I would like to point out that my previous post now makes it appear as if I have lost my damn mind.

The camera proposal is just a knee-jerk, fix-it-and-forget-it solution. I think those “us vs. them” problems require an extensive and continuing effort to resolve. I don’t know if it’s nature or nurture, but we seem predisposed to developing us vs. them paradigms. So it’s an issue that will probably require constant vigilance.

What happens when police officers wear body cameras (WSJ)

Seems like a reason to consider the proposal more than knee-jerk

Don't forget the ubiquitous "has sex with sheep."

Nah, that's a stereotype of New Zealanders, as you will surely find out if you accidentally refer to an Australian as having ovine sexual tendencies. I've heard the Swiss as being referred to as bad in bed compared to other Europeans. I'm not sure if that is as true as the Irish curse stereotype.

Isn’t that relieving a symptom without curing the underlying disease? My thinking is that unless we address the problem at its root, we’ll just be playing an endless game of symptomatic whac-a-mole.

Not all diseases have cures. What is the problem at its root?

The the entire problem is police acting inappropriately. If that goes away, the problem is entirely solved.

We can also work on other problems, such as police force selection and training.

That's often good thing.

You could say the introduction of a police force was a whack against an underlying problem so shouldn't have been done but it improved life greatly while introducing a new smaller problem. Now we have the opportunity for a good solid whack in the right direction.

I also think you're totally wrong about it being a knee-jerk idea. The need for checks and balances on authority is an academic area. Such thinking was behind the US constitution which is half-decent if a bit rickety and behind the far superior UK constitution which shows no sign of age, sadly the great minds behind that thinking didn't have the foresight to consider cameras.

I really don't like it when data showing something is a good idea is used in a discussion about something which is obviously a good idea.

That's mostly a joke for BTM's benefit but it can lead to bad mistakes. Here the danger is that its such an obviously great idea that any poorly though out use of it will look a good idea and then people will stop thinking about it and we're stuck with it done poorly. (good is the enemy of the great type thing)

When junior or great-grandpa are acting up, “Honey get the taser” is somewhere down my decision tree. I think what happens to cops is the same that happens to prison guards: an us vs. them mentality develops and they lose empathy for the people they’re dealing with. I don’t know if you’ve seen the video of a cop tasering somebody’s grandma for refusing to sign a traffic ticket, but I doubt he would have done so to his own grandmother or a buddy’s grandmother. As you’re probably aware, it doesn’t take much for one person or a group of people to dehumanize another.

Apparently the Swiss police don’t need cameras to govern their behavior.

That's incorrect.

The need for checks and balances is irrespective of the fact that sometimes things look okay without them.

I don't think that it counts as a stereotype to say that all cultures who have neighbors who own sheep claim that their neighbors **** sheep.

As far as the Irish curse goes, I am not sure what to think. I thought that I was popular for saying clever things. I really don't want to be popular for being some circus freak. Are you saying that it isn't normal sized if you can't use it as a belt to hold up your trousers?

The Swiss and their numbered bank accounts saved my family from the Nazis because they could funnel enough money into Switzerland and then to the Arrow Cross Party to buy themselves out of Eichmann's death marshes. And you know, who actually stole their little gold that was left after this? Their nice catholic neighbours in Hungary.

The Swiss saved my family a second time, this time from communism. They paid for my mom's education she wasn't allowed to have in Hungary because her father was an "intellectual", hospital bills and a place to stay for a year. So yeah, it tilts me to no end, that the clocks are always on time. Edit: It really does. I am an ungrateful ass after all.

p1: p2:?
C: p2: People, who have sex with tons of sheep are anal retentive.

I think we found proof here. No, really. They are so ****ing anal.

There are other and better checks and balances than cameras though. But truth to be told, my examples could have gone the other way, if I wasn't a cute girl back then, who knows. They have some leeway in arresting people (for no more than 24h). But way less than the US police.

It doesn’t matter how good we get at holding cops accountable for their behavior, if the standard of behavior we’re holding them accountable to leads to an egregious outcome. For instance, say Wilson had a bodycam that either convicts or acquits him. If it’s the latter, we still have a dead jaywalker, just because we’re allowing those sorts of engagements to occur. Even if we think Brown was the sort of person who would potentially react in the same manner to any interaction with police, we don’t have to provide, or allow, the conditions for that potentiality to actualize. That’s just what we’re allowing the police to do, for example, with the bait car: a potential criminal becomes an actual criminal because we’re allowing the police to provide the conditions for such to occur. That same principle extends to traffic stops, no-knock warrants, etc. That is, while the police aren’t creating the criminal, the tactics we allow them to employ are creating the crime, making a potential criminal an actual one. My point is that the larger problem isn’t cops breaking the rules; I believe it’s the rules themselves.

That is something open for a reasonable debate. I cant see how it would go against cameras but it might. What we cant do is give examples where things look okay and say we therefore don't need checks and balances, or give examples where some version seems to be working and deduce its therefore the best way to do it.

