Advocacy groups concerned as TTC fare inspectors, special constables will be equipped with body-worn cameras starting in May

Butler1000 said:

It doesn't stop bad ones. Which means you catch them. And remove them. I don't buy into ACAB.

Click to expand...

This isn't about ACAB.
It's about "When body cams were installed, what actually happened?".

Body cams sound like they should work in theory, but I have a vague memory of them having had very little effect on anything in practice.
So it was mostly just PR money. It doesn't actually result in bad cops being caught and removed, nor does it lower the number of events in the first place.
Maybe that isn't true.
I guess I will have to go hunting to see what is actually out there.

Valcazar said:

This isn't about ACAB.
It's about "When body cams were installed, what actually happened?".

Body cams sound like they should work in theory, but I have a vague memory of them having had very little effect on anything in practice.
So it was mostly just PR money. It doesn't actually result in bad cops being caught and removed, nor does it lower the number of events in the first place.
Maybe that isn't true.
I guess I will have to go hunting to see what is actually out there.

Click to expand...

Yes it is. The advocates basically said it makes the people getting busted look bad. But no one says that when it comes to the cops. Its not PR money. Its regularly used as evidence in court. And is publicly availble as well.

Bedt thing ever for accountability. To say otherwise is just stupid.

Joyrection said:

These groups do not have the safety and the welfare of cummuters as their first thought. They don't care that their clients may have an "episode" and terrorize or assault citizens just trying live their lives while traveling on the TTC. Soon as they started with this BS against TTC staff having body cameras their opinions should have been disregarded.

Click to expand...

Kind of like the 50 year old dude in barrie who thinks he's a she and gets to change with 10 year old girls. Protect him but not the kids.

dognutz said:

Kind of like the 50 year old dude in barrie who thinks he's a she and gets to change with 10 year old girls. Protect him but not the kids.

Click to expand...

The tail wags the dog, and no one challenges these bright sparks out of fear they will be accused of being (insert label here) and cancelled even though most jobs are protected in Canada.

Valcazar said:

This isn't about ACAB.
It's about "When body cams were installed, what actually happened?".

Body cams sound like they should work in theory, but I have a vague memory of them having had very little effect on anything in practice.
So it was mostly just PR money. It doesn't actually result in bad cops being caught and removed, nor does it lower the number of events in the first place.
Maybe that isn't true.
I guess I will have to go hunting to see what is actually out there.

Click to expand...

Lots of controversy down here. It sometimes takes a legal proceeding to get body cam footage Big one recently in the Erie County Jail in Buffalo. Logical successor to cops confiscating mobile cam footage from news people or witness cell phones for evidence and then deciding the public is better off knowing. Cockroaches prefer to stay in the dark, but everything comes out eventually...

If it's for accountability it is good. Vancouver Sky Train rentacops became well known for using riders as punching bags at the drop of a hat.

Advocacy groups outraged over an increase in use of force by TTC fare inspectors and special constables.

TTC announces fare inspectors and special constables will be fitted with bodycams in an effort to reduce use of force issues and make employees accountable.

Advocacy groups outraged that the presence of bodycams will inevitably and by design capture people in their worst moments, which contributes to the systemic over-surveillance of homeless people.

The moral of the story, you just can't please advocacy groups.

Butler1000 said:

Yes it is. The advocates basically said it makes the people getting busted look bad. But no one says that when it comes to the cops. Its not PR money. Its regularly used as evidence in court. And is publicly availble as well.

Bedt thing ever for accountability. To say otherwise is just stupid.

Click to expand...

It really doesn't appear to be that clear cut.

Valcazar said:

It really doesn't appear to be that clear cut.

Research on Body-Worn Cameras and Law Enforcement

National ToolkitBJA's National Body-Worn Camera Toolkit is a clearinghouse for criminal justice practitioners.BJA also has produced a podcast series on body-worn cameras.

nij.ojp.gov

Click to expand...

They do one thing. Clearly show the truth. Those findings are about deterence. Of course criminal are stupid and do stupid things on camera. And stupid officers do stupid things on camera. It will take decades to chsnge police culture in any measure.

Valcazar said:

I thought the evidence was in that body cams don't really stop cops from violating rights or hold them accountable?
There is some effect but it is weak.

Click to expand...

I haven't seen that evidence. I've seen a few studies in which cops turnoff the body cam or pointed it a different direction but in most cases it proved culpability not innocence. Video cameras record factual events without prejudice. There was the same issues raised when cameras were added to busses. How many times have the cops been able to nab a thug because of the bus cam ? If you are assaulted on the bus, are you worried that sexual predator is being unfairly judged because he was having a bad day when he was caught on camera ?

I prefer you keep them on during their shift. No blackouts - maybe with the exception when I'm reaching for that annoying booger deep inside my left nostril.

Butler1000 said:

They do one thing. Clearly show the truth.

Click to expand...

You didn't read the research at all, did you?

It will take decades to chsnge police culture in any measure.

Click to expand...

This I agree with.

IM469 said:

Video cameras record factual events without prejudice.

Click to expand...

You need to read the research.
A little digging has shown this isn't really the case.
Or rather, that's an inadequate description.

Valcazar said:

You need to read the research.
A little digging has shown this isn't really the case.
Or rather, that's an inadequate description.

Click to expand...

Explain how a camera records with predjudice.......

Butler1000 said:

Explain how a camera records with predjudice.......

Click to expand...

Angle of camera, line of visibility, edits.
All known to affect what people think they are seeing.
This is old news.

