Random Thoughts.....

Ron said:
Lord knows I’ve been quick to bark against over beating or over reaching LEO…

But let’s look at another angle.
Cop is called to grandmas house because she locked her self outside.( It happens more than you’d think) There is gramma with her grandma sagging boobs all humiliated …
Let’s broadcast that to the internet so creeps can come harass grandma.

Just one example of hundreds I can imagine.

Or what about your relatives lieing on the road dieing after a crash let’s broadcast that
Click to expand...

Another good (bad?) example of what doesnt need to be broadcast. In all three counties we serve, LEO is coming to pretty much every major call. That includes CPR calls, traumatic injuries, wrecks, ect. Thats not something John Q. Public needs to see raw footage of, especially live.

There is also a lot of private and personal identifying info that is exchanged in everything from a minor traffic stop to a felony arrest stop. My thoughts on any given person aside, everyone is innocent until proven guilty and it aint right to put all their info out there, potentially opening up an innocent person to a lot of harassment and or undue problems.

Now, if you are involved in an incident, I agree that you should have immediate access to an unedited copy within a couple days. But the general public doesnt need access to every call every time.
 
benXJ said:
Aren't they set up to only record when lights/sirens/official duties are happening? Not when they are in the bathroom. Duh.
Where is this cop going while on duty that is suspect?
What is this cop doing while on duty that they would be ashamed of?
We the taxpayers and voters asked and are paying for it.....so I'm still unsure why it was deployed in such a cumbersome, lack of transparent method (except that is the gov't way.....maybe that is just it?)
I'm not involved in a particular case, just more of a curiosity as I watch a number of police cam vids and often hear something like "after 6 months and 75 lawyers spending $10,000, the footage was released"
Seems that if we could see every police/citizen interaction within days, unedited, alot of issues could be avoided...hot head cops might think twice before getting too aggressive with a grandma over a mask 'violation' and we wouldn't have 'hands up don't shoot' riots that are often proven to be based on lies and misinformation.
We have the tech...why are we scared to use it?
Click to expand...
Ron said:
Lord knows I’ve been quick to bark against over beating or over reaching LEO…

But let’s look at another angle.
Cop is called to grandmas house because she locked her self outside.( It happens more than you’d think) There is gramma with her grandma sagging boobs all humiliated …
Let’s broadcast that to the internet so creeps can come harass grandma.

Just one example of hundreds I can imagine.

Or what about your relatives lieing on the road dieing after a crash let’s broadcast that
Click to expand...
You're both making valid points which basically prove that the current system is probably the best way, but could use some tweaking to align more with RHSCTJ's approach:
RHSCTJ said:
I dont see a need for it to be live-streamed but it should be as simple as a FOIA request to get body cam footage. It took like 6 months, countless protests, some guy on twitter, and an act of God to get gastonia to release the body cam footage of the PD tasing Joshua's service animal.
Click to expand...
 
Geez...I backed off the livestreaming. A long time ago.

I get not releasing cam footage to any tom dick and harry off the street whenever they want to see it. No one is implying needing or wanting to see the mundane 99% of activity.

But the police have a video team, let them edit out grandmas saggy boobs. Or blur the dead body in the street.

But if I get in a scuffle with the police and want to highlight the wrong doings, I should be able to go down to the local PD and ask for the footage. The next day. Not 6 months later after threats of lawsuits from my lawyer.
What if I can't afford a lawyer to fight 6 months?
Or an overzealous cop is having a bad day and steps on my rights and I want to fight back? Why is the burden on me to fight the police department?
Why does it seem that no one really cares because 'they aren't coming for me' mentality?
So exactly why are the cams in use then? To protect who?
They sure are quick to release the footage when it shows the cops in a good light (i.e. shooting of the drunk south of the border immigrant on 440 this year). So where is the hold up when they are in the wrong? How is that tolerated? There are obviously methods to get the footage out quick, when they want.
 
benXJ said:
Geez...I backed off the livestreaming. A long time ago.

