Do you think it fair and constitutional to make police officers wear audio/video

Jump to Last Post 1-10 of 10 discussions (23 posts)
  1. Jay Barban profile image81
    Jay Barbanposted 3 years ago

    Do you think it fair and constitutional to make police officers wear audio/video recording devices?

    https://usercontent1.hubstatic.com/10276882_f260.jpg

  2. lisavollrath profile image96
    lisavollrathposted 3 years ago

    Yes, and yes. I think it's the only way to keep interactions between the police and the public from becoming he said/she said. Since there is no expectation of privacy in public, and the police officers are wearing badges and uniforms, I can't see the legal argument against it.

    1. Jay Barban profile image81
      Jay Barbanposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      I agree and now that the tecnology is allowing it to happen I think it's a great idea. However conversations sake what about the privacy of the officer? His general conversations with coworkers or say they receive a personal phone call.

    2. profile image0
      christiananrkistposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      the likely hood is that they only turn it on during interaction with the public. if not, then that kind of sucks for them

    3. lisavollrath profile image96
      lisavollrathposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      There can be no expectation of privacy if you're working in a public position. I don't see how this is any different than having keystroke loggers on work computers.

    4. profile image0
      christiananrkistposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      i agree. certain jobs come with certain expectations of the employee. honestly i dont think its a big deal. they already have cams in the cars. and many cops say they are useful for training.

  3. profile image0
    christiananrkistposted 3 years ago

    honestly i dont see how it would be unfair in any way. what exactly would be unfair about it?

    1. Jay Barban profile image81
      Jay Barbanposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Well think of it this way, if your employer made it mandatory that you wear a video camera on you at all times how do you think you would feel? Consider the pro's and con's.  There are definitely a lot of Pro's but where does it stop.

    2. profile image0
      christiananrkistposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      its ultimately up to the employer. if you dont like it, look for another job. it really is a pro's and con's thing. how much does it bother you as an employee. no one is being forced to be a cop.

    3. Robert the Bruce profile image59
      Robert the Bruceposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      The difference obviously between an employee of a company and a police officer is that the PO is given authority over basically everyone he meets during the day. With this authority come a responsibility to uphold the law.

    4. stclairjack profile image81
      stclairjackposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      every day, when I clock in, there are cameras on me, with the exception of bathrooms and perhaps 1-2 other locations, I know that I am on video at all times,.... its never bothered me.

  4. thelittlesmich profile image54
    thelittlesmichposted 3 years ago

    We look at this from a point of view as the society horrified of Police Brutality, but is this idea not also a public display of what could be classified as privacy. I do not disagree with this idea, however I do not quite agree with it. Like I said its all on the point of view.

  5. stclairjack profile image81
    stclairjackposted 3 years ago

    the "badge cam" or what ever you wish to call it is just as much a defense mechanism for cops as it s the public,... if i were an officer on the street id happily wear one, certainly i would shut it off while at lunch, while using the restroom, or answering a personal phone call,... but just as you learn to instinctively check your gear, and turn on your radio, call in on duty etc,.. you turn on your camera,.... imagine if we had footage from a camera like this in the Ferguson case,... one way or the other the story would be told,... nuff said yes?

  6. peeples profile image95
    peeplesposted 3 years ago

    I think it is brilliant. After all, if they are not doing anything wrong, they shouldn't have anything wrong with it. It serves good for both the officers and the public.
    I don't mean to sound rude, but they choose this field of work, just as soldiers choose to be soldiers. They choose to put every moment of their work day on display of public scrutiny, so why not have something to back them up so they don't get accused of wrong doing?
    I'd go a step further and say other professions need to have the same thing. Teachers would be a good start, paramedics, politicians, and any other public service type employees.
    There is no privacy at work. As long as they can remove it while using the restroom, that's the only privacy an employee should have while on the clock.

  7. RTalloni profile image88
    RTalloniposted 3 years ago

    Am a little divided on the issue because even recorded events can be twisted and used against police officers and/or innocent citizens.  However, considering the times we live in, if I knew police officers and they were of high character with a good record, and they voted yes on the issue I would go with their choice.  Things that happened before the recording began, or that are out of range of the recording play into situations in ways that cannot be detected after the fact.  Life is not cut and dry in a vacuum, but quite complex, and sometimes police officers have to make the best decision they can based on the information they have at the moment.

    1. Jay Barban profile image81
      Jay Barbanposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      I agree with you I feel it is easy for a citizen to say yes to this however we are lacking intimate knowledge of the job and the pro's and con's they face.  Also what about civilians privacy. What if you do something embarrasing and its now on camera

  8. Robert the Bruce profile image59
    Robert the Bruceposted 3 years ago

    Yes, it is fair and as far as I know this kind of thing would not be a constitutional issue, but rather something left to the individual states and local governments to decide. Police officers volunteered for the job and should accept the responsibility to uphold the law. Sadly, many instances of police brutality and utter disregard for the law have occurred and probably will continue as governments gain more power. Recording the interactions between officer and citizen will help to "level the playing field" in the legal system.

