Getting the Police under control

[Bishop]

Correct, ban inc. Don't come back.

[citadela01]

Interesting topic.
I'll just skip all the bickering going on last few pages and respond to op.
I dont think implementing wide lens cameras is the solution or should be used alltho I have no doubts it will eventually happen. While this would definitelly help prevent some abuse of power in those cases where it is impulsive act by police officers it would not adress corruption as a whole at all, not on a more organized level.
Main reason I dont like this solution is because I feel it is violation of personal liberties. And I am not talkin usa amandman rights and crap like that ... I am talking about the fact authorities that would monitor officers during their day would have complete insight into their personal affairs.
Do they really need to know what I order for breakfast, what my wife told me happened with my kids at school or what are my plans for this weekend ? Or to make it more seerious do they really need to know how I feel about my boss or current political situation in the country ?
Will my chance to advance professionally go down the drain if I think my boss is an asshole and curent head of state is puppet in the service of someones economical interests ?
If we agree power corrupts who will prevent supervisors of such system to abuse power given to them ?

I am completely against anything that pushes us in the BB direction. Its a common practice allrdy for companies to have complete surveilance of their office space, op sugestion would be pretty much same thing but for police officers. I am against both and would be happy to see such practices become illegal.

To conclude I do not feel that possibility that someone IS corrupt warants measures against corruption. That is against the very principle that everyone is innocent until proven guilty.

[Korp]

I am talking about the fact authorities that would monitor officers during their day would have complete insight into their personal affairs.

What personal affairs are you engaged in while working?

Do they really need to know what I order for breakfast, what my wife told me happened with my kids at school or what are my plans for this weekend ? Or to make it more seerious do they really need to know how I feel about my boss or current political situation in the country ?

Seems rather reasonable that you should be able to take it off during breaks. But otherwise nothing that you mentioned is something that should be done within the limits of your job.

This isnt really pushing anything towards a BB society, look at London thats a great example of pushing towards a BB society with all the cctv cams. Are you against having cameras at high security sites? Banks? Jewlery stores? etc all kind of places that needs survailance? I can see negative things about the ide (which also been mentioned before i think) but not what you suggest.

[citadela01]

I dont know about you Korp but I make and receive personal phonecalls while at work, I discuss things outside of the work itself with coworkers etc etc. Its illusionary to expect professional life has no interaction with personal one, we are not drones that shut down during workday ad get completely cut of from our personal lives. Those two are inevitably connected.

As far as turning cameras off for break or something that kinda defeats the purpose of it. Who is to say corrupt officer will not "take break" to have a lunch at restourant and meet there with his culprint or commit any wrongdoing camera is supose to prevent ?
Like I said, I think effectivnes of such aproach would be limited to impuslive abuse of power only which in all honesty is minor compared to police participating in organized criminal activities imo. And even than a lot of moral question get raised like who and when can supinat those recordings, which open more oportunities for abuse.

You greatly underestimate the BB factor imo. It would be HUGE step toward such society since (afaik) it would be first and grounbreaking instance of centering the enforced video surveilances techniques on individual rather than location or event. London cctv cams dont even come close imo, not in the same league even.

[Korp]

I dont know about you Korp but I make and receive personal phonecalls while at work, I discuss things outside of the work itself with coworkers etc etc. Its illusionary to expect professional life has no interaction with personal one, we are not drones that shut down during workday ad get completely cut of from our personal lives. Those two are inevitably connected.

I dont know, the jobs ive had we werent allowed to have cellphones around disturbed the work pace so to speak. I tend to work at work and not tend to personal business that I do after work.

As far as turning cameras off for break or something that kinda defeats the purpose of it. Who is to say corrupt officer will not "take break" to have a lunch at restourant and meet there with his culprint or commit any wrongdoing camera is supose to prevent ?

With that pessemitic outlook why should we trust anyone, everyone lies.

You greatly underestimate the BB factor imo. It would be HUGE step toward such society since (afaik) it would be first and grounbreaking instance of centering the enforced video surveilances techniques on individual rather than location or event. London cctv cams dont even come close imo, not in the same league even.

So, while with the video camers on a police officer would be in the line of duty which lets face it a lot of people gets filmed at work constantly, banks, jewelry stores (there is no difference imo) is more "BB" than you getting filmed constantly when you go around doing your personal business? I see the later one as a lot bigger step towards a Big brother society than anything else.

[citadela01]

I dont know, the jobs ive had we werent allowed to have cellphones around disturbed the work pace so to speak. I tend to work at work and not tend to personal business that I do after work.



With that pessemitic outlook why should we trust anyone, everyone lies.


So, while with the video camers on a police officer would be in the line of duty which lets face it a lot of people gets filmed at work constantly, banks, jewelry stores (there is no difference imo) is more "BB" than you getting filmed constantly when you go around doing your personal business? I see the later one as a lot bigger step towards a Big brother society than anything else.

There is no need to patronize or question my work ethics, especially not if you type that msg early in the morning on the week day.
We were talking about police officers, should they restrain from discussing anything other than work related issues while ie driving in the patrol car ?