I get not releasing cam footage to any tom dick and harry off the street whenever they want to see it. No one is implying needing or wanting to see the mundane 99% of activity.

But the police have a video team, let them edit out grandmas saggy boobs. Or blur the dead body in the street.

But if I get in a scuffle with the police and want to highlight the wrong doings, I should be able to go down to the local PD and ask for the footage. The next day. Not 6 months later after threats of lawsuits from my lawyer.
What if I can't afford a lawyer to fight 6 months?
Or an overzealous cop is having a bad day and steps on my rights and I want to fight back? Why is the burden on me to fight the police department?
Why does it seem that no one really cares because 'they aren't coming for me' mentality?
So exactly why are the cams in use then? To protect who?
They sure are quick to release the footage when it shows the cops in a good light (i.e. shooting of the drunk south of the border immigrant on 440 this year). So where is the hold up when they are in the wrong? How is that tolerated? There are obviously methods to get the footage out quick, when they want.
Click to expand...


The cams are to protect cops. If anyone thinks otherwise, theyre delusional.
 
benXJ said:
Geez...I backed off the livestreaming. A long time ago.

I get not releasing cam footage to any tom dick and harry off the street whenever they want to see it. No one is implying needing or wanting to see the mundane 99% of activity.

But the police have a video team, let them edit out grandmas saggy boobs. Or blur the dead body in the street.

But if I get in a scuffle with the police and want to highlight the wrong doings, I should be able to go down to the local PD and ask for the footage. The next day. Not 6 months later after threats of lawsuits from my lawyer.
What if I can't afford a lawyer to fight 6 months?
Or an overzealous cop is having a bad day and steps on my rights and I want to fight back? Why is the burden on me to fight the police department?
Why does it seem that no one really cares because 'they aren't coming for me' mentality?
So exactly why are the cams in use then? To protect who?
They sure are quick to release the footage when it shows the cops in a good light (i.e. shooting of the drunk south of the border immigrant on 440 this year). So where is the hold up when they are in the wrong? How is that tolerated? There are obviously methods to get the footage out quick, when they want.
Click to expand...
What you don't seem to understand is that there's no telling what else is in that footage that may or may not be related to your incident. There may be footage of a guy with his dick out in the background. There may be audio of a guy giving out his address in the background. Who knows.
It take TIME and RESOURCES for that to be reviewed and edited. That video team is a bunch of guys that cost money. How big do you want that team to be? Aren't you the guy always complaining about taxes being too high? How much are you willing to pay for this service? do you think you are the only person requesting footage? In your world, there will be tons of people requesting it all the time. So you cool with spending a $million annually to have this?

Then on top of that - how do they know its appropriate to give to you? You walk in and say, "I'm the guy that had this altercation" or "I'm the guy who's wife had this altercation" or "I' ma concerned citizen representing the guy....". Somebody has to vet you and give you a chance to actually prove you have a reason to need this footage. So we need a process for that. And processes take - wait for it - time.
 
jeepinmatt said:
You're both making valid points which basically prove that the current system is probably the best way, but could use some tweaking to align more with RHSCTJ's approach:
Click to expand...
thats a great theory, but I don't know about you... but not everybody living in my house is smart enough to follow @RHSCTJ 's approach.
 
Yea...the rent is too damn high. Hence my idea of Livestream....sure that has some issues
A few tv shows were pretty successful in the same vein.
'taxes are too high' is not the same as 'defund the police' btw
But my point still stands....the police can get footage out QUICK when they are in the 'right' but drag their feet for a number of reasons when they are looking bad.
Why, when this camera program was implemented, asked for and paid for by the taxpayers, was a 2 or 3 day max limit implemented for the release to the public...no matter the circumstances. It is possible, so why not in every case?
 
The worst thing about running late, is all the people who are not. :mad: It's morning rush hour. There's no need to go 28 in a 45 right now. Clearly that shit can wait.
 
