But it Won’t., They *Need* It

I've been saying for years that simply turning it off should be grounds for immediate suspension if not full termination.

The only time those cameras should be off is when they go to the bathroom and even then I'm fuckin iffy.

I feel like the solution is a "taking a shit" button which flags that chunk of the video. That way unless there is some suspicion that a crime happened in that chunk of time it goes unwatched.
- Yes your honour, I suddenly needed to take a shit in public just when the suspect was assaulted by someone else
- Yup definitely goes unwatched. It would be immoral to watch that so that's not going to happen.
- This works.
Just have it time limited so that every sixty seconds they get a quick audible countdown to point away from their exposed body part at the roll of toilet paper or wall of the urinal. They can't beat someone and keep breaking to arrange a fake shot from atop a toilet.
- Cop walks into the toilet, closes the door, turns off the camera. Immediately exits, jumps into police car to find and beat some people they don't like, then turns around, goes back to the toilet and turns it back on before opening the door to leave.

Another thing of note. If you see car hoods up, take out your camera and film. The pigs will pop their hood to block their dashcams.

ACAB

Why is covering the badge number even allowed?

Because cops are the violent arm of the ruling class, and it's convenient for them to be immune to legal consequence.
- When will the rich pay?
Who's going to stop them?
- Laws?
- I'm calling the cops!!
Why do you think body cam was introduced? Pigs do shady shit when no ones watching and they don't want to be identified when they do.

Body cams should also work as a time clock. If the camera isn't on, they are off the clock and not getting paid.

And don't have qualified immunity
- Well they shouldn't have that to begin with anyway.
That's actually an interesting idea. Always capturing, perhaps at half-fidelity to save wear and tear on the storage card and full quality when they activate for a call. I don't know why I've never seen anyone suggest this.
I can see legitimate grounds to switch them off. E.g. talking to a witness, or informant, who doesn't want anything on record.
It should be properly noted in their records however, and viewed with suspicion if overused.
FYI, good police actually love the cameras. They vastly cut down on false accusations, or at least nip them in the bud. It's also, apparently extremely satisfying and effective to show someone exactly how they came across. It really runs in a drunk tank hangover.
- Also they should never be believed for anything they say happened without the camera on, not just the thing itself, but also the context.
  Like, you had the option to record this behavior and chose not to, why should I trust you
- Then they can submit a formal request with detailed documentation to request payment for those times their camera is off. Still seems like a perfect idea.
This is actually a great idea, ngl.

This should void their qualified immunity or whatever you American kids call it these days.

I don’t think the legal principle is even that important these days. It’s more so that some people are immune to laws because no one will prosecute. It’s just power.
Rights seem to be taken not granted.

I cant recall it specifically, but I am sure Ive heard of a term which describes this in a legal sense - if whatever accountability that exists is intentionally blocked, its presumed to be worst case scenario

Not sure if it's what you're remembering, but adverse inference can be drawn when a party fails to present evidence known to exist by the court.
- That sounds familiar. “Show us x and if you can’t we will assume its incriminating towards you”?
  In this case - show us the body cam footage, and if youve hidden it or otherwise impaired its capture, the adverse inference is taken

Suppose someone who isn't a cop does this and uses a fake uniform? How could anyone be able to tell if the officer is legitimate? That alone should make police departments not want to endorse such practices.

The way they're looking at it:
What's more likely? That we do sketchy or blatantly illegal shit, abuse our power, and having our badges and cams (measures created in an attempt to increase police accountability) helps us avoid any and all consequences...
...or people decide to buy fake uniforms and badges in any significant numbers and use these same tactics to confuse the general public...in any way that we, as a police force, actually CARE about?
Keep in mind that police impersonators would have to be impacting the police forces so much and so negatively that it would get to the point that it's not worth preserving their own impunity. That's incredibly unlikely.

That’s an incredibly valid argument.

ACAB

I'm glad this is happening under blue man, because otherwise this would be a sign of a fascist regime!

Close to the bone there

It is... But it should ALSO be considered a premeditated crime.

So about that shine?

I have never been able to make it all the way through that. It's like Scott's Tots but for fascists.
- Same. I can only get through 5 seconds of Trump before cringing the hell out. Don't understand how anyone can be enamored with him.

Should, but it won't be.

This could have been a text post and nothing would have been lost.

clearly you have never seen dozens of Lemmings come into a comment section to spam “i personally have never seen xyz happen” unless clear evidence is presented right in their face lol

And they should be sterilized.