After watching this tape, I was actually prepared to give the cop the benefit of the doubt, even though their actions seemed unnecessary, intrusive, specious, and confrontational. But even with all of that, I reasoned that if the guy really looked like someone they were actively hunting for, then it makes sense they would need him to hand over his ID and remove himself from the car for possible detainment. And since I’m not an expert in Ohio law, I don’t know if asking a passenger’s ID is out of bounds during a traffic stop.
But it appears as if the cop all along knew who the passenger wasand also knew there were no actionable warrants for him. So what becomes obvious is that the passenger was 100% right. The cop just wanted to harrass and intimidate him and his GF. He and his other buddies went fishing for probable cause until they successfully wore him down and got him to exit the vehicle.
They’ll deem his merchandise to be drug paraphernalia just like a wad of bills can be deemed drug money. They’ll take everything he’s got, and the onus will be upon him to prove innocence.
Another part being that unjustified complaints are less likely to be filed if the complainant knows that an objective record of the encounter exists that can be used to disprove false accusations of police misconduct.
So, perhaps the police cleaned up their act, and perhaps the public stopped filing wrong-headed complaints because they knew it wouldn’t get them anywhere. Or a combination of both.
Require all cops to wear cameras. If the camera isn’t recording at all times, they are immediately terminated.
Take away all military hardware from every police force in the country.
Revise and simply the procedures for suing police for abuse of power/harassment/arbitrary violation of civil rights, and give the new rules massive teeth, starting with immediate dismissal and a lifetime ban from acting in any enforcement capacity, public or private, a lifetime ban on possession of any firearm, and fines in the hundreds of thousands of dollars. Then nail every one of them to the wall.
Cameras work because they keep both sides semi-honest.
I seriously doubt this. Most people understand that cops protect their own and will almost always will side with an officer’s side of the story in the absence of hard evidence like broken ribs. For every spurious complaint filed by a loud-mouthed malcontent there are probably 100 legitimate complaints that go unreported because people’s trust in the LE system is so low.
If anything, I think cameras are empowering people to resist cops in ways they would’ve been too afraid to do so before. The scene between the head-shop owner and the narcotics officers that I cited earlier probably would’ve turned out differently in a cameraless world.
I will say, though, that while I doubt citizen complaints are going down for the reason that Shodan points out, awareness of being filmed could very well cause citizens to control their behaviors and reign in their urge to escalate confrontations with the police too. So yes, body-cams would be a win win this way.
I hope this idea doesn’t offend anyone, but I’m wondering if some of this trigger-happy cop stuff isn’t due to a surge in Iraq and Afghanistan veterans going into law enforcement. The siege mentality that characterizes so many of these interactions makes me think of habits possibly engrained in combat. I hope someone is looking at this.
Then one would expect that with cameras the number of complaints to go up, not down, since the one spurious complaint would disappear but be offset by 100 new complaints that can now be substantiated.
Of course the premise of this thread is largely a product of confirmation bias and selective attention - the dashcam videos showing police behaving according to policy never make it onto the Internet.
And assholes are always going to complain about being arrested. One advantage of objective evidence is to point out bullshit, and there is at least as much or more coming from the arrestees as the arresters.
It’s often “he was walking down the street minding his own business when the racist pigs shot him in the back!!!” and somehow it doesn’t get mentioned that “walking down the street” means “jaywalking and blocking traffic with stolen goods in his hand” and “minding his own business” means robbing stores and assaulting clerks and “shot him in the back” means “shot him in the front after he assaulted a police officer and tried to grab his gun”.
Why would they? Cops often behave appropriately, that doesn’t mean the cops that don’t shouldn’t be called on their actions. Bad cops have been acting with impunity for far too long.
Nobody claimed that bad cops shouldn’t be called on it.
The problem comes from believing that fifty cases out of a million or so establish any kind of a meaningful pattern. Especially since about half of them are bullshit where anti-cop bigots with a racial chip on their shoulder screech “Brutality!” every time a cop subdues a subject with anything more severe than “Pretty please with cream and sugar”.
Young black males being killed by police at a rate significantly disproportionate from their statistical involvement in violent crime sounds like such a “meaningful pattern”.