City Solicitor George Nilson, who reports to Mayor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake, said legislation proposed by Council President Bernard C. "Jack" Young violates a city charter provision that prohibits lawmakers from interfering with the power of the police commissioner. "The City Council can't issue a legal requirement that the police have to conduct themselves in a specific way," Nilson said.
But Young and some other council members disagreed, and one local legal scholar said he was "not persuaded" by Nilson's argument.
More
8 comments:
As a local LEO I support the use of body cameras. Unlike dash cameras the body cameras capture the whole incident. Will cut down on BS complaints and also weed out some bad apples.
Blake and Baltimore city cops don't want them because they are nearly all involved in illegal activity every day!
They just can not justify the B.S. excuses for the video disappearing or the equipment malfunctioning on the scale it would take to cover up the thug activity in the police department.
I think all officers should be recording audio and video EVERY minute of their ENTIRE shift.
It's the only way to hold the thugs accountable before they do harm.
Name and quote the law that makes these cameras "illegal".
We will wait right here...
11:08 Then, every person should be required to wear them. You, your children, politicians, EVERYBODY. Oh, wait, that would be invasion, or some other quack excuse you rejects use.
The police want it to be "he said - she said" where most folks believe the cops. They've shown time and time again that they can't be trusted anymore.
What do the people want?!
Anon 1108, I'll stay wearing my body cam 24-7 right after it becomes mandatory for every body else as well. Besides the privacy issues there would be no way to capture and store that much video in a reasonable or affordable way. Recording the entire shift would mean if i responded to your home for some issue then i could record in your house and you couldn't tell me to turn it off. As it stands now we can only turn them on during traffic stops, public areas if we announce we are recording, and transporting people in our vehicles.
7:21....get back to grazing... you must have an IQ in the single digit range...your reasoning (which barely reaches the definition of that word) is ridiculous.
"....your children", "politicians", etc, DO NOT get to empty an automatic rifle into a kid and say they were "afraid", then get to go back to work. "WE, the people" get arrested, our story is picked apart and investigated" VERY thoroughly, and we end up in prison.
9:19 has it right. Thanks.
And for the record, the City Council isn't REQUIRING the police "conduct themselves in a specific way" (following the law would be a good start) -- wearing a camera doesn't SPECIFY "conduct", it MONITORS it.
More cop BS to avoid being caught on camera beating up a 65 year old lady for calling him a mean name. And saying he HAD to kill her because he was afraid. And that would be the end of the story of THAT murder.
A camera on EVERY cop. Damn right. And "camera failure" or "malfunction" in a incident where a citizen is killed or injured would be automatic UNPAID suspension. Cops check their weapons every day right?
9:50...I'll stop carrying a gun as soon as everyone else does, too. Including YOU.
More cop BS.
Ever hear of a recording LOOP?
And since WHEN did the police worry about "affordability"? The TAXPAYERS "afford" everything they say they need, including automatic rifles, grenade launchers, military thermal vision equipment, Stingray devices, etc.
MORE cop BS.
Oh yeah, I've heard thousands of cops ANNOUNCE that they recording in a public area. lol!!! You can't have said that in a serious line of thinking...I hope you don't actually believe THAT or think that ever really happens.....
Post a Comment