32 AM. Reason : But thank Jebus we're in a time where there IS video to either keep people honest or exonerate them. I'm pretty sure we can all realize what happened back in the day when there was no such technology}

9/25/2016 12:31:20 AM

even the republicans on facebook are saying the killing was not justified

9/25/2016 12:48:50 AM

There's a lot of kids in wolf pack students saying shooting was fair because he wasn't following orders.

I wonder if that mentality is a result of growing up post 9/11 world?

9/25/2016 1:05:07 AM

Are you sure they're saying fair ?? Cause if so there a bunch can if fuckwits. A lot of people are saying this doesn't situation tends not to happen when you follow orders, which is a true statement, but duck if it's fair.

9/25/2016 6:01:34 AM

Did you have a stroke while typing that? Because Jesus Christ.

9/25/2016 6:46:39 AM

9/25/2016 7:13:33 AM

My phones auto correct is all fucked up and I'm with my 2 day old in the ICU and its 6 am. I did my best, but don't care enough to fix it hopefully my point came across.

9/25/2016 7:33:17 AM

^Congrats and good luck!

9/25/2016 8:29:11 AM

^ pics in old school thank you!!

9/25/2016 8:44:52 AM

looks like the protest reached Auburn last night

Oh, nm, just a bunch of dumb white kids lighting trees downtown on fire to celebrate a football win.

9/25/2016 8:45:43 AM