Victoria BC Police Brutality Video

[bloodyminded]

Most likely because it was tangential to the discussion at hand and there was no urgency to answer it. Sorry if you felt ignored. But I wonder about the proposal before I give my yea or nay to it: Is it only the police who you think deserve this requirement? Or, are you okay with cameras recording all of us?

It was tangential, and there was no urgency...and yet you respond to it here while still choosing not to answer. As for your last point: it would appear you don't even understand the question, implying as you do that there is some sort of...I dunno...democratic equivalence to surveilling the actions of the authoritarian sectors of public servants, and surveilling everybody. When they are entirely distinct matters, unrelated.

The fact is, there are not a few police themselves who wish for intensification of self-survelliance, precisely to make things perfectly clear to everybody. (These aren't the police who enjoy cracking heads in abuse of their power, presumably.) Eyeball's wish here is not radical; hell, it's downright conservative in the best possible sense.

[g_bambino]

It was tangential, and there was no urgency...and yet you respond to it here...

Uh, would you like a pat on the head for being able to follow along?

{I}t would appear you don't even understand the question, implying as you do that there is some sort of...I dunno...democratic equivalence to surveilling the actions of the authoritarian sectors of public servants, and surveilling everybody. When they are entirely distinct matters, unrelated.

Good grief; it's amazing the flack one gets around here for apparently not offering up answers on the fly. I'm sorry I don't immediately see the world in a strictly divided way; it seems possible to me that police officers are part of, not apart from, democratic society, and so I sense nothing wrong in merely asking if the proposal is indeed to uniquely single them out. If so, where is the line drawn? Who has a sufficient amount of authority to warrant cameras and mics? Does parking enforcement merit them? Does the Chief have to wear such equipment around the office? Do the politicians who have authority over the police require them? Private security? Parliamentary officers? And so forth. You should probably know I also consider the fact that we're all already heavily surveilled by cameras, both public and private, and that many police cars are already equipped with cameras, and ask: is more of that necessarily better? So, I understand the concept, but see it as actually a small part of a more complex matter.

[eyeball]

Of course it's what you said I said. And you talk about me being obtuse?

Smallc said...I think some are far too quick to judge based on very shaky evidence taken out of context. In response you said Exactly. That was the first thought that entered my mind after I saw this video.

I think a criticism of people who are too quick to judge is pretty much the same as defending those who are being judged, don't you think so too?

You may like to stroke your own ego with such opinions, but, in fact, it's you who evades analysis by flatly denying that any further information is required to analyse; you say I find accountability and transparency abhorrent, yet it's me, and not you, who's asking for more evidence.

So why is answering the question do you approve of police wearing cameras so difficult? The fact is I'm suggesting we do exactly what you're asking for which is provide more evidence/context but now you seem really reluctant to go down this path.

Most likely because it was tangential to the discussion at hand and there was no urgency to answer it. Sorry if you felt ignored. But I wonder about the proposal before I give my yea or nay to it: Is it only the police who you think deserve this requirement? Or, are you okay with cameras recording all of us?

I often have cameras staring at me all day when I'm at work, and I'm perfectly okay with it, because they allow me to verify to a very skeptical public and government that my actions in fact do match my words. The context and evidence of what I do is there for analysis.

Why should you the police or the government be treated any differently than me?

Edited March 28, 2010 by eyeball

[bloodyminded]

Uh, would you like a pat on the head for being able to follow along?

Would you like a pat on the head for being a smug little know-it-all bully?

Good grief; it's amazing the flack one gets around here for apparently not offering up answers on the fly. I'm sorry I don't immediately see the world in a strictly divided way;

Yes, you're a master of nuance.

it seems possible to me that police officers are part of, not apart from, democratic society, and so I sense nothing wrong in merely asking if the proposal is indeed to uniquely single them out.

I find it difficult to believe you are unaware of the distinction between Power/authority and those that they are meant to represent and serve. The default position, automatic and crucial to any democratic, open society, is that Power has to justify itself. The onus is not on us to decry Power; the onus is on Power to justify its behaviour.

