Outgrowth of Ferguson: Should cops be REQUIRED to wear shoulder cams?
One of many ripple effects from Ferguson is an on-line petition to the White House (now well past the 100-thousand-signature threshold) seeking to require cops in all jurisdictions to wear cameras to record their activities and interactions.
What do you think? Wise? Illusory? With many cash-strapped cities and police departments, where would the money come from? The Feds? And what about the usual conflict over the relative powers of the legislative vs. executive branches? Would this require a Congressional vote? Could a President just order it? Slippery slope in any way?
(Some jurisdictions ALREADY require such cameras. For example: Burlington, Vermont. A free test from the manufacturer!)
By the way, one price-tag I saw: About $900 per cam.
From The NATIONAL JOURNAL's Marina Koren (former Editor-in-Chief of the University of Delaware student newspaper, The REVIEW)...
Don't we have enough "surveillance" already? Everything we do/say every day is under the ever-watchful eye of someone...somewhere. Do we really want to be watched even more?
What's next?...giving the police G0ogL3 GlaSseS so they no longer need to have a laptop in the squad car?
The media continue to feed on this story (probably the real reason it's still front-page news)... no journalists reporting (front page) on ISIS beheading a journalist from America?... and their threat to kill another journalist they captured in Syria?
Wed, Aug 20, 2014 3:05pm
Front page, USA TODAY insert in The NEWS JOURNAL: (Just below the masthead) "Video seems to show American's beheading"
Second story, just below (with biggest headline and big photo):
"IRAQIS: U.S. HELP VITAL"
Then, the third story: "Ferguson shooting goes to grand jury"
And some regard USA TODAY as a tabloid.
We led some of our newscasts this A.M. with the beheading.
That said, average people are talking about Ferguson, not the beheading. I concede we could be looking at a vicious circle, chicken-and-the-egg effect. Wall-to-wall media coverage, especially on cable news, means more people are talking about Ferguson. However, I really think all the angles of Ferguson captivate many more people than ISIS/Syria/Iraq. It's just the way it is.
Mike from Delaware
Wed, Aug 20, 2014 3:05pm
I'm against the idea of Big Brother, but given the fact that cops have carte blanche to do whatever they want and the citizens have no recourse, but to shut their mouths or get the crap kicked out of them, I believe for the public's safety and to end the wall of silence, the blue code, that YES, every cop in every town, county, and state should have one of those on when on patrol.
Think about it, had the cop in Ferguson had a self camera on, we'd know the truth, rather than the cop said and the victim's friend said. Rodney King's video showed America that the cop was way out of line. No, this is an idea whose time has arrived. This can be part of the stimulus thing, look at all the body cameras that would need to be manufactured... require they are made in U.S.A. That way, we kill two birds with one stone, create some jobs and put a leash on the cops. So we'll know how often they go for a donut run, how long they sit there in the parking lot not patroling their assigned area, and if they do get out of control, or if the alleged criminal asked for it, it works both ways. Time for some accountability from those who have so many more rights than the average citizen.
Wed, Aug 20, 2014 3:36pm
Sorry Mr. Loudell...guess I'm just getting tired of the "news" creating this tabloid-type environment for ratings, but you're right...some are reporting on the ISIS story.
I'm sure many people are also sick of hearing about terrorists, war and the Middle East...so they tune out and talk about the latest top story that's closer to home for most.
Wed, Aug 20, 2014 4:18pm
Mike: You have some good points on cameras on cops... according to this story, the Ferguson police department had them, and the department was in the process of deploying them to officers, but not all had received them yet. This story also proves the policeman was seriously beaten by Brown...
As regards to the beheading, it is being taken as good news, unfortunately, not for the family involved. ISIS is rapidly collapsing upon itself - intelligence reports say - and these tactics are more of a desperation move to keep the news focused on the threat ISIS allegedly poses, and not on the reality that ISIS is being decimated like pigeons in a box..... It's hard to recruit pigeons when all they see is their brethren getting put in boxes, and then shot.
