6 ms·

There will be footage recorded by those cameras that will drastically impinge on the privacy of civilians should it be shared publicly. It's a nice idea, but I

by eric_h 9y ago

There will be footage recorded by those cameras that will drastically impinge on the privacy of civilians should it be shared publicly. It's a nice idea, but I think it has some pretty significant potential for downsides.

jMyles 9y ago
I find this idea very toxic. If the state can send an agent somewhere, then that place and the goings-on that were witnessed are a matter of public record. If that isn't so, and isn't sacred, then we're saying that secrecy in policing is normal, and that goes against hundreds of years of progress in the common-law tradition. In order for people to enjoy the kind of privacy you discuss, we need to have non-state support services that are completely disconnected from the matter of enforcement of th e law.
- taeric 9y ago
  This is trivial to argue against, though. Officer heads to restroom to help patient that is having seizures. Heck, officer heads anywhere to help citizen having seizures. (Substitute any of a number of incidents and the argument remains mostly the same.) Is it public record that it happened? Yes. Should it be shielded from anyone knowing? I don't think so. Should it be publicly broadcast? Almost certainly not.
  - jMyles 9y ago
    The underlying question here is: what does enforcement of the public ordinances have to do with medical aid? Why has our society conflated those? Why has our society conflated law enforcement with emergency response at all? What do these two things have to do with each other? That's the problem. The fact that we're talking seriously about affording public policing a sphere of secrecy is just a symptom of that problem.
    - s73ver_ 9y ago
      Police often have training in first aid. In addition, they might be much closer than an ambulance, so might be sent to help out in that case. It's not a problem in the least.
    - taeric 9y ago
      And it is not like an officer is enforcing ordinances at all hours. Nor do we expect them to be. Outreach is a thing. An officer goes in to give a fun speech to a school. Suddenly, kids in the class are being broadcast. I get it. Most of us are programmers, so we think we can setup a pretty solid set of rules for when something applies. Maybe some of us can. And when that perfect ruleset is found, it will be awesome. However, it is a lot more fluid and discretion is not necessarily a bad thing.
      - cracell 9y ago
        ACLU has written and refined very good rules for proper bodycam use that protects both citizen and police officer privacy. It's not that black and white but it's not that complex of an issue either. Act - https://www.aclu.org/other/model-act-regulating-use-wearable-body-cameras-law-enforcement https://www.aclu.org/other/model-act-regulating-use-wearable..., White Paper - https://www.aclu.org/other/police-body-mounted-cameras-right-policies-place-win-all https://www.aclu.org/other/police-body-mounted-cameras-right...
      - Brybry 9y ago
        Psst. Kids in class are broadcast all the time on the news. Sometimes they're even identified by name, school, and municipality in recognition for some achievement. Honestly, privacy is nearly dead anyway. I'm not happy about it but there are databases with enough information on us to steal anyone's identity. With that level of information already existing... it seems kind of silly that what we're most worried about with police cameras basically comes down to embarrassment. It's also weird how hacker news has forgotten that Google Street View has tons of pictures of naked people with automatically blurred faces. Same for Google Maps/Earth.
        9y ago
- sigstoat 9y ago
  > I find this idea very toxic. If the state can send an agent somewhere... if the cops bust into your house because they misread the address of the warrant (something which happens regularly), and they capture some video of you walking around eating cereal naked, do you think that should immediately and irrevocably go up on youtube?
  - jMyles 9y ago
    Obviously in a decent society this is a horrific, abhorrent affront. And yes, I'm fine with the horrific, abhorrent affronts of the state being public if I'm the victim. How about we stop allowing police to search homes in the first place in 99.9% of cases?
    - s73ver_ 9y ago
      "And yes, I'm fine with the horrific, abhorrent affronts of the state being public if I'm the victim." Ok. I'm not.
      - yojex 9y ago
        If an agent of the state commits a "horrific, abhorrent affront" against you, you want it to be kept secret? That's what I'm reading here.
        s73ver_ 9y ago
        That would be a fair interpretation if that's all they did. However, we all know that law enforcement agents do lots of other things that the people involved would rather not be made public. A cop being a first responder to someone having a seizure, or consoling a rape victim, are things that I'm pretty sure those people would not want to be public.
        mulmen 9y ago
        Ok but in that case the state did not commit an abhorrent act.
- SubiculumCode 9y ago
  Black and white perspectives aren't helpful. When a policing event happens in a private space, a home for example, there are multiple stakeholders whose interests will not always align.
- cavanasm 9y ago
  In many places, it's already public record, you just have to request it. However, some places are putting rules in after overly broad and onerous requests ("I want to every piece of body camera footage ever taken" for example, which actually happened in Washington state, and lead to a law a few years later). Usually privacy rights are strongly taken into consideration, and the videos have to be edited and reviewed by humans before release. https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/crime/washington-senate-passes-bill-on-police-body-cameras/ https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/crime/washington-s...
- lostlogin 9y ago
  Yeah, good idea to have people help everyone. However it would be duplicating loads of state service and, as always, who pays?
- rocqua 9y ago
  Police catch a child-rapist in the act. Does that go online? What about a normal rape? Someone's husband falsely but convincingly accuses them of domestic abuse, later they are cleared of all charges. Does this accusation go on youtube? Someone attempted suicide, and then called the cops because he didn't want to go through with it. Someone was inadvertently caught on camera in a gay bar when it was raided for drugs.
- mcguire 9y ago
  You are arrested for murder, rape, or sexual abuse of a domestic pet, following proper procedures, etc., etc. Video of the arrest goes viral. Hundreds of millions of people across the world see it. You are later acquited of the charges. But a fat lot of good that does....
givinguflac 9y ago
I’m not saying it should be live streamed to YouTube, just for incidents that are resolved or public, and need long term storage. Obviously there would need to be some editing, ideally by an independent team.

