Your cell phone is a dangerous weapon, cops say.

[eyeball]

That depends, I guess, on what the main goal is.

Covering their asses. This may not be the main goal but it's definitely got to be high up on the list.

Edited April 23, 2013 by eyeball

[guyser]

nope. Ordering me to give up my phone is an illegal order and I'm walking away because I've done nothing illegal

Again, you arent wrong but you arent too bright at that point. I agree , but I also have a bigger picture in mind.

and I'll lay charges against them and sue their asses. They know it now so they'd be stoooooopid to push it.

We'll film them if we want. We pay their salaries and we are all watching. They can get used to it, or resign.

But they can't steal our phones.

Yes well that will be money foolishly spent then.

I know you are not wrong legally, but for the moment and a few years beyond, it will certainly hurt.

Apart from some horrible actions by cops, have you ever heard of a conviction on a minor charge as the one you propose? Remember, we live in Canada and punitive awards are not very common.

Edited April 23, 2013 by guyser

[GostHacked]

Covering their asses. This may not be the main goal but it's definitely got to be high up on the list.

Maybe Mike is right.. more CCTV is needed. Some CCTV footage has been key in prosecuting criminal activity by police.

[jacee]

Again, you arent wrong but you arent too bright at that point. I agree , but I also have a bigger picture in mind.Yes well that will be money foolishly spent then.

I know you are not wrong legally, but for the moment and a few years beyond, it will certainly hurt.

Apart from some horrible actions by cops, have you ever heard of a conviction on a minor charge as the one you propose? Remember, we live in Canada and punitive awards are not very common.

It's the threat of Police Act charges and lawsuits that matters, because police now know they have no right to try to stop a person from filming. Innocent civilians aren't taking crap from police about filming them anymore, and we sure as hell aren't letting them take our phones!

Police brutality against innocent TAXPAYERS, such as you suggested earlier, will get cops fired.

Why would they object to people filming them if they are doing their job right???

Edited April 23, 2013 by jacee

[guyser]

It's the threat of Police Act charges and lawsuits that matters,

You would first have to convince a Cop to lay those chahrges, you cannot do so yourself.

Good luck finding one to do so. It is very hard to do. Google McCromack and see what he has been able to get away with. And you want to take on a phone confiscation ? Brave or er....

because police now know they have no right to try to stop a person from filming.

Now know? They always knew , but they figured most of us didnt know.

Police brutality against innocent TAXPAYERS, such as you suggested earlier, will get cops fired.

Why would they object to people filming them if they are doing their job right???

Rarely does a cop get fired. Very rarely, and certainly not over the cell phone liberation

[jacee]

You would first have to convince a Cop to lay those chahrges, you cannot do so yourself.

Good luck finding one to do so. It is very hard to do.

You don't seem to know what you're talking about.

Civilian complaints about officers don't go to another officer.

They are reported directly to SIU, the Police Commission/Office for Independent Review, etc, and of course, to the media.

[guyser]

You don't seem to know what you're talking about.

Civilian complaints about officers don't go to another officer.

They are reported directly to SIU, the Police Commission/Office for Independent Review, etc, and of course, to the media.

Nice smug smiley,hope you like eating crow then!

Oh I dont? Oh man...

One really should look into things before commenting

The complaints either go thru the station ( Hi Mr Cop !) or the OIPRD (civilian run) who then MUST FORWARD to the police station (hi Mr Cop)where the complaint originates. Then it goes to the Chief.

Dont worry, the SIU wont take your complaint either, unless you have an a serious assault , death or sex assault from a cop. But then again, most SIU guys are cops and if not, they all have criminal backgrounds, Intelligence, CSIS, Immigration and so on.

Yea about that not knowing......you keep on with you cell phone complaint. Hope you like the chipped beef, and PMITA Bubba.

[jacee]

Nice smug smiley,hope you like eating crow then!

Oh I dont? Oh man...

One really should look into things before commenting

The complaints either go thru the station ( Hi Mr Cop !) or the OIPRD (civilian run) who then MUST FORWARD to the police station (hi Mr Cop)where the complaint originates. Then it goes to the Chief.

Dont worry, the SIU wont take your complaint either, unless you have an a serious assault , death or sex assault from a cop. But then again, most SIU guys are cops and if not, they all have criminal backgrounds, Intelligence, CSIS, Immigration and so on.

Yea about that not knowing......you keep on with you cell phone complaint. Hope you like the chipped beef, and PMITA Bubba.

So you're suggesting that cops will steal our phones, if we object they'll beat our "melons" and trump up some charge to throw us in jail.

Then the Police Commission, Chief and SIU will all collude in a coverup.

I wonder if the cops appreciate you making them look like stupid violent thugs on a power trip.

[guyser]

So you're suggesting that cops will steal our phones, if we object they'll beat our "melons" and trump up some charge to throw us in jail.

Then the Police Commission, Chief and SIU will all collude in a coverup.

I wonder if the cops appreciate you making them look like stupid violent thugs on a power trip.