Wed, Aug 20, 2014 8:01pm
MFD: Thank you for posting the LCMS statement on the previous Ferguson thread. It's very much in line with what I would expect and am pleased with what was said.
My reason for bringing up the fact that the Lutheran church is headquartered there was inspired by Kavips' effort to paint Missouri as a place that celebrates hate and attempting to cite Rush Limbaugh as a symbol of that hate.
Your response has illustrated my first point which is that you can't paint all people of any geographic location with a broad brush.
My other less obvious point is it's possible that some of the church leaders who disagree with Copeland and Osteen may nevertheless agree with Limbaugh, which while that may seem contradictory it shows that a plus b doesn't necessarily result in c, and also wouldn't mean they're racists if they did agree with Limbaugh.
Thanks again for the post. It's really a bright spot in an otherwise dark and ugly situation.
Wed, Aug 20, 2014 8:54pm
For anybody who thinks it's the Republicans who want to destroy Social Security, listen carefully to this report:
ISIS only has 6000 men from Syria to Baghdad. Currently their only strength is because the Sunni insurgents have joined. They have lost all major battles since the US became involved. Iran, British, French, US, and Iraq and Iran are fighting against them. Iran alone has 6000 troops in Iraq. Hence, it was necessary to obfuscate all those loses by beheading someone... It was an act of desperation.
However ISIS is not dead yet. They've stolen assets worth $3 billion in cash, even though their manpower is diminished.
Mike from Delaware
Thu, Aug 21, 2014 8:16am
Mrpizza: Interesting video from Dick Morris. So he's claiming there was a news item that says Obama wants to move some of the Social Secuirty money that goes to Social Secuirty over to the part of Social Security to fund the disability part that has shy rocketed during the Obama years.
Morris also said that during Reagan's terms the rules for getting disability changed from having to prove you need it to taking the person's word for it thus the steady increase from Reagan's terms to now. Apparently many of the folks going on disability today aren't going on there for cancer and things like that, but mental issues, migraines, and back aches all pretty subjective. In other words, there are folks riding the gravy train on our tax dollars who could and should be able to work.
So the Reagan administration screwed up, and today it would appear Obama wants to steal more money from Social Security to give money to the Social Security disability fund.
Allan: was this a news story? Do you have more info? Might be a good interview for you during the noon time hour to interview the Obama's Sec of the Treasury, who Morris claims made the statement to the press about this change.
Thu, Aug 21, 2014 8:35am
I guess time will tell who is right about ISIS...I hope kavips is right, but I continue to hear/read opposing reports. On NPR this morning, they were discussing the number of VISA-carrying Americans and Brits who have joined the jihad for ISIS. I don't see the beheading of a journalist as a sign of weakness for ISIS any more than it was a sign of weakness when the same thing happened to Daniel Pearl by al-Qaeda...
As for the Ferguson/Brown story... I have said, and linked news stories saying the two kids ran from the cop AFTER Brown beat the cop... latest I've read the cop got out of his SUV and told the two to freeze; they did, raised their hands, and then Brown decided to bum-rush the officer. I guess the main question that needs to be answered is...did the cop fire and then Brown ran at him or did he run at the cop and he then fired his weapon?
(The NYT article seems to be only available to subscribers...)
Mike from Delaware
Thu, Aug 21, 2014 8:37am
Kavips: This is the key point from that article of which the case will probably be won or lost.
"According to his account to the Ferguson police, Officer Wilson said that Mr. Brown had lowered his arms and moved toward him, law enforcement officials said. Fearing that the teenager was going to attack him, the officer decided to use deadly force. Some witnesses have backed up that account. Others, however — including Mr. Johnson — have said that Mr. Brown did not move toward the officer before the final shots were fired.
A lawyer for the police union, Greg Kloeppel, did not return calls for comment.
