BoatBanter.com - View Single Post

KC

On 11/26/2014 11:42 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 26 Nov 2014 20:29:41 -0500, KC wrote:

On 11/26/2014 8:03 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 26 Nov 2014 19:48:46 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

Looks like one of the immediate reactions to the Ferguson (and other)
shooting(s) is a call for all police officers in the USA to wear a
camera intended to document what occurs in a police action.

Pros? Cons?

The only con I have heard is the privacy issue. The pictures are in
the public domain and a lot of people who were not actually arrested
can still have their image popping up on youtube.

Well, if you are in the public domain and somebody films you, from what
I know, that is not an invasion of your civil rights. Now I am not sure
how this works on private property, but I suspect those rules may be
different during police activity??

That is the problem. We expect the cops to be able to go lots of
places where we have the expectation of privacy but that camera is
going to see everything, not just the reason the cop was there.
The cop himself is prevented from using a lot of things he sees but
the camera still sees it.
I am mostly referring to innocent 3d parties, not the object of the
enquiry.

No, I understand completely. They may have to make a "poison pill" law
where they can not use the vid as evidence for a warrant or in court.
Maybe the film can only be used in a court case to prove or disprove the
actions of the cop, or others directly involved in the incident, maybe
only to be viewed at all by court order, and in the presense of a judge.
What I am suggesting is the "daily vid" is sealed and not even the cop
sees it until such time as a judge calls it out....