All you have to say is "oh, this isnt what I thought"

Whatever you wrote above is merely an attempt to deflect the fact that the Cops investigate other Cops having civilian complaints against them.

So....your cell phone complaint will go as far as getting it back and an apology. But be my guest and hire a lawyer and sue the cops, when you get your settlement ($0)and realize the bill from the lawyer is a lot more than that, well....the truth will come out.

Edited April 24, 2013 by guyser

[Argus]

Maybe Mike is right.. more CCTV is needed. Some CCTV footage has been key in prosecuting criminal activity by police.

I like the bobbiecam idea.

[eyeball]

I like the bobbiecam idea.

I like the idea of extending the idea up the chain of command, right to the very very top.

Go far enough with this idea and maybe we'd be able to stop our rich people from preying on third world countries and putting our society in harm's way when they do. Something else you've been starting to demonstrate a bit of concern about that lately.

[g_bambino]

I like the idea of extending the idea up the chain of command, right to the very very top.

Go far enough with this idea and maybe we'd be able to stop our rich people from preying on third world countries and putting our society in harm's way when they do...

Then cameras have to be attached to everyone; no privacy, ever. Equality and all, right?

[eyeball]

No. Stop misrepresenting me. You know perfectly well I only mean as little secrecy as possible, for only the very small number of us who have the power to impose no privacy on everyone else.

[jacee]

All you have to say is "oh, this isnt what I thought"

Whatever you wrote above is merely an attempt to deflect the fact that the Cops investigate other Cops having civilian complaints against them.

And your implication was that they will all collude in a coverup to defeat all complaints against other police officers. Is that still your position?

You don't have a very high opinion of the integrity of police do you?

So....your cell phone complaint will go as far as getting it back and an apology.

No, because MY cellphone is NOT going anywhere.

Because ... my original point ... cops have no right to take it and I won't give it, a fact you acknowledge by saying I'll get an apology.

But be my guest and hire a lawyer and sue the cops, when you get your settlement ($0)and realize the bill from the lawyer is a lot more than that, well....the truth will come out.

Ya, the truth that COPS CAN'T TAKE YOUR PHONE just because you're filming them.

And if they bust your "melon" to get your phone, your original threat, then they're in trouble that is definitely worth the cost of a lawyer.

And btw ... I know from personal experience that SIU cops actively seek out incompetent thug cops who give them all a bad name ie, like the thug cop you initially threatened me with who would bust my "melon" if I refused to give him my phone. Such officers are a disgrace to their uniform.

Edited April 24, 2013 by jacee

[guyser]

And your implication was that they will all collude in a coverup to defeat all complaints against other police officers. Is that still your position?

You don't have a very high opinion of the integrity of police do you?

For the most part no I don't

Most cops will be closed mouth when it comes to indiscretions of other cops.

No, because MY cellphone is NOT going anywhere.

Because ... my original point ... cops have no right to take it and I won't give it, a fact you acknowledge by saying I'll get an apology.

Sigh....your phone , should they want it, will be gone. There is no Judge nor jury on the streets so yes, if they want it it is gone.

Only after peer review would your apology come.

Ya, the truth that COPS CAN'T TAKE YOUR PHONE just because you're filming them.

Not sure how you dont get it but anyway.....Cops CAN take your phone. Again, it may be illegal (save for Border security)but take it they ahve and will.

And if they bust your "melon" to get your phone, your original threat, then they're in trouble that is definitely worth the cost of a lawyer.

Its a phrase not an actual thing they will do. Ok, hire a lawyer and youll be out more tha you gain. But then again, pro bono or civil rights lawyer might take it up , still not a winning money kind of idea.

And btw ...I know from personal experience that SIU cops actively seek out incompetent thug cops....

Your personal experience is a fantasy. The SIU is called out only for serious injury, death and sex assault at the hands of police.

sigh.....from the SIU website.

The SIU has a limited jurisdiction. The Unit conducts investigations into police activity where someone has been seriously injured, alleges sexual assault or has died. The jurisdiction captures cases where the police conduct in question causes serious injury or death to another police officer. In addition, it includes incidents of serious injury or death connected to the conduct of a police officer at the time of the incident, regardless of the fact that the individual may no longer be a police officer at the time of the Unit’s investigation.

Complaints involving police conduct, services and policies that do not meet these criteria must be referred to other complaint processes.

http://www.siu.on.ca/en/faq.php?print=y

You best wave the white flag on this one.

[g_bambino]

No. Stop misrepresenting me. You know perfectly well I only mean as little secrecy as possible, for only the very small number of us who have the power to impose no privacy on everyone else.

The only thing being misrepresented here is this proposal of yours: There are so many problems with it that you simply, perpetually ignore. I raised the issue of equality: If some people have to wear audio and visual recording devices at all times, then why shouldn't others? Why not everyone? If it is only a few, where is the line drawn between those who do and those who don't? You see "the very small number of us who have the power to impose no privacy on everyone else" is not a substative answer: who are "they", exactly? What, precisely, differentiates them from everyone else? What about their rights vis-a-vis everyone else's? And, if they have all the power you say they do, who has the power to make them wear cameras at all times?