So Power/authority must be accountable, since they exercise that power over us. The only way to properly justify their behaviour is to make it as transparent as possible.

Wishing the police were more heavily surveilled is not analogous to wishing citizens without authority be more heavily surveiiled. This displays a wild misunderstanding of the role of police in a relatively free society.

If so, where is the line drawn? Who has a sufficient amount of authority to warrant cameras and mics? Does parking enforcement merit them? Does the Chief have to wear such equipment around the office? Do the politicians who have authority over the police require them? Private security? Parliamentary officers? And so forth.

"And so forth"? These are not only individually distinct, but are wholly beside the point. A seaparte argument entirely. Your remark to which I objected was a promiscuous analogy--no doubt meant to obfuscate the issue--comparing surveilling the police to surveilling everybody.

As if my ordinary, day-to-day life deserved equal accountability as do the actions of the enforcers of the law. That's preoposterous.

[g_bambino]

Would you like a pat on the head for being a smug little know-it-all bully?

No, no. Conceited, self-righteous prats like you telling me I'm a bully is amusing enough.

[msj]

Perhaps you need to brush up on your English language skills. I gave the context. What you're asking for is proof that what I said about the context is true. A fair enough request (had you known what it was you were actually requesting), but one that, for practical reasons, I won't be fulfilling.

Oh, I never expected you to fulfill anything.

That's what your ilk do....

[g_bambino]

That's what your ilk do....

Awwww... How cute.

[Oleg Bach]

IF THEY DO NOT CHARGE THE COP...FOR ASSUALT..THEN ALL IS LOST.

[Oleg Bach]

Disgrace........... don't vote if the cop is not jailed.

[Oleg Bach]

so the cop goes to the gym--goes into a roidrage and smashes some ribes...maybe he is gay?

[Oleg Bach]

I guess it's true that lawyers are all liars and cops come from the same genetic pool as crooks...but what do we expect when a cop learns that our american brothers torture people..and it is acceptable--monkey see monkey do.

[Oleg Bach]

ALL I and say in closing is, what a brutal power crazed son of a bitch--and if the cop is not charged and jailed then those in charge should be jailed---this might just be the way our authoritarian masters view the general public- that we are less than dogs...I suspect that our elite would kick us in the ribs while prone if they could get away with it..reminds me of a judge that plays with himself under his robes while listening to a child molestation case.

[dre]

Iv spent a fair ammount of time around these kinds of incidents and I can tell you that kicking and punching suspects that are already restrained are causing little threat is basically standard operating procedure. For every video like this that we get to see theres a few hundred similar events that dont get taped.

[Oleg Bach]

Iv spent a fair ammount of time around these kinds of incidents and I can tell you that kicking and punching suspects that are already restrained are causing little threat is basically standard operating procedure. For every video like this that we get to see theres a few hundred similar events that dont get taped.

The cops do not respect their bosses and which at the high end is the judicary - untill there is an honourable justice system there will always be dis-honourable law enforcement.

[Beaver]

thats messed up i myself have seen police use excessive violence before and have used my cell to record it just tohave the officer take my phone and delete the video, that was before i knew my rights, i believe police officers should face harsher penalties due to the fact they have a higher standard we have them to enforce the laws not break them,

[marvc]

Both those who were restrained seemed to be cooperating enough to deserve a non violent arrest if you ask me! This brings back bad memories of the G20 weekend. :angry:

[GostHacked]

Pay attention to the perp's hands. He was resisting (although not enough to some people's definition of resisting). The perp was making it difficult to put the cuffs on. Why that perp felt the need to resist is beyond me? All that was going to happen was a ride down to the cop shop, the charges probably get thrown out and he's out in a couple of hours. It's not like the cops are going to haul him off never to be seen again.

Yeah the perp really resisted. They told him down on the ground and he did. Then the one cop bowled him over, which puts the guy in a position that became difficult to cuff. So they try to roll him over (dude is pretty big) and then the cop in the yellow puts a steel toes right into the guys spine with excessive force. That's abhorrent.

He was already being compliant and this same cop in yellow busts on to the scene and lays a steel toe into the guy on the street.