Federally mandated Cameras for cops

[Ravi]

My big hesitation would be that this would mean the cops filmed any and all interactions and that constitutes an invasion of privacy.

 

[Ravi]

A mandate, by definition, takes away the right for someone to decide for themselves what is best for them.

Christ Almighty, I can't believe I actually have to explain this.

So you think cops should be able to decide what is best for cops?

 

[g5000]

A mandate, by definition, takes away the right for someone to decide for themselves what is best for them.

Christ Almighty, I can't believe I actually have to explain this.

So you think cops should be able to decide what is best for cops?

I think I, and the people of my community, should decide what is best for the community, not the federal government.

Don't be so stupid as to think giving the federal government the power to mandate shit will stop at cameras on cops. You should know better than that by now if you aren't deaf, dumb, blind, and stupid.

 

[Ravi]

A mandate, by definition, takes away the right for someone to decide for themselves what is best for them.

Christ Almighty, I can't believe I actually have to explain this.

So you think cops should be able to decide what is best for cops?

I think I, and the people of my community, should decide what is best for the community, not the federal government.

And yet no matter where I go in the USA I can be arrested by the police.

Maybe we should make it so cops can only interact with citizens of their state, or county, or city, or town.

 

[g5000]

My big hesitation would be that this would mean the cops filmed any and all interactions and that constitutes an invasion of privacy.

If you are interacting with a cop, your privacy is already moot.

 

[g5000]

A mandate, by definition, takes away the right for someone to decide for themselves what is best for them.

Christ Almighty, I can't believe I actually have to explain this.

So you think cops should be able to decide what is best for cops?

I think I, and the people of my community, should decide what is best for the community, not the federal government.

And yet no matter where I go in the USA I can be arrested by the police.

Maybe we should make it so cops can only interact with citizens of their state, or county, or city, or town.

Holy fuck, it getting really stupid around here.

You can only be arrested by the police as long as those police are in their jurisdiction.

So we don't need to "make it so cops can only interact with citizens of their state, or county, or city, or town", BECAUSE THAT IS THE WAY IT IS ALREADY.

 

[Ravi]

My big hesitation would be that this would mean the cops filmed any and all interactions and that constitutes an invasion of privacy.

If you are interacting with a cop, your privacy is already moot.

Wrong.

 

[Ravi]

A mandate, by definition, takes away the right for someone to decide for themselves what is best for them.

Christ Almighty, I can't believe I actually have to explain this.

So you think cops should be able to decide what is best for cops?

I think I, and the people of my community, should decide what is best for the community, not the federal government.

And yet no matter where I go in the USA I can be arrested by the police.

Maybe we should make it so cops can only interact with citizens of their state, or county, or city, or town.

Holy fuck, it getting really stupid around here.

You can only be arrested by the police as long as those police are in their jurisdiction.

Did I stutter? I can go to NYC and be arrested by a NYC cop. If that is so, why shouldn't a camera mandate be required by the federal government?

 

[Ravi]

A mandate, by definition, takes away the right for someone to decide for themselves what is best for them.

Christ Almighty, I can't believe I actually have to explain this.

So you think cops should be able to decide what is best for cops?

I think I, and the people of my community, should decide what is best for the community, not the federal government.

And yet no matter where I go in the USA I can be arrested by the police.

Maybe we should make it so cops can only interact with citizens of their state, or county, or city, or town.

Holy fuck, it getting really stupid around here.

You can only be arrested by the police as long as those police are in their jurisdiction.

So we don't need to "make it so cops can only interact with citizens of their state, or county, or city, or town", BECAUSE THAT IS THE WAY IT IS ALREADY.

Are you hitting the turkey a few days early?

 

[Asclepias]

A mandate, by definition, takes away the right for someone to decide for themselves what is best for them.

Christ Almighty, I can't believe I actually have to explain this.

So you think cops should be able to decide what is best for cops?

I think I, and the people of my community, should decide what is best for the community, not the federal government.

And yet no matter where I go in the USA I can be arrested by the police.