My view was not pesimistic. I was simply pointing out that you are transfering oportunity to abuse power from one instance to another rather than to close it what would be the goal of the idea initially. This doesnt achive intended goal.

I really didnt get the meaning of that last sentance. Not beeing a grammer nazi here but with so many words and no interpunction meaning is lost to me.
But there is a big difference to workin in the surveiled area and beeing the object of the survilance yourself.

[Korp]

We were talking about police officers, should they restrain from discussing anything other than work related issues while ie driving in the patrol car ?

Nah, they can discuss whatever they want but you're on the job and excepting privacy which doesnt go hand in hand imo.

My view was not pesimistic. I was simply pointing out that you are transfering oportunity to abuse power from one instance to another rather than to close it what would be the goal of the idea initially. This doesnt achive intended goal.

So then its better to have the all the possibilities in the world to break the law instead?

I really didnt get the meaning of that last sentance. Not beeing a grammer nazi here but with so many words and no interpunction meaning is lost to me.
But there is a big difference to workin in the surveiled area and beeing the object of the survilance yourself.

Haha, no its me being bad. The Last option ie, London cctvs being a bigger step to a Big brother society. But while working in the surveiled area you are being the object of survilance yourself, ie everything you talk about records? I dont know if sound included thou, maybe not. The only negative issue I can see with cameras is that it would maybe make the cop too afraid to act acordingly cause he would be afraid of reprimands later on.

[citadela01]

Nah, they can discuss whatever they want but you're on the job and excepting privacy which doesnt go hand in hand imo.



So then its better to have the all the possibilities in the world to break the law instead?



Haha, no its me being bad. The Last option ie, London cctvs being a bigger step to a Big brother society. But while working in the surveiled area you are being the object of survilance yourself, ie everything you talk about records? I dont know if sound included thou, maybe not. The only negative issue I can see with cameras is that it would maybe make the cop too afraid to act acordingly cause he would be afraid of reprimands later on.

I am not talking about privacy per se, but there has to be a line at which point individual is not beeing controled but given benefit of the doubt.
Logic and reasoning you use to justify camera on police officer can be aplied to justify installing (imaginary) thought recording device. Its extreme example but I use it to paint a picture.
Your employer does not own you, you are not a slave and he does not have a right to monitor and control every action you take during work hours. While this is curently usually not the truth and society is taking a turn at turning us into part time slaves in service of profit this doesnt make it right and should not be further encouraged.

Reason I am pointing out a big diference between individual and location centered surveilance is in the aproach. I am sure any data analisyst could elborate this much better but such data would give way too much insight into individuals.
I am not talkin about some obscure tinfoil conspiracies theories here but such information could (and would) be used in very mundane but basically unethical ways like targeted advertising, behavioral analysis etc etc.
Oportunities for abuse are endless and its only a matter of time before abuse would become accepted and individual liberties would be knocked down another notch.
This would be a big step toward bb society imo.

[Octaedron]

youtube . com/watch?v=2nAZC80xgMo

It's not just the police its all federal security

[thephatman]

idk if you checked the rules but anything on the internet is not admissible as evidence according to bishop. The same guy who has no evidence of his own.

[Crazyguy]

* Posts encouraging illegal or unethical behavior*

http://forums.utopia-game.com/showth...ng-combination.

Some PPl have no respect for rules of any kind.
I don't think that Bish bans PPL for disagreeing with him. He and I rarely agree. We agree to disagree respectfully, and I've never been banned.

[Bishop]

idk if you checked the rules but anything on the internet is not admissible as evidence according to bishop. The same guy who has no evidence of his own.

Youtube clips are not admissible evidence :/ They aren't even representative.

[thephatman]

They are all more admissible than the baseless opinions of one guy. Bishop you seem to have a lot of opinions and nothing but hot air and ban hammers to back them up. Why dont you live up to your own standards and submit some evidence or stay out of the debate.

Whut about the LAPD report and SAQ report? also not admissible i presume? or if they are im guessing you will dismiss them out of hand as irregularities and uncommon. If an entire police unit could become so blatantly corrupt for so long with out being caught how many individuals out there do you think escape undetected?

I would guess that for every police beating captured on tape there are 10 more that were not. For every beating that makes it to the cable news 100 or more that were not publicized.

* Also you have yet to address the points about check points and "free speech zones". Clearly these practices are widespread and common place. To anyone with a 5th grade reading level these practices are clearly in violation of the constitution and oaths of office taken by all police; Namely, Due process and the Freedom of Speech.

* Or the use of criminal informants, and sting operations. ATF was recently caught running tens of thousands of guns to Mexican drug cartels. Every day police commit criminal acts like this through their own agents and informants. Is this not corruption?

[Bishop]

You made the claim, you need to submit the evidence of widespread and systematic police corruption. A couple of youtube clips is laughable.

[thephatman]

maybe you have trouble reading. Scroll up ive submited official reports and the locations of thousands of illegal check points, at any time the SS is protecting an VIP, there exists a 1/4 mile barrier against protest.

Where is your evidence bishop?