The F.B.I., Mr. Bosley said, pressed Mr. Johnson to say how high Mr. Brown’s hands were. Mr. Johnson said that his hands were not that high, and that one was lower than the other, because he appeared to be “favoring it,” the lawyer said.
James McKnight, who also said he saw the shooting, said that Mr. Brown’s hands were up right after he turned around to face the officer.
“I saw him stumble toward the officer, but not rush at him,” Mr. McKnight said in a brief interview. “The officer was about six or seven feet away from him.”
So it appears the police will claim Brown rushed the cop and Brown's family/prosecution, etc., will claim he stumbled towards the cop with his hands up.
Six or seven feet is not a lot of space between the two men. If Brown did stumble towards him, the cop might not have had enough time to evauate the movement, and reacted by shooting. I could also see the police lawyer saying it was an accidental shooting. The problem with that, though, is the cop fired 6 shots. Why so many? At that range, he could have shot him in the leg to immobilize him, then cuff him.
Mike: Hopefully the FBI will be able to figure this one out...and maybe there's a mixture of truth from both sides. Perhaps Brown did stumble, but remember the cop, by that point in time, already had an orbital blowout fracture to his eye socket (whatever that is) so his vision was probably not 100%. In other words, he very well could have "seen" a lunge when it was a stumble...but he had already been struck several times by the 6ft 4in tall/300 pound Brown.
Mike from Delaware
Thu, Aug 21, 2014 10:39am
EarlGrey: I agree if the cop had a damaged eye socket, he probably wasn't seeing very clearly, and again only 6-7 feet separated the two, that requires a split second seeing, understanding what you saw, and reaction of firing the gun or not.
Still the big question in the back of my mind was, why did the cop stop Brown and Johnson in the first place? It seems like it was because they were walking in the street [some say blocking the street]. So a roll down the window and yell, get out of the middle of the street would suffice. Of course, some folks have to mouth off to the cop [never a good idea]. Maybe Brown gave the cop the "Bronx Salute" [even a worse idea]. Now the cop is going to have to restore his "manhood" and confront these two clowns. So the cop calls them over to his car and Brown sticks his head and arms into the window and who knows what was said by both cop or Brown. But it seems to appear that Brown hit the cop in the eye and the cop fired a shot inside the car. Frankly it sounds like this cop is scared and doesn't know what he's doing. Brown and Johnson beat feet out of there and "deputy dog" gets out of the car and shoots a shot [maybe he yelled - STOP or I'll fire a warning shot between your shoulder blades]. I believe the cops bullet hit Brown's arm. Brown stops and turns and puts his arms over his head. The cop must have walked closer to close the gap [mistake] so now there's 6-7 feet between them when Brown stumples, the cop panics thinking Brown's rushing him and fires the gun 5 more times killing Brown.
Both made mistakes. Brown's 1st was if he "flipped off or smart mouthed" the cop when told to get out of the street [doesn't warrant being shot for]. Brown's 2nd mistake was for hitting the cop while he had his head and arms inside the cop car. That should have gotten him arrested, but not shot dead.
The cop made mistakes too. 1st cop mistake was telling Brown to stick his head inside the car window. The cop should have gotten out of the car and talked to Brown. He wouldn't have been hit in the face. Where was his taser, why use a gun? All he had to do was get out of the car and calmly tell Brown to spread eagle on the side of the car and to stay that way while backup came to assist, especially if Brown was a 300 lb hulk. That way he got his collar and Brown would be sitting in jail, not the morgue. The cops mistakes seem to have cost Brown his life. So in my version of better police technique if when the cop Brown didn't spread eagle, but instead ran, then officer Krupky should have then shot him with his taser, if only having a gun, the used gun to shoot in the leg to disable him, not kill him. Another thought, if Brown weighed 300 lbs, how far is he going to run, so why not chase until he runs out of breath, then as he's panting for air cuff him and read him his rights. Good Job, Lenny Briscow, good collar.