Maybe we should make it so cops can only interact with citizens of their state, or county, or city, or town.

Holy fuck, it getting really stupid around here.

You can only be arrested by the police as long as those police are in their jurisdiction.

So we don't need to "make it so cops can only interact with citizens of their state, or county, or city, or town", BECAUSE THAT IS THE WAY IT IS ALREADY.

Not quite true. A cop can arrest you out of jurisdiction if in pursuit.

 

[Katzndogz]

I recently read that where these cameras are in use, there is no police brutality. We also know that police are killing more people now.

All that money th

I recently read that where these cameras are in use, there is no police brutality.

Think about what you just said...

It's harder to claim police brutality when there is film. Until the film is said to be character assassination of the criminal.

 

[g5000]

A mandate, by definition, takes away the right for someone to decide for themselves what is best for them.

Christ Almighty, I can't believe I actually have to explain this.

So you think cops should be able to decide what is best for cops?

I think I, and the people of my community, should decide what is best for the community, not the federal government.

And yet no matter where I go in the USA I can be arrested by the police.

Maybe we should make it so cops can only interact with citizens of their state, or county, or city, or town.

Holy fuck, it getting really stupid around here.

You can only be arrested by the police as long as those police are in their jurisdiction.

Did I stutter? I can go to NYC and be arrested by a NYC cop. If that is so, why shouldn't a camera mandate be required by the federal government?

Wow. You have zero understanding of enumerated powers and states rights. Holy shit.

 

[Ravi]

A mandate, by definition, takes away the right for someone to decide for themselves what is best for them.

Christ Almighty, I can't believe I actually have to explain this.

So you think cops should be able to decide what is best for cops?

I think I, and the people of my community, should decide what is best for the community, not the federal government.

And yet no matter where I go in the USA I can be arrested by the police.

Maybe we should make it so cops can only interact with citizens of their state, or county, or city, or town.

Holy fuck, it getting really stupid around here.

You can only be arrested by the police as long as those police are in their jurisdiction.

So we don't need to "make it so cops can only interact with citizens of their state, or county, or city, or town", BECAUSE THAT IS THE WAY IT IS ALREADY.

Not quite true. A cop can arrest you out of jurisdiction if in pursuit.

A cop can also arrest me if I am not in MY jurisdiction. I live in Miami but could be arrested by the police of any city if I am in their city.

 

[Asclepias]

So you think cops should be able to decide what is best for cops?

I think I, and the people of my community, should decide what is best for the community, not the federal government.

And yet no matter where I go in the USA I can be arrested by the police.

Maybe we should make it so cops can only interact with citizens of their state, or county, or city, or town.

Holy fuck, it getting really stupid around here.

You can only be arrested by the police as long as those police are in their jurisdiction.

So we don't need to "make it so cops can only interact with citizens of their state, or county, or city, or town", BECAUSE THAT IS THE WAY IT IS ALREADY.

Not quite true. A cop can arrest you out of jurisdiction if in pursuit.

A cop can also arrest me if I am not in MY jurisdiction. I live in Miami but could be arrested by the police of any city if I am in their city.

That cop would be in their jurisdiction.

 

[Plasmaball]

i figured i'd run into a few people saying local level, but the local level doesnt seem to have the funds to buy these cameras. Armored personal carriers, Yes, but cameras no.
Do you see the issue here? Unless you think these small local towns getting these "tanks" are also an issue.

I think using cost savings as an excuse for expanding federal powers is as insidious as it gets.

im not sure how this would be expanding powers? It would just be giving local police money to buy the cameras and saying hey you need to wear these. Its a tad different from saying cops can come into your house without a warrant and arrest you for nothing.

You don't see how the federal government MANDATING THE USE OF BODY CAMERAS isn't an expansion of federal power? Really?

Jesus! You are proving my point about insidiousness! The federal government's tentacles have creeped so thoroughly into your psyche you don't even notice any more when they expand. Not only that, you actively seek them to have more power!

yeah calm down there killer.We are just talking here.

 

[Ravi]

So you think cops should be able to decide what is best for cops?

