4 ms·
>>The big problem is: what happens when a cop comes out on a call and there is clear photographic evidence of a crime being committed (very likely, considering
by smtddr 12y ago
>>The big problem is: what happens when a cop comes out on a call and there is clear photographic evidence of a crime being committed (very likely, considering the sheer number of things that are technically illegal)? When there is clear video evidence of, say, possession of paraphernalia, assault, public intoxication, or whatever else, it suddenly becomes a lot easier to pick on citizens.
I think this highlights a bigger issue with the justice system in general. Those minor things shouldn't be illegal to begin with. Or at least, not wreck your life with an insane fine or criminal record. Those issues should just be some kind of $50 - $100 fine, maybe an evening in a single person cell, and that's it. e.g., BART(www.bart.gov) does not want people eating/drinking on their trains or within paid-areas of the stations or you risk a $250 fine. I break that rule from time to time because... whatever. A bunch of people break that rule in fact. No law should be absolute in its application or punishment. They should be evaluated in case by case basis and context of the situation.
If it's July 4th, people are partying and one of drunk party-goers happens to run into a cop after stumbling too far from the beach... he/she doesn't deserve their life to be ruined.
Major sporting event, 2 people from opposite teams get into heated argument. Both people continued to escalate the situation until eventually a fight breaks out, I don't think their lives need to be ruined with assault charges.
Our legal definition of "paraphernalia" is messed up, so I won't get into that. I'll just say that a person who isn't a major drug-lord or drug-pusher on the corner shouldn't be wrecked by the legal system. Some young person just experimenting with a small amount of a controlled substance probably just needs a night in a cell and mandatory drug education class for a week or something.
- XorNot 12y ago$50-$100 fines are life wreckers. Doesn't take too many of those to wipe out someone's weekly paycheck. But this isn't a problem: because the police can (and do) do this to people now, but it's also why we have procedure as a valid defense. Cameras wouldn't make that worse, they'd make it better. It would mean the procedure is plain to see. The only policy needed to ensure this is to ban fishing-expeditions with the footage (which would protect police and citizen alike). If the police don't write a ticket then and there, then it's illegal to go through the footage after the fact if it's not relevant to an ongoing investigation (and make it illegal to file charges for say, non-felonies found peripheral to that). Most of this sort of stuff has been put through case law in various guises at different times already - it's likely it would extend to police cameras by simple precedent in the courts, if not by explicit policy in advance.
- deleted 12y ago[deleted]