by eric_h 9y ago

jMyles 9y ago

I find this idea very toxic. If the state can send an agent somewhere, then that place and the goings-on that were witnessed are a matter of public record. If that isn't so, and isn't sacred, then we're saying that secrecy in policing is normal, and that goes against hundreds of years of progress in the common-law tradition. In order for people to enjoy the kind of privacy you discuss, we need to have non-state support services that are completely disconnected from the matter of enforcement of th e law.

taeric 9y ago
This is trivial to argue against, though. Officer heads to restroom to help patient that is having seizures. Heck, officer heads anywhere to help citizen having seizures. (Substitute any of a number of incidents and the argument remains mostly the same.) Is it public record that it happened? Yes. Should it be shielded from anyone knowing? I don't think so. Should it be publicly broadcast? Almost certainly not.
- jMyles 9y ago
  The underlying question here is: what does enforcement of the public ordinances have to do with medical aid? Why has our society conflated those? Why has our society conflated law enforcement with emergency response at all? What do these two things have to do with each other? That's the problem. The fact that we're talking seriously about affording public policing a sphere of secrecy is just a symptom of that problem.
  - s73ver_ 9y ago
    Police often have training in first aid. In addition, they might be much closer than an ambulance, so might be sent to help out in that case. It's not a problem in the least.
  - taeric 9y ago
    And it is not like an officer is enforcing ordinances at all hours. Nor do we expect them to be. Outreach is a thing. An officer goes in to give a fun speech to a school. Suddenly, kids in the class are being broadcast. I get it. Most of us are programmers, so we think we can setup a pretty solid set of rules for when something applies. Maybe some of us can. And when that perfect ruleset is found, it will be awesome. However, it is a lot more fluid and discretion is not necessarily a bad thing.
    - cracell 9y ago
      ACLU has written and refined very good rules for proper bodycam use that protects both citizen and police officer privacy. It's not that black and white but it's not that complex of an issue either. Act - https://www.aclu.org/other/model-act-regulating-use-wearable-body-cameras-law-enforcement https://www.aclu.org/other/model-act-regulating-use-wearable..., White Paper - https://www.aclu.org/other/police-body-mounted-cameras-right-policies-place-win-all https://www.aclu.org/other/police-body-mounted-cameras-right...
    - Brybry 9y ago
      Psst. Kids in class are broadcast all the time on the news. Sometimes they're even identified by name, school, and municipality in recognition for some achievement. Honestly, privacy is nearly dead anyway. I'm not happy about it but there are databases with enough information on us to steal anyone's identity. With that level of information already existing... it seems kind of silly that what we're most worried about with police cameras basically comes down to embarrassment. It's also weird how hacker news has forgotten that Google Street View has tons of pictures of naked people with automatically blurred faces. Same for Google Maps/Earth.
      - 9y ago
sigstoat 9y ago
> I find this idea very toxic. If the state can send an agent somewhere... if the cops bust into your house because they misread the address of the warrant (something which happens regularly), and they capture some video of you walking around eating cereal naked, do you think that should immediately and irrevocably go up on youtube?
- jMyles 9y ago
  Obviously in a decent society this is a horrific, abhorrent affront. And yes, I'm fine with the horrific, abhorrent affronts of the state being public if I'm the victim. How about we stop allowing police to search homes in the first place in 99.9% of cases?
  - s73ver_ 9y ago
    "And yes, I'm fine with the horrific, abhorrent affronts of the state being public if I'm the victim." Ok. I'm not.
    - yojex 9y ago
      If an agent of the state commits a "horrific, abhorrent affront" against you, you want it to be kept secret? That's what I'm reading here.
      - s73ver_ 9y ago
        That would be a fair interpretation if that's all they did. However, we all know that law enforcement agents do lots of other things that the people involved would rather not be made public. A cop being a first responder to someone having a seizure, or consoling a rape victim, are things that I'm pretty sure those people would not want to be public.
        mulmen 9y ago
        Ok but in that case the state did not commit an abhorrent act.
SubiculumCode 9y ago
Black and white perspectives aren't helpful. When a policing event happens in a private space, a home for example, there are multiple stakeholders whose interests will not always align.
cavanasm 9y ago
In many places, it's already public record, you just have to request it. However, some places are putting rules in after overly broad and onerous requests ("I want to every piece of body camera footage ever taken" for example, which actually happened in Washington state, and lead to a law a few years later). Usually privacy rights are strongly taken into consideration, and the videos have to be edited and reviewed by humans before release. https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/crime/washington-senate-passes-bill-on-police-body-cameras/ https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/crime/washington-s...
lostlogin 9y ago
Yeah, good idea to have people help everyone. However it would be duplicating loads of state service and, as always, who pays?
rocqua 9y ago
Police catch a child-rapist in the act. Does that go online? What about a normal rape? Someone's husband falsely but convincingly accuses them of domestic abuse, later they are cleared of all charges. Does this accusation go on youtube? Someone attempted suicide, and then called the cops because he didn't want to go through with it. Someone was inadvertently caught on camera in a gay bar when it was raided for drugs.
mcguire 9y ago
You are arrested for murder, rape, or sexual abuse of a domestic pet, following proper procedures, etc., etc. Video of the arrest goes viral. Hundreds of millions of people across the world see it. You are later acquited of the charges. But a fat lot of good that does....

givinguflac 9y ago

I’m not saying it should be live streamed to YouTube, just for incidents that are resolved or public, and need long term storage. Obviously there would need to be some editing, ideally by an independent team.