I'm not remotely a religious man but I understand 'there but for the grace of god go I'. I have a deep wariness of those who don't get it.

I'm not convinced that there are.

Properly used cameras are a must on police cars and even on their chests are ok if not heavy. They can serve a lot of purposes and not just the keeping them well behaved and not abusive objective. In fact they can document details about all kinds of situations that can be used later in training of themselves or others or in collecting/documenting evidence and even the accumulation of information in situations accurate description and not just eye witness reference is more appropriate (in details) or necessary. They can be used for constructive criticism and self reflection of the officers themselves. They can review their own approaches just to improve and learn better. Identification of suspects in crowds may be also improved and documentation of crimes becomes easier and that way it may impact the other side too, the criminals.

A full scale usage of cameras to monitor everything though is a sensitive issue that requires transparency and self policing of the process of collection of such data.

A society different that one which is scientific at heart will always have the risk to exploit in unprecedented levels that undermine freedom and democracy a future of no more secrets. Only a mature ethical society can deal in a healthy manner with the prospect of immense information collection and reconstruction of events. Corrupt governments and corporations can manipulate people in terrible ways if the accumulation of data is not responsibly handled. You can essentially coordinate collective behavior and manipulate or eliminate/constraint trends and this is dangerous.

Furthermore a society that behaves well because it is recorded is not a free society. So no more secrets must mean also no more shame and no more hypocritical exploitation of these easier to reveal/reconstruct "secrets", but ultimately being unable to operate unconventionally and risky without being recorded and facing consequences requires a very healthy self critical society that evolves and doesnt rely so much on civil disobedience or doesnt punish it heavily. I think only scientific society can carry such burden without loss of elementary functions necessary for its development and avoidance of tyranny

A world of fewer secrets has the responsibility to be a lot more understanding, open minded, systematically embracing change and encouraging criticism of the current norms constantly plus enabling members with creative options to fight conformity. If criminal operations cannot get to you easily, you must also make sure you are not yourself the criminal.

The debate should be rather short.

True. My examples were introduced after you guys told stories about your life experiences with a cop, they were just fun stories to illustrate the difference in deferential behaviour expected by cops. Just to make sure again: they weren't meant as a coherent argument against cameras or something.

Having said that, my premise is still something like this:

So I try to identify, where I am wrong and cameras play an additional role than just to have better evidence in court. I can see on top of that, that cameras would actually change the standard of behaviour we're holding cops accountable for just because

a) more people would actually see the behaviour and change their own standard of accountability and then many people will and then maybe the "official" standards of behaviour will be changed. I am just not seeing this happening much.
b) cops change their own personal standard of behaviour in clear cut cases.

Now, I can see, that all proposals for changing "official" standards of behaviour have the same problems somewhat. But they can be more efficient (eliminating the whole seeing to believing part) by directly changing the "official" standard of behaviour.

So for example not to allow for no knock warrants would eliminate the need of cameras for no knock raids to use duffee's example. Or to completely change the instances when somebody can actually be arrested would reduce the risk of having to deal with muddy situations where somebody can be killed. Are those not checks and balances?

The only argument for cameras I can see is that they are actually being debated in the US right now and they are "better than nothing" in the short term.

Cameras have an instrumental value, in that they’re not ends-in-themselves but the means of achieving some other end. So in an instrumental sense, I’m not denying they’re good. However, if they’re not something we’d need in a perfect world, then they’re a necessary evil required to “check and balance” another necessary evil we’ve installed, the police. So the cameras will inevitably lead to some other abuse that we’ll then need to install another necessary evil to mitigate, which will inevitably lead to some more abuse that will require another necessary evil to mitigate, et cetera.

Now if we’re “eyes wide open” with all that and we’ve somewhat exhausted other potential solutions, that’s one thing; if we’re not and haven’t, then the camera proposal is what I think of as a knee-jerk reaction. In light of that, I’m looking at the behavior of the Swiss police as a contrast to derive another solution. Essentially, I’m reframing the question: In the way that what’s his name discovered a cure for smallpox when he stopped asking “Why do people get smallpox?” and reframed the question to “Why don’t milkmaids get it?” -- I’m reframing the question from “Why are our cops behaving badly?” to “Why aren’t the Swiss cops?” To me, that’s more of a scientific approach. We know well enough what sort of conditions elicit behavior we’d rather see or not see. So I’m asking “What are the different conditions the Swiss police are operating under compared to their U.S. counterparts?” That’s how science works: we figure out what conditions produce what results and then alter the conditions to produce a desirable result.

The conditions that produce the result may well be that US society is much more violent than Swiss. Cops are forced to take a different posture in response. Could be they've overshot the mark. How to bring levels of violence in US society to Swiss levels is another huge discussion. I'm ruling out yodeling lessons.