That's another question that still needs to be answered more clearly. I can not find anywhere on any credible news source as to how tall and how much did Michael Brown weigh. So was he 6'4" weighing in at 300lbs? or smaller and lighter? That's a big dude. How big is the cop?
Thu, Aug 21, 2014 1:23pm
In the long run, the police are supposed to be an extension of society, put in place by that society to preserve law and order. Accidents will happen. It is the duty of society to determine if that accident was the case of pursuing law and order then decide for the police, or if that was not an accident and bordered on the police officer having a criminal motive, in which case society, in order to preserve law and order, must decide against the police.
My guess is that it will be decided to protect the institution of the police, and not open the door for every policeman to be criminalized, making them less inclined to do what is right in such moments and decide for the police in the criminal trial, and then,... use a civil case to reward Michael Brown's family a large sum in response to the damage done by the officer on Michael Brown's family.
That is my Solomonic solution...
Thu, Aug 21, 2014 1:56pm
Ok, now in Communist Ferguson Missouri, armed platoons are invading churches....
This is worse than Soviet Russia.... Conservatives don't care about American values. They are no different than Communist Russians, the SS, or the Red Brigade.
MOST of the protesters who have been arrested are NOT from Ferguson. (Of 163 arrests since shooting, 7 from Ferguson)
However, quite a few of the instigators/agitators are actual Communist Party members.
"A video uploaded on YouTube Tuesday shows Gregory Lee Johnson, a veteran member of the Revolutionary Communist Party, riling up a crowd and seemingly discouraging them from listening to police’s advice to calm things down."
And, neither of these stories sound like ISIL/ISIS is on the run or weakening:
"WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The sophistication, wealth and military might of Islamic State militants represent a major threat to the United States that may surpass that once posed by al Qaeda, U.S. military leaders said on Thursday.
"They are an imminent threat to every interest we have, whether it's in Iraq or anywhere else," Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel told reporters at the Pentagon."
Earl... I saw nothing backing up your claim in the Reuters article. We have to teach you how to read double-speak... What was given in that was unsubstantiated posturing.... You heard the dam was retaken I hope. And that ISIS is on the defensive in Iraq from the Kurds, Iranians, Iraqi forces and American bombing? I've heard these on WDEL so I don't need links there.
The second link, was from the "Hill"? A radical Republication that once echoed McConnell that their only goal was to make sure Obama was a one-termed president. You expect them to tell any good news that makes Obama look good? Of course not. That is why no one read them.
But I did read that article. There was nothing about the Iraqi-Syrian ground game countering what was offered on my end... Just some rambling from someone known to be "America's Dumbest Senator" about how ISIS wants to blow up an American city. Hell, Hitler and Tojo wanted to blow up an American city; we were beating the crap out of them. It was never a threat because they didn't have the means to do anything.
More on America's dumbest senator, which is the only person Earl can seem to find to boost his argument.....
Thu, Aug 21, 2014 7:49pm
MFD: I agree that Reagan shouldn't have gone along with relaxing the rules, but on the other hand, it also shows the man was more compassionate than he was given credit for. He also went along with amnesty, which was a big mistake, but at that time there was no historical precedent that would indicate it would result in a bigger immigration problem 25 years later. Unfortunately many politicians today have learned nothing from Reagan's mistakes or any other history for that matter.
You know the old saying: History repeats itself.
As Dick Morris always says: Thanks for watching.
Thu, Aug 21, 2014 9:48pm
It appears that the police officer, will not be charged because as in Florida, there is now real law against killing someone in self defense.....
"as long as there is a modicum of evidence and reasonable plausibility in support of a self-defense claim, a court must accept the claim and acquit the accused. The prosecution must not only prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant committed the crime, but also disprove a defendant’s claim of self-defense to the same high standard. Under Missouri law, all a citizen claiming self-defense or a police officer claiming to have fired while pursuing a dangerous criminal need do is “inject the issue of justification.” In other words, he only needs to produce some evidence (his own testimony counts) supporting the claim. Once he does so, “any reasonable doubt on the issue requires a finding for the defendant.”"
