Scot Dutchy wrote:

DarthHelmet86 wrote:

Fallible wrote:Well. I disagree.

As do I. Cameras would also help in ensuring convictions weren't based on the police officers memory, they would have video footage to help prove the case. So they serve multiple functions making them better value for the money.

You must have a lousy police force as well.

The idea was rejected here and I fully agree with it. Why not make all workers wear one. In fact everyone should have one that's it. Then we can record every hastle that we have and make a court case out of it.

This is rather obvious isn't it? My job doesn't have any requirement where I might have to defend myself in a court where I might find myself in prison.

Did that really need to be pointed out?

But your boss can see what you are doing.

Scot Dutchy wrote:But your boss can see what you are doing.

What's your point?

Teague wrote:

DarthHelmet86 wrote:All the cops I have known personally have said they like the idea of wearing cameras but worry that the money needed to outfit them and to maintain them might take money away from other important parts of the job. That isn't an unfair worry to have. I am sure there are plenty of bad cops or cops with different opinions on the privacy of the public who argue not to have them.

Well if those cops had been doing their jobs properly, i.e. reporting and arresting bent cops, then they wouldn't need them.

Who is "those cops", is it the ones I know personally? Because if they knew of a bent cop they would report them and as far as I can tell do a damn fine job of doing their job properly. And as I pointed out part of their desire for the cameras wasn't to do with bent cops it had to do with presenting better evidence at trial and to do with protecting themselves from false reports.

Cant see it? Oh well.

Yeah don't bother to explain your point when others don't understand it.

My old boss could rarely ever see me and I dealt with large amounts of money. But there were other safeguards to make sure I wasn't nicking it and no extra jobs that the cameras could do. Whereas with the police there are extra jobs the cameras can do as well as keeping a check on cops with no over sight of their actions and stopping groups of cops from abusing the safeguards to protect each other.

But of course Robocop and orders over the radio are scary things for some reason.

DarthHelmet86 wrote:Yeah don't bother to explain your point when others don't understand it.

My old boss could rarely ever see me and I dealt with large amounts of money. But there were other safeguards to make sure I wasn't nicking it and no extra jobs that the cameras could do. Whereas with the police there are extra jobs the cameras can do as well as keeping a check on cops with no over sight of their actions and stopping groups of cops from abusing the safeguards to protect each other.

But of course Robocop and orders over the radio are scary things for some reason.

Yeah the great Australian society. To think I could have lived there

Yes and that post answers any of the points in mine how? Oh right it is just more dodging and weaving so you don't have to back up the bullshit in your posts.

DarthHelmet86 wrote:Yes and that post answers any of the points in mine how? Oh right it is just more dodging and weaving so you don't have to back up the bullshit in your posts.

I dont have back anything wtf are you on about. Camera's will not be used here as there is no need or is that a difficult concept?

That has nothing to do with what people are asking you to explain. We want to know about this Robocop threat and the threat of cooler heads offering advice or orders based on some imagined high dev high speed base connection with on site cameras.

But dodge dodge weave weave is all we get.

If you're worried about the boss being able to see what the Dutch cops are doing, maybe they have some room to improve as well? Otherwise why would it matter if the boss sees their pitch-perfect work? They'd all get raises!

Well there is an argument for why it would be pointless to record good police work in that it would mean recording interactions with innocent people without the benefit of being able to show that it helps to protect civilians, cops and lower tensions. It would still provide evidence for any charges the police press and help protect them against any false charges. But some would argue that isn't enough to out weigh the innocents rights not to be recorded without their consent.

It wouldn't surprise me if that was the actual position of the Netherlands police and citizens. Robocop and cool headed orders perhaps having nothing to do with it at all.

DarthHelmet86 wrote:

Teague wrote:

DarthHelmet86 wrote:All the cops I have known personally have said they like the idea of wearing cameras but worry that the money needed to outfit them and to maintain them might take money away from other important parts of the job. That isn't an unfair worry to have. I am sure there are plenty of bad cops or cops with different opinions on the privacy of the public who argue not to have them.

Well if those cops had been doing their jobs properly, i.e. reporting and arresting bent cops, then they wouldn't need them.

Who is "those cops", is it the ones I know personally? Because if they knew of a bent cop they would report them and as far as I can tell do a damn fine job of doing their job properly. And as I pointed out part of their desire for the cameras wasn't to do with bent cops it had to do with presenting better evidence at trial and to do with protecting themselves from false reports.

I'm talking about US cops, I see ur in Oz now.

I have never not been in Australia, that flag and country under my name have never changed from the day I joined this forum and in real life I have never had the money or desire to leave this country on holiday.

ok