Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Well, while I agree that making cops wear body cameras could serve the purpose to protect both the civilian and the officer, you can probably make the argument for ALL public workers and even in many cases; that EVERY private employee should also wear them for the sake integrity.
If that's the case...
Why not make EVERY politician wear them during conferences, and during "private" negotiations and discussions?
Why not make EVERY teacher wear one, especially given the gross allegations of sexual misconduct, egregious teaching methods and student disciplinary bias?
How about EVERY social worker in the field?
Why not make every stock, real estate and insurance broker wear one in order to avoid unethical selling practices?
Why not make EVERY bus driver wear one?
Why not UPS drivers? Packages go missing or are arguably delivered to the wrong addresses all the time.
Why not mandate EVERY doctor or physician wear one to curb malpractice lawsuits?
Why not EVERY lawyer to keep in line with ABA requirements?
Perhaps, EVERY soldier in the field should wear one too in order to curb human rights violations?
Maybe we should mandate EVERY cashier to wear one to protect the consumers and the employees of being "short changed?"
Does anyone see what I'm talking about here?
The onus of irresponsible behavior that requires monitoring a cops behavior should not fall on the cops alone.
Well, while I agree that making cops wear body cameras could serve the purpose to protect both the civilian and the officer, you can probably make the argument for ALL public workers and even in many cases; that EVERY private employee should also wear them for the sake integrity.
If that's the case...
Why not make EVERY politician wear them during conferences, and during "private" negotiations and discussions?
Why not make EVERY teacher wear one, especially given the gross allegations of sexual misconduct, egregious teaching methods and student disciplinary bias?
How about EVERY social worker in the field?
Why not make every stock, real estate and insurance broker wear one in order to avoid unethical selling practices?
Why not make EVERY bus driver wear one?
Why not mandate EVERY doctor or physician wear one?
Why not EVERY lawyer?
Perhaps, EVERY soldier in the field should wear one too?
Maybe we should mandate EVERY cashier to wear one to protect the consumers and the employees of being "short changed?"
Does anyone see what I'm talking about here?
The onus of irresponsible behavior that requires monitoring a cops behavior should not fall on the cops alone.
No. I don't see what you're talking about here.
None of the people you pointed out are public servants, having constant public contact, while holding the power of instant death on the individuals they come in contact with. The people you pointed out also will not make me liable for their actions. I, as a taxpayer are liable for the actions of the police in my area. As such, I demand vigorous oversight on their actions, at all times, while performing the duties of administering the laws.
There is also the unspoken truth that many individuals target the police by using tactics that are designed to incite and inflame the situation just to bring the incident to court for a legal settlement. The police and the public who hire them need protection from false and inflammatory allegations.
None of the people you pointed out are public servants, having constant public contact, while holding the power of instant death on the individuals they come in contact with. The people you pointed out also will not make me liable for their actions. I, as a taxpayer are liable for the actions of the police in my area. As such, I demand vigorous oversight on their actions, at all times, while performing the duties of administering the laws.
There is also the unspoken truth that many individuals target the police by using tactics that are designed to incite and inflame the situation just to bring the incident to court for a legal settlement. The police and the public who hire them need protection from false and inflammatory allegations.
Of course you don't you don't see what I'm talking about. And you're simply wrong, I said both public and private employees would have a good reason to wear them. Teachers, and political figureheads are "public servants" are they not?
Lawyers can either be public or private, right?
All employees (such as Stock Brokers or Real Estate brokers) are regulated by public laws are they not?
And "instant death" should not be the barometer for mandating body cameras on cops, reason being that most "instant deaths" are caused by civilians.
Should all gun owners be mandated to wear body cameras while operating a firearm?
Should all gun sellers wear body cameras to monitor their conversations before selling a firearm to ensure that they are falling in-line with all federal requirements?
And in regards to your last comment about "legal settlements"...guess what? The police aren't the only ones who are sued and have false allegations made against them.
You have teachers and doctors who are sued all of the time.