Last edited:
jeepinmatt said:
The worst thing about running late, is all the people who are not. :mad: It's morning rush hour. There's no need to go 28 in a 45 right now. Clearly that shit can wait.
Click to expand...
Nobody is actually in a rush.
 
jeepinmatt said:
The worst thing about running late, is all the people who are not. :mad: It's morning rush hour. There's no need to go 28 in a 45 right now. Clearly that shit can wait.
Click to expand...
The number of people behind the wheel of a car with no where to go and no set time to get there is mind boggling.
 
Every time I see one of those "Drive like your kids live here" signs, it makes me want to stop and ride my dirt bike in their front yard. :D
 
How can one be SO obtuse? And get into a pretty powerful position? This guy really is quite dumb....I hear him on the radio quite often.
Even if the story is questiobable.....what does posting on social media fueling conspiracy theories get him?
Keep your mouth shut dude.

www.wral.com

Robinson social media post makes light, doubts details of Pelosi attack

A post on Lt. Gov. Mark Robinson's personal Facebook page appears to make light of and cast doubt on details surrounding the attack last week on the husband of U.S. House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi.
www.wral.com www.wral.com
 
benXJ said:
what does posting on social media fueling conspiracy theories get him?
Click to expand...
People who will believe the conspiracy theories and take action.
 
benXJ said:
How can one be SO obtuse? And get into a pretty powerful position? This guy really is quite dumb....I hear him on the radio quite often.
Even if the story is questiobable.....what does posting on social media fueling conspiracy theories get him?
Keep your mouth shut dude.

www.wral.com

Robinson social media post makes light, doubts details of Pelosi attack

A post on Lt. Gov. Mark Robinson's personal Facebook page appears to make light of and cast doubt on details surrounding the attack last week on the husband of U.S. House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi.
www.wral.com www.wral.com
Click to expand...
He has made a lot of very questionable statements for a long time.
He will probably be running against cooper also in the next round, i was hoping for a better republican candidate.
 
benXJ said:
Can a state decide to allow cars newer than 25 years old to be imported and registered and titled?
Click to expand...

I dont know how legal it is, but I would say yes. I feel like California is doing that. NC constantly seems to make it more difficult to do so. I could see a state require all cars meet some emissions requirement, that they were never able to meet from the factory.
 
paradisePWoffrd said:
I dont know how legal it is, but I would say yes. I feel like California is doing that. NC constantly seems to make it more difficult to do so. I could see a state require all cars meet some emissions requirement, that they were never able to meet from the factory.
Click to expand...
My understanding - which could be totally wrong - is that the import regs are Federal, since thats an international trade thing, but regs regarding what you can title/tag is up to the state bc they control the local roads.
E.g. it's hard to imagine DC letting Raleigh dictate what can come into the country, but once it is here and on NC soil it's their (Raleigh's) problem to deal with.
 
paradisePWoffrd said:
I dont know how legal it is, but I would say yes. I feel like California is doing that. NC constantly seems to make it more difficult to do so. I could see a state require all cars meet some emissions requirement, that they were never able to meet from the factory.
Click to expand...
they could, in theory, if they wnted to give up all federal road funding
 
RatLabGuy said:
My understanding - which could be totally wrong - is that the import regs are Federal, since thats an international trade thing, but regs regarding what you can title/tag is up to the state bc they control the local roads.
E.g. it's hard to imagine DC letting Raleigh dictate what can come into the country, but once it is here and on NC soil it's their (Raleigh's) problem to deal with.
Click to expand...

Well you can import a car into any state now that is less than 25/21 years old (potentially in parts, depending on age/make/model/customs official mood/country of origin/ if it has an engine/etc), the issue is that you can't title or register it for legal road use.
So why can't a state allow you to register/title a car less than 25 years old for legal road use once its in that state?
California has super strict rules about what cars can be registered there, but I can drive any car I want on CA roads, as long as its registered in another state.
Seems that states could do what they want, where the NC governor could allow any cars on the roads...just like SC has weaker requirements than NC....cause we all know the 25 year rule