Valcazar said:

Angle of camera, line of visibility, edits.
All known to affect what people think they are seeing.
This is old news.

Click to expand...

Body Cameras can't be edited. Thats the point of them. Sound matters. And really they do work. You are grasping at straws now.

Butler1000 said:

Body Cameras can't be edited. Thats the point of them. Sound matters. And really they do work. You are grasping at straws now.

Click to expand...

The NIJ itself expresses caution.
There are - just go look - numerous issues with the actual real-life performance of body cams.

I'm not saying they are necessarily useless. I am saying they shouldn't be viewed as a panacea and they shouldn't be advocated for uncritically.
Either by the people who think they would stop police violence or the people who think they would exonerate cops.

Simplistic tech solutions to systemic problems aren't going to happen and it serves no good purpose to be blindly uncritical of them.

GameBoy27 said:

Advocacy groups outraged that the presence of bodycams will inevitably and by design capture people in their worst moments, which contributes to the systemic over-surveillance of homeless people.

Click to expand...

Yeah because if we can't see it, it ain't happening.

Valcazar said:

The NIJ itself expresses caution.
There are - just go look - numerous issues with the actual real-life performance of body cams.

I'm not saying they are necessarily useless. I am saying they shouldn't be viewed as a panacea and they shouldn't be advocated for uncritically.
Either by the people who think they would stop police violence or the people who think they would exonerate cops.

Simplistic tech solutions to systemic problems aren't going to happen and it serves no good purpose to be blindly uncritical of them.

Click to expand...

The NIJ report of 2022 lists reports that are purely geared to criminal charges. For instance 4 out of 10 responded with not effective , one with the following comments: Officers wearing cameras had statistically significant reductions in complaints filed against them and made more stop reports. Camera use resulted in a statistically significantly reduced likelihood of lawful stops and frisks but fewer subjects searched.

There are no 100% solutions but you can't toss an important tool away because it doesn't solve everything. I sympathize with cops and understand the bond of covering each others back against the bad guys. However there are bad apples and misplaced loyalty can usurp the rules they are suppose to enforce. Close to home - remember the kid alone on a streetcar who was basically murdered by an overzealous cop ? He was only caught because of video footage. There are hundreds of other cases where cops have both been exonerated and convicted based on body cams.

I cannot fathom an excuse not to have the police wear body cams or any other public enforcement officers. (Okay, undercover cops should get a pass )

To end with an article that uses your terminology:

In San Antonio, body-camera video appeared to play a key role in the murder case filed last week against three police officers in the fatal shooting of 46-year-old Melissa Perez. ...
.. While body cameras aren’t a panacea, in many departments they’re also being used to train officers on good policing. New York’s Metropolitan Transportation Authority Police keep a library of recorded interactions where officers defused situations well, a tool that’s invaluable for its immediacy and specificity.

The Oracle said:

Yeah because if we can't see it, it ain't happening.

Click to expand...

Good point ! How about body cams on the homeless ? Put the edited cuts on a reality TV series and you can feed them with the profits. It might be the first reality TV I'm willing to watch.

IM469 said:

I prefer you keep them on during their shift. No blackouts - maybe with the exception when I'm reaching for that annoying booger deep inside my left nostril.

Click to expand...

Or when they're jerking off while on duty.

https://www.masscops.com/threads/police-officer-caught-masturbating-on-video-while-on-duty.106877/

IM469 said:

The NIJ report of 2022 lists reports that are purely geared to criminal charges. For instance 4 out of 10 responded with not effective , one with the following comments: Officers wearing cameras had statistically significant reductions in complaints filed against them and made more stop reports. Camera use resulted in a statistically significantly reduced likelihood of lawful stops and frisks but fewer subjects searched.

There are no 100% solutions but you can't toss an important tool away because it doesn't solve everything.

Click to expand...

Absolutely.
And I'm not saying to throw it away.
But budget choices need to be made and it also may not be worth it.

I sympathize with cops and understand the bond of covering each others back against the bad guys. However there are bad apples and misplaced loyalty can usurp the rules they are suppose to enforce. Close to home - remember the kid alone on a streetcar who was basically murdered by an overzealous cop ? He was only caught because of video footage. There are hundreds of other cases where cops have both been exonerated and convicted based on body cams.

Click to expand...

And again, it may not be worth it to marginally improve outcomes on 100 cases.
Also, was that streetcar cop found guilty because of body cam footage?

"Video has helped" is not the same thing as "Bodycam video has helped".

I cannot fathom an excuse not to have the police wear body cams or any other public enforcement officers. (Okay, undercover cops should get a pass )

Click to expand...

Spending a huge amount of money that doesn't accomplish much isn't a reason?

To end with an article that uses your terminology:

In San Antonio, body-camera video appeared to play a key role in the murder case filed last week against three police officers in the fatal shooting of 46-year-old Melissa Perez. ...
.. While body cameras aren’t a panacea, in many departments they’re also being used to train officers on good policing. New York’s Metropolitan Transportation Authority Police keep a library of recorded interactions where officers defused situations well, a tool that’s invaluable for its immediacy and specificity.

Click to expand...

Certainly a good argument.

Good point ! How about body cams on the homeless ? Put the edited cuts on a reality TV series and you can feed them with the profits. It might be the first reality TV I'm willing to watch.

Click to expand...

It's the fact people who unquestioningly support body cams make comments like this that make me think "maybe we shouldn't blindly support bodycams".