Since state law trumps Federal law in this case, the police officer's use of force should be vindicated against such a very low standard. The Fed's may opt to bring a civil Rights violation against him, since his actions overstepped Federal outlines of respecting other races...
At best, this can be used to organize black communities into voting blocks which having heard how few Missouri blacks are currently voting, could make an always toss-up state, a blue one. Because if they get the votes, they can change the law to whatever they want... IF they get the votes.
Fri, Aug 22, 2014 12:40am
Now that "Ferguson fatigue" has hit most of America, Eric "Adolf" Holder should go to Miami along with Sharpton and Jackson to investigate the murder of a Jewish rabbi on his way to synagogue on a Saturday morning. Unfortunately, the victim, while part of a minority, is still the wrong color, and since Holder, Sharpton, and Jackson only defend black thugs, it just doesn't fit their political agenda.
Fri, Aug 22, 2014 12:52am
Pizza, you missed the point... If Miami goes up in flames over that Rabbi, I'm sure that Holder might go there as well. People get killed all the time... That includes, clergy, priests and yes, rabbis... Has nothing to do with color. Has to do with the national agenda. If your argument had legs, that Holder's visit was color induced, he would have been here in Wilmington long ago... It is about justice. He is chief of the Justice Department. This is about police breaking the law... I'm only hearing about the rabbi from you.. That means no one else cares either. The executive branch cannot waste its resources on people no one cares about.
More Palestinians die at the hand of Israel than rabbis die in Miami. If anything, they get priority after Ferguson is done, over one lone killing in Florida.
Fri, Aug 22, 2014 12:53am
Hey, Pizza. Dick Morris is dumb.
Fri, Aug 22, 2014 3:10am
Here is the current status of ISIS. You can listen to the American media, (I just did and laughed and laughed) but how many times do we have to tell you, if it is every right, it is because it is the last to report the news.
From the above link from Asia Times: an organization that "actually" has contacts who speak the local language in Iraq...
Islamic State troops in Iraq, numbering perhaps 6,000, are stretched thin across a winding 800-mile (1,300 kilometer) front in northern Iraq, from the Syrian border to the approaches to Baghdad. They may soon face attacks from all sides, the loss of safe havens, and the absence of secure lines of communication to base areas in western Iraq and eastern Syria.
Further, they are taking scores of casualties every day, and a coming Kurdish counteroffensive, in conjunction with attacks by the Dulaim from the south, will greatly increase those casualties.
Islamic State may have to ponder whether to continue a war of attrition against numerically superior forces or withdraw to safer areas in eastern Syria. Its disposition toward increasingly hostile populations - Shia or Sunni or Yazidi, Kurdish or Arab - is not in doubt and its wrath will be fearsome...
One military guy to guard 2 kms of border... That alone tells you ISIS is done. Should negotiations with the Sunni tribe of 5 million controlling Iraq's West go well, and the fracturing of Iraq is finally agreed upon, then an independent Sunni state complete with oil, straddling East Syria and West Iraq, exists and is exactly what the Saudi's and Gulf States would want. They support the new Sunni's, and their support dries up for ISIS.
That is the real story, available for anyone to read. You gotta stop trying to get foreign news from all American media... Its like trying to understand the Bible by only reading the Koran.
I must add, since the thought just occurred. What can go wrong? The deal with the Sunnis gets sabotaged by the Israelis.
Fri, Aug 22, 2014 7:34am
This piece by Pat Buchanan summarizes the Ferguson case very well and also points out why Eric Holder should not be involved in this case...
Buchanan sums up well what I've attempted to say over many posts on this topic on this blog...there are two versions of what happened, but the facts are not supporting the claims against Wilson.
Kavips: I can't speak about Eric Holder, but from what I've observed over the years, Al Sharpton is ONLY interested when a Black is attacked, beaten, or killed, by a White. He never bats an eye when black-on-black or black-on-white crime happens. I believe that's what Mrpizza is saying.