I think I, and the people of my community, should decide what is best for the community, not the federal government.

And yet no matter where I go in the USA I can be arrested by the police.

Maybe we should make it so cops can only interact with citizens of their state, or county, or city, or town.

Holy fuck, it getting really stupid around here.

You can only be arrested by the police as long as those police are in their jurisdiction.

Did I stutter? I can go to NYC and be arrested by a NYC cop. If that is so, why shouldn't a camera mandate be required by the federal government?

Wow. You have zero understanding of enumerated powers and states rights. Holy shit.

Sure I do.

So explain to me how the police of another city have some power over me if I do not reside in that city but am simply there for a visit? And since they do have some power over me, why aren't my rights enforced by the federal government via the cameras, since they can't be enforced by anyone but the federal government.

 

[Ravi]

I think I, and the people of my community, should decide what is best for the community, not the federal government.

And yet no matter where I go in the USA I can be arrested by the police.

Maybe we should make it so cops can only interact with citizens of their state, or county, or city, or town.

Holy fuck, it getting really stupid around here.

You can only be arrested by the police as long as those police are in their jurisdiction.

So we don't need to "make it so cops can only interact with citizens of their state, or county, or city, or town", BECAUSE THAT IS THE WAY IT IS ALREADY.

Not quite true. A cop can arrest you out of jurisdiction if in pursuit.

A cop can also arrest me if I am not in MY jurisdiction. I live in Miami but could be arrested by the police of any city if I am in their city.

That cop would be in their jurisdiction.

Yes, I realize that. But since I am free to travel as I please, how else protect me with cop cameras unless the fed mandates it?

Not that I am totally sold on the idea of cop cameras.

 

[Anathema]

Here's what you'd find if body/lapel cameras were required for all LEO's.....

1. A massive reduction in forces, due to retirements and officers quitting their jobs. You may think this is a great thing until you realize that most of these would be senior/veteran officers and the ability to replace them would be very low.

2. A massive reduction in the effectiveness of Law Enforcement personnel. Once every thug out there knows the cop has a camera on him/her, they're all gonna want their 15 minutes of fame and their hope to take that "million dollar punch/push/tasering" that will set them up for life.

 

[Asclepias]

And yet no matter where I go in the USA I can be arrested by the police.

Maybe we should make it so cops can only interact with citizens of their state, or county, or city, or town.

Holy fuck, it getting really stupid around here.

You can only be arrested by the police as long as those police are in their jurisdiction.

So we don't need to "make it so cops can only interact with citizens of their state, or county, or city, or town", BECAUSE THAT IS THE WAY IT IS ALREADY.

Not quite true. A cop can arrest you out of jurisdiction if in pursuit.

A cop can also arrest me if I am not in MY jurisdiction. I live in Miami but could be arrested by the police of any city if I am in their city.

That cop would be in their jurisdiction.

Yes, I realize that. But since I am free to travel as I please, how else protect me with cop cameras unless the fed mandates it?

Not that I am totally sold on the idea of cop cameras.

Ok. I see what you are getting it. It would have to be federally mandated which I dont think is legal.

 

[Plasmaball]

So.....we have some riots going on, we have story after story of cops being dicks when cameras are put on them and they dont seem to know it. So why not take a few billion, ( we don't need tanks so cut that out of the budget) and produce enough dash and body cameras for the police.
It would be an extremely easy fix and we wouldnt have brown cases popping up. Or is this just going to get a bunch of state right posts? We have no problem selling armored tanks to local small time Law enforcement, so why not give them some cameras?

No local law enforcement gets "tanks" They get APC's or armored cars.

Policing is a state level issue. If the feds wanted to require all federal police to have these things, they can do it.

Personally the more cameras on law enforcement the better, however it has to come from the state level.

i just used "tanks" because i was being lazy...
So its a state issue but you have no problem when they use a federal program to get those APC's, helicopters and grenade launchers do you?

I don't think that's a bright idea either, and I am against the militarization of police when combined with the disarming of citizenry, however they are not tanks.

Words mean things.

cool story