Billions of dollars in the real estate market were lost due to the unscrupulous manipulation of reverse mortgages..and we bailed them out, should they all be required to wear body cameras now to monitor the flow information from business to consumer?
Let's be honest here, you have an issue against the cops. If your line of argument were consistent, you would agree with my original point.
If you as a "tax payer" do not want to be held accountable in these types of lawsuits; the most practical consideration would be to remove or severly limit the opportunity to litigate public servants.
Location: Democratic Peoples Republic of Redneckistan
11,078 posts, read 15,080,865 times
Reputation: 3937
Quote:
Originally Posted by itshim
Of course you don't you don't see what I'm talking about. And you're simply wrong, I said both public and private employees would have a good reason to wear them. Teachers, and political figureheads are "public servants" are they not?
Lawyers can either be public or private, right?
All employees (such as Stock Brokers or Real Estate brokers) are regulated by public laws are they not?
And "instant death" should not be the barometer for mandating body cameras on cops, reason being that most "instant deaths" are caused by civilians.
Should all gun owners be mandated to wear body cameras while operating a firearm?
Should all gun sellers wear body cameras to monitor their conversations before selling a firearm to ensure that they are falling in-line with all federal requirements?
And in regards to your last comment about "legal settlements"...guess what? The police aren't the only ones who are sued and have false allegations made against them.
You have teachers and doctors who are sued all of the time.
Billions of dollars in the real estate market were lost due to the unscrupulous manipulation of reverse mortgages....should they all be required to wear body cameras now to monitor the flow information from business to consumer?
Let's be honest here, you have an issue against the cops. If your line of argument were consistent, you would agree with my original point.
If you as a "tax payer" do not want to be held accountable in these types of lawsuits; the most practical consideration would be to remove or severly limit the opportunity to litigate public servants.
No..its YOU missing Mohawkx point..the LEO is the point of contact on the road where it can all go good or bad in a split second..he/she has the gun that can take a life..the others you mentioned do not and a private gun owner is not paid with public monies...huge differences and your argument makes no sense.
Of course you don't you don't see what I'm talking about. And you're simply wrong, I said both public and private employees would have a good reason to wear them. Teachers, and political figureheads are "public servants" are they not?
Lawyers can either be public or private, right?
All employees (such as Stock Brokers or Real Estate brokers) are regulated by public laws are they not?
And "instant death" should not be the barometer for mandating body cameras on cops, reason being that most "instant deaths" are caused by civilians.
Should all gun owners be mandated to wear body cameras while operating a firearm?
Should all gun sellers wear body cameras to monitor their conversations before selling a firearm to ensure that they are falling in-line with all federal requirements?
And in regards to your last comment about "legal settlements"...guess what? The police aren't the only ones who are sued and have false allegations made against them.
You have teachers and doctors who are sued all of the time.
Billions of dollars in the real estate market were lost due to the unscrupulous manipulation of reverse mortgages....should they all be required to wear body cameras now to monitor the flow information from business to consumer?
Let's be honest here, you have an issue against the cops. If your line of argument were consistent, you would agree with my original point.
I most certainly do NOT have an issue against cops.
My apologies if I came off like that. I am very supportive of the LEOs in my community.
Being active in the Arizona Right to Bear Arms(ARTBA) and responsible for presenting various changes to current Arizona gun law to the state legislature, I come in contact and are personal friends with many local LEOs. We shoot together on weekends regularly at the range right down the street from the LEO special operations training center here in Northern Az.
I have an issue with the fact that most conflicts that get out of hand in police interaction are instigated by the perpetrator. It is only after the LEO has been pushed beyond their limit that they react and in a few cases, over react. I want irrefutable proof of the fact that the perp was mouthing off to the LEO, in the LEO's face, threatening the LEO and doing everything in their power to incite a reaction from the LEO to get the perp's infractions thrown out or possibly a monetary settlement.
That is my main reason for cameras.
I believe the ratio of good cops to bad cops is 95 good to 5 bad.