Sharpton isn't Martin Luther King. Sharpton isn't about equal justice for all as Rev. Dr. King was. That's why Sharpton hasn't come to Wilmington, because all those shootings are black-on-black, more often than not drug-related. No glory there for him or an issue to stir up the black community with agaisnt the white community. He's the black version of a "David Duke".
There have been a number of black-on-white crimes that made national news [so it's not like good ole Al Sharpton didn't know about them], but no one heard a peep about those crimes from the MSNBC Sharpton.
We should be calling Al Sharpton, one-way-Al. He only cares if it is white on black, never the other way around. That is why he has no credibility with folks like me, because be it black on white or white on black BOTH are wrong and need to be stopped. Until Sharpton gets some real stones or "brass monkey's" and confronts both issues, he's simply a race bating agitator in my view and wouldn't make a pimple on Dr. King's "dari-air" and should be given the same lack of respect as should Rush Limbaugh both are agitators of the worse sort and hurt the nation more than they help.
Fri, Aug 22, 2014 9:07am
(1). The Brown family's grandfather invited Al Sharpton to Ferguson.
(2). The Al Sharpton of today is vastly more restrained than the younger Al Sharpton. POLITICO's Glenn Thrush - who covered Al Sharpton over the years - notes this in a lengthy piece today.
(3). For what it's worth, I've met and interviewed both Al Sharpton (running for President) and David Duke. Duke is the scary one. I've not personally covered Minister Louis Farrakhan, but for my money, Farrakhan would be more accurately the polar opposite of David Duke, including ideologically (anti-Semitic).
Mike from Delaware
Fri, Aug 22, 2014 9:29am
Allan: Good points.
I'm sure Sharpton is more nuanced than from his earlier years [I've listened to early films of Billy Graham from the 1950's vs. his later sermons from the 1970's on, and he too is more nuanced, and less inflammatory than in his early years].
The family probably did call in Sharpton; look at the national exposure this has gotten,; Sharpton has that ability and pull. Sadly those white families whose family member was killed by a black don't have such a national voice to speak for them.
I still have no use for Al Sharpton, because he is one-way, and that doesn't serve the nation or help to bring to the two groups together. He is a divider and the nation frankly doesn't need more help being divided. That was what was special about Dr. King; he worked for all people.
Sharpton could become the next Martin Luther King [he has the voice, the national following, plus access to national media, but he'd have to swallow up his hatred of white people and speak for all, as his mentor Dr. King did.] Rev. Sharpton could actually become a wonderful voice of reason, peace, and reconcilation if he chose to, by simply following what his savior Jesus said in the Red Lettered parts of the Gospels. Sadly the Rev. Al has chosen a different path.
Fri, Aug 22, 2014 6:35pm
MFD: Thanks for the defense on the Sharpton/Holder issue.
Not to argue here, but just wanted to point out that while you paint Limbaugh and Sharpton as two of a kind, it was actually Limbaugh who first pointed out to me Sharpton's hypocrisy and that Limbaugh would agree with you about that point.
But then, I'm not advocating that all our opinions have to be consistent. I like both Gary Sinise AND James Garner.
Mike from Delaware
Sat, Aug 23, 2014 12:21am
Mrpizza : my guess is Al Sharpton would say the same thing about Limbagh. So I'd agree with Rush's comment & Sharpton's too. That's where you & I would differ. Both men are dividers & not good influences on our nation. You see one as a hero & the other as a divider. It is what it is.
Add your comment: Attention: In an attempt to promote a level of civility and personal
responsibility in blog discussions, we now require you to be a member of
the WDEL Members Only Group in order to post a comment. Your Members
Only Group username and password are required to process your post.
You can join the WDEL Members Only Group for free by clicking here.
If you are already a member but have forgotten your username or password, please
Please register your post with your WDEL Members Only Group username and password below.