It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: raymundoko
I'm very anti Orwellian society, but I'm very pro this...it offends my libertarian beliefs yet my social justice approves.
I will always play devils advocate concerning how we monitor the populace, so I do see this as a very slippery slope, yet I still approve.
originally posted by: akushla99
a reply to: rockpaperhammock
Yep...a new slew of excuses about equipment to be made up...new divisions of geek police altering video on the fly...
- Guardian article
But Rialto's randomised controlled study has seized attention because it offers scientific – and encouraging – findings: after cameras were introduced in February 2012, public complaints against officers plunged 88% compared with the previous 12 months. Officers' use of force fell by 60%.
"When you know you're being watched you behave a little better. That's just human nature," said Farrar. "As an officer you act a bit more professional, follow the rules a bit better."
Video clips provided by the department showed dramatic chases on foot – you can hear the officer panting – and by car that ended with arrests, and without injury. Complaints often stemmed not from operational issues but "officers' mouths", said the chief. "With a camera they are more conscious of how they speak and how they treat people."
In an announcement today, the White House has pledged $263 million in new federal funding for police training and body cameras, set aside by executive order.
originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: akushla99
Yea, because you have the right to see a rape victim's face right? Or a victim of child abuse? Along with thousands, tens of thousands of other people on the net?
I'm all for body cams, but there does need to be limitations on it.