No..its YOU missing Mohawkx point..the LEO is the point of contact on the road where it can all go good or bad in a split second..he/she has the gun that can take a life..the others you mentioned do not and a private gun owner is not paid with public monies...huge differences and your argument makes no sense.
Most points of contact between the Cops and the public do NOT go "bad" in a split second, and most certainly do not lead to death. What percentage of cops are responsible for all homicides in the US? Besides if the idea is hold someone accountable for the sake of saving money in law suits, then you'd agree that all public servants should be required to wear them, and ALL private companies should require their employees to wear them as well. Otherwise, you have no rebuttal.
In regards to "public monies" and gun ownership, the argument is that the flow of illegal guns stems from states with less stringent laws to those with more stringent laws. This is the apex of the argument that former NYC mayor Bloomberg made for federal gun control--that being said, by the sentiments in this thread, all gun sellers and gun owners should be digitally monitored and recorded during the sell and when the firearm is being used. Afterall, the owners and the sellers are directly related to gun deaths/homicides.
The reality is, you have no argument, nor can you address what I'm referring to point by point.
I most certainly do NOT have an issue against cops.
My apologies if I came off like that. I am very supportive of the LEOs in my community.
Being active in the Arizona Right to Bear Arms(ARTBA) and responsible for presenting various changes to current Arizona gun law to the state legislature, I come in contact and are personal friends with many local LEOs. We shoot together on weekends regularly at the range right down the street from the LEO special operations training center here in Northern Az.
I have an issue with the fact that most conflicts that get out of hand in police interaction are instigated by the perpetrator. It is only after the LEO has been pushed beyond their limit that they react and in a few cases, over react. I want irrefutable proof of the fact that the perp was mouthing off to the LEO, in the LEO's face, threatening the LEO and doing everything in their power to incite a reaction from the LEO to get the perp's infractions thrown out or possibly a monetary settlement.
That is my main reason for cameras.
I believe the ratio of good cops to bad cops is 95 good to 5 bad.
Fair enough mohawk,
But why just LEO?
If I have a child in classroom, perhaps as a parent I may want the classroom to be digitially monitored to ensure that the teacher is adequately teaching and more importantly not sexually harassing my child behind closed doors?
As a registered voter and tax payer, I would prefer that my City Councilman/woman, public attorneys, judges and Mayors are being "fair" and "just" in the negotiations in their application to the law. Perhaps they should walk around with body cameras "on duty" too?
Perhaps, Eric Holder (for the time being) should wear a body camera to record all conversations, negotiations and his examination of all the evidence to ensure that he is in line with all ABA requirements?
Well, while I agree that making cops wear body cameras could serve the purpose to protect both the civilian and the officer, you can probably make the argument for ALL public workers and even in many cases; that EVERY private employee should also wear them for the sake integrity.
If that's the case...
Why not make EVERY politician wear them during conferences, and during "private" negotiations and discussions?
Why not make EVERY teacher wear one, especially given the gross allegations of sexual misconduct, egregious teaching methods and student disciplinary bias?
How about EVERY social worker in the field?
Why not make every stock, real estate and insurance broker wear one in order to avoid unethical selling practices?
Why not make EVERY bus driver wear one?
Why not UPS drivers? Packages go missing or are arguably delivered to the wrong addresses all the time.
Why not mandate EVERY doctor or physician wear one to curb malpractice lawsuits?
Why not EVERY lawyer to keep in line with ABA requirements?
Perhaps, EVERY soldier in the field should wear one too in order to curb human rights violations?
Maybe we should mandate EVERY cashier to wear one to protect the consumers and the employees of being "short changed?"
Does anyone see what I'm talking about here?
The onus of irresponsible behavior that requires monitoring a cops behavior should not fall on the cops alone.
Slippery slope; a logical fallacy, an invalid argument.
Slippery slope; a logical fallacy, an invalid argument.
"an invalid argument"= I can't think of or artculate an argument to counter the proposed argument.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
