4 ms·

BART doesn't release the videos to the public. They do release them to the police. There are legitimate reasons not to release them to the public, including t

BART doesn't release the videos to the public. They do release them to the police. There are legitimate reasons not to release them to the public, including the fact that the media will sensationalize them to make BART look far more dangerous than the statistics actually reflect.

banned1 9y ago
Replace [BART] with Police and [police] with [congress]: "The Police doesn't release the videos to the public. They do release them to Congress. There are legitimate reasons not to release them to the public, including the fact that the media will sensationalize them to make the Police look far more dangerous than the statistics actually reflect." Would you still want videos withheld from the public? After all, BART is a public agency. We are not babies who need to be protected by The Master Director because we are "the lowly citizen." That's not how it works in America.
- Dylan16807 9y ago
  Videos of what? If the police have videos of X person robbing Y person, with no police around, then I don't mind if they keep those videos private.
  - banned1 9y ago
    It's not about whether you mind or not. It's about whether Y person will get justice.
    - Dylan16807 9y ago
      Let me put it differently: Police actions need to be transparent. There are strong reasons to release recordings with police actions in them. But if the recordings are unrelated to any police officers or police actions, then all of that goes away. It's completely fine for police to not release footage of two random people interacting. And that scenario is what is analogous to BART surveillance videos.
      - DrScump 9y ago
        two random people interacting That's an odd way to paraphrase the pairing of a felony perpetrator and a felony victim.
        Dylan16807 9y ago
        It's in the context of the previous comments, "X person robbing Y person". I didn't want to be redundant. No matter what crimes are happening, there are no police involved, so there is no police transparency motive to release the video.
        banned1 9y ago
        The motive is to provide the public with information. Some of this information may be useful to identify the (gang of) attackers.
        Dylan16807 9y ago
        That's a perfectly fine motive, but it's not enough to force anyone that has such a video to release it completely publicly. And BART in this case is basically an "anyone". They have no particular involvement.

banned1 9y ago

Replace [BART] with Police and [police] with [congress]: "The Police doesn't release the videos to the public. They do release them to Congress. There are legitimate reasons not to release them to the public, including the fact that the media will sensationalize them to make the Police look far more dangerous than the statistics actually reflect." Would you still want videos withheld from the public? After all, BART is a public agency. We are not babies who need to be protected by The Master Director because we are "the lowly citizen." That's not how it works in America.

Dylan16807 9y ago
Videos of what? If the police have videos of X person robbing Y person, with no police around, then I don't mind if they keep those videos private.
- banned1 9y ago
  It's not about whether you mind or not. It's about whether Y person will get justice.
  - Dylan16807 9y ago
    Let me put it differently: Police actions need to be transparent. There are strong reasons to release recordings with police actions in them. But if the recordings are unrelated to any police officers or police actions, then all of that goes away. It's completely fine for police to not release footage of two random people interacting. And that scenario is what is analogous to BART surveillance videos.
    - DrScump 9y ago
      two random people interacting That's an odd way to paraphrase the pairing of a felony perpetrator and a felony victim.
      - Dylan16807 9y ago
        It's in the context of the previous comments, "X person robbing Y person". I didn't want to be redundant. No matter what crimes are happening, there are no police involved, so there is no police transparency motive to release the video.
        banned1 9y ago
        The motive is to provide the public with information. Some of this information may be useful to identify the (gang of) attackers.
        Dylan16807 9y ago
        That's a perfectly fine motive, but it's not enough to force anyone that has such a video to release it completely publicly. And BART in this case is basically an "anyone". They have no particular involvement.