this post was submitted on 18 Dec 2023
1038 points (99.1% liked)

News

23310 readers
3534 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

At least 1,201 people were killed in 2022 by law enforcement officers, about 100 deaths a month, according to Mapping Police Violence, a nonprofit research group that tracks police killings. ProPublica examined the 101 deaths that occurred in June 2022, a time frame chosen because enough time had elapsed that investigations could reasonably be expected to have concluded. The cases involved 131 law enforcement agencies in 34 states.

In 79 of those deaths, ProPublica confirmed that body-worn camera video exists. But more than a year later, authorities or victims’ families had released the footage of only 33 incidents.

Philadelphia signed a $12.5 million contract in 2017 to equip its entire police force with cameras. Since then, at least 27 people have been killed by Philadelphia police, according to Mapping Police Violence, but in only two cases has body-camera video been released to the public.

ProPublica’s review shows that withholding body-worn camera footage from the public has become so entrenched in some cities that even pleas from victims’ families don’t serve to shake the video loose.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 4 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Absolutely not. That defeats the entire purpose. Foia requests should 100% be answered.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 10 months ago (1 children)

An officer wears a body camera. A confidential informant against the mafia runs up to him in the street and starts talking to him.

A mafia lawyer files a FOIA request for the body camera video of every officer in the department.

Should the department comply with this FOIA request, give up the video and expose the informant to the mafia?

Should the officer be allowed to leave his camera off throughout the day, so as to avoid creating a record that he would be forced to turn over?

Suppose I were to SWAT you. I spoof your number, call the police, tell them I'm you, get them to raid "my" house. They get all geared up, turn in their cameras, raid your house, discover it was a prank. Should I, or anyone I tell, now be allowed to file a FOIA request for their video footage, and publish it "for the lulz"?

The idealistic, absolute position you took here would be ripe for abuse.

I want those cameras running all day long. They should be incorporated into the officer's badge, and have no "off" setting. It should be recording from the time they take it off the charger at the start of their shift, and should keep running until they put it back on the charger after their shift.

The only way that level of intrusiveness is feasible is if nobody - and I mean nobody - can view that video without a warrant or a subpoena.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Obviously that's not an artist situation. Easy appendage to the law. Arrests can't be done with cameras off and turning a camera off should automatically be logged. Therefore a cup who presses the button to turn one off before an arrest should be subject to firing and prosecution. Pressing the button before a your convo with an informant should be no big deal.

Welcome to nuance. It's where we don't blanket accept manipulation and bullying just to avoid a particular specific scenario included in the blanket.

Also yeah, why shouldn't a SWAT be recorded and subject to request?

We also can't rule out technical failure. That's why they should be tamper resistant and have a log for button presses, GPS data, and automatically report. I don't wanna see a cop be prosecuted because some tech fucked up on them.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 10 months ago

Also yeah, why shouldn't a SWAT be recorded and subject to request?

You failed to comprehend that situation. You do not appear to understand the concept of "swatting" if you believe it even remotely reasonable to release that camera footage.

Humans are notoriously bad at consistently following requirements. If your system requires extensive human interaction in real time, your system will also require tolerance for mistakes that humans consistently make when given only split seconds to consider their decisions. The exemplar scenarios I presented demand significantly more thought and consideration than a single officer's quick decision as to whether or not to record. Cases should not succeed or fail, and confidence should not be kept or broken on a single officer's split second decision as to whether his camera should be on or off at a particular moment.

With your system, cameras will occasionally be off when they should be on. That's just human fallibility. No amount of punishment will ever prevent an honest mistake.

We can't get footage if it was never recorded, so we should err on the side of creating the recording. But, we cannot allow the existence of a recording to create unnecessary harm, either to the officer or to members of the public.

We don't need to see any video where there is no suspicion of wrongdoing. When there is a suspicion, we need that camera to have been on. My approach systematically solves both problems; your approach does not.