    1. profile image0
      christiananrkistposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      i agree. this isnt really much different than taco bell putting cam up in the restaurant.

  9. cjhunsinger profile image73
    cjhunsingerposted 3 years ago

    Jay

    This has nothing to do with the Constitution and, as a former Police Officer, I would have no objections; I would welcome it. This, however, is a prelude to more to come. Some questions though: How about the FBI, Secret Service and the many other Federal and State police agencies? Are such exempt and why should they be? Do we now install  or embed cameras on paroles or suspected criminals or to those who  may provide a risk? Do we install cameras on children to protect them? At what point are cameras installed  on  all citizens, for the common good. We have banned and vilified smokers for the common good, forced handicapped parking spaces for the common good. The list here is a long one and when the 'Common Good' is the objective how can any good citizen object. If he does, perhaps, it is he who is hiding something and should be investigated or scrutinized much like the IRS with the right wing groups. Be careful what you want for others to protect you, as others may deem you the threat.

    1. Robert the Bruce profile image59
      Robert the Bruceposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Good points. It's always wise to find out where an action will lead.

    2. Jay Barban profile image81
      Jay Barbanposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Great answer! I though this would be an interesting top for discussion for I am pro camera for many reasons. Recently got accepted to the RCMP and will be leaving for training in a few months. I thought it would be good to hear different opinions.

    3. cjhunsinger profile image73
      cjhunsingerposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Jay
      Good luck. A difficult academy.

  10. Angela Kendrick profile image74
    Angela Kendrickposted 3 years ago

    Because police officers are public servants, there is no constitutional right that is implicated.  Police officers do not have an expectation of privacy while acting within their official capacities.  Everything that a police officer does while acting in his/her official capacity is a matter of public record and accessible to all citizens via the Freedom of Information Act.  They definitely SHOULD wear audio/video recording devices to ensure that every citizen's constitutional rights, life, and liberty are protected.

 
working

This website uses cookies

As a user in the EEA, your approval is needed on a few things. To provide a better website experience, hubpages.com uses cookies (and other similar technologies) and may collect, process, and share personal data. Please choose which areas of our service you consent to our doing so.

For more information on managing or withdrawing consents and how we handle data, visit our Privacy Policy at: https://hubpages.com/privacy-policy#gdpr

Show Details
Necessary
HubPages Device IDThis is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.
LoginThis is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.
Google RecaptchaThis is used to prevent bots and spam. (Privacy Policy)
AkismetThis is used to detect comment spam. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide data on traffic to our website, all personally identifyable data is anonymized. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Traffic PixelThis is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.
Amazon Web ServicesThis is a cloud services platform that we used to host our service. (Privacy Policy)
CloudflareThis is a cloud CDN service that we use to efficiently deliver files required for our service to operate such as javascript, cascading style sheets, images, and videos. (Privacy Policy)
Google Hosted LibrariesJavascript software libraries such as jQuery are loaded at endpoints on the googleapis.com or gstatic.com domains, for performance and efficiency reasons. (Privacy Policy)
Features
Google Custom SearchThis is feature allows you to search the site. (Privacy Policy)
Google MapsSome articles have Google Maps embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Google ChartsThis is used to display charts and graphs on articles and the author center. (Privacy Policy)
Google AdSense Host APIThis service allows you to sign up for or associate a Google AdSense account with HubPages, so that you can earn money from ads on your articles. No data is shared unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Google YouTubeSome articles have YouTube videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
VimeoSome articles have Vimeo videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
PaypalThis is used for a registered author who enrolls in the HubPages Earnings program and requests to be paid via PayPal. No data is shared with Paypal unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook LoginYou can use this to streamline signing up for, or signing in to your Hubpages account. No data is shared with Facebook unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
MavenThis supports the Maven widget and search functionality. (Privacy Policy)
Marketing
Google AdSenseThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Google DoubleClickGoogle provides ad serving technology and runs an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Index ExchangeThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
SovrnThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook AdsThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Unified Ad MarketplaceThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
AppNexusThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
OpenxThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Rubicon ProjectThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
TripleLiftThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Say MediaWe partner with Say Media to deliver ad campaigns on our sites. (Privacy Policy)
Remarketing PixelsWe may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.
Conversion Tracking PixelsWe may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.
Statistics
Author Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide traffic data and reports to the authors of articles on the HubPages Service. (Privacy Policy)
ComscoreComScore is a media measurement and analytics company providing marketing data and analytics to enterprises, media and advertising agencies, and publishers. Non-consent will result in ComScore only processing obfuscated personal data. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Tracking PixelSome articles display amazon products as part of the Amazon Affiliate program, this pixel provides traffic statistics for those products (Privacy Policy)