And, for god's sake, what're they supposed to do when they have to go to the washroom?

[guyser]

And, for god's sake, what're they supposed to do when they have to go to the washroom?

Hopefully they dont look down .....or turnaround and look down.

[jacee]

Most cops will be closed mouth when it comes to indiscretions of other cops.

Are you including Police Commission, OIPRD, SIU and Chief, whose job it is to monitor officer behaviour?

Sigh....your phone , should they want it, will be gone. There is no Judge nor jury on the streets so yes, if they want it it is gone.

Not if I don't give it to them.

They're not going to assault me for it with others filming them.

Not any more!

Your personal experience is a fantasy. The SIU is called out only for serious injury, death and sex assault

It's the truth. Some violent thug cops have their own personal SIU officers following them around, tracking them, interviewing those they assault.

Don't judge all cops by the creeps: Most of them actually do their jobs well and don't brutalize innocent civilians.

Edited April 24, 2013 by jacee

[eyeball]

And, for god's sake, what're they supposed to do when they have to go to the washroom?

That reminds me of the time I stepped out on deck and hung a rat over the rail and forgot the damn camera/black-box was running. Then DFO's plane, light's out at about 100' above the surface flew over head and snapped a picture, just for good measure I guess. They blast the boat with a high-intensity flash that...well, as I said, I was already hanging over the rail so at least I didn't soak my pants.

BTW please note I said as little secrecy as possible, not privacy. There is a huge difference that you're deliberately ignoring.

If there are gaps in the data collected when I fish I have to account for them in a log book that is also audited. I suspect there must be something similar in place for the Bobby's that wear cameras. So, we simply come up with something similar for people in power. I guess if politicians and lobbyists start playing footsie with each other in bathroom stalls it'll just add a seedier aspect to an already all too-often incestuous relationship.

[Argus]

The only thing being misrepresented here is this proposal of yours: There are so many problems with it that you simply, perpetually ignore. I raised the issue of equality: If some people have to wear audio and visual recording devices at all times, then why shouldn't others? Why not everyone? If it is only a few, where is the line drawn between those who do and those who don't?

If you don't get a gun as part of your job, or a tazer, and you don't get to manhandle people whenever they won't do what you want, then you don't need a camera.

[guyser]

Are you including Police Commission, OIPRD, SIU and Chief, whose job it is to monitor officer behaviour?

Its not their job.

It's the truth. Some violent thug cops have their own personal SIU officers following them around, tracking them, interviewing those they assault.

Don't judge all cops by the creeps: Most of them actually do their jobs well and don't brutalize innocent civilians.

Sadly you are mistaken.

SIU do not have any mandate to follow anyone but the people they have complaints against.

Perhaps you are thinking of IA ? (Internal Affairs)

[kimmy]

However, how do we reconcile that with what just happened in Boston? The police had to beg people not to reveal their tactical positions, so as to insure their safety and not to compromise their search. Is this an obvious exceptional circumstance? Are there other circumstances where there should be an exception?

I'm not aware of any way of putting cell-phone video on the internet in real-time. And if it's not being streamed real-time, then it's not a tactical liability. During the Dzokhar Tsarnaev manhunt, I was able to follow along in real time at my computer, but the updates weren't coming from cell phone video, they were coming from guys with police radio scanners.

-k

[Guest American Woman]

I'm not aware of any way of putting cell-phone video on the internet in real-time.

Phone to phone real-time video could still be a disadvantage to police depending on who is doing the sending and receiving.

Actually, according to Qik Video and PC World, you can stream live videos to the internet anywhere, any time, anywhere in the world....

Edited April 25, 2013 by American Woman

[cybercoma]

If you don't get a gun as part of your job, or a tazer, and you don't get to manhandle people whenever they won't do what you want, then you don't need a camera.

Frankly, I don't understand bambino's position. Cops get guns. Does that mean everyone should have to wear guns? I don't get the logic.

[cybercoma]

I'm not aware of any way of putting cell-phone video on the internet in real-time. And if it's not being streamed real-time, then it's not a tactical liability. During the Dzokhar Tsarnaev manhunt, I was able to follow along in real time at my computer, but the updates weren't coming from cell phone video, they were coming from guys with police radio scanners.

-k

OWS Protestors put cellphone video online in real time via LiveStream. So it's definitely a possibility, even if most people don't know about it yet. Even still, analyzing their tactical positions in takedowns and whatnot could jeopardize the officers' safety in future activities. It's just a thought. I think they should be recorded. Bobbiecams seems like a great idea, but then I imagine a situation where the cops refuse to release the recordings to the public. I can see the press release now, "the tapes are currently under review by our internal investigations division, so we cannot release them to the public at this time." Once the situation blows over and people stop asking for the recordings, they won't have to release them. The ideal situation is to allow the public to record encounters.

Edited April 25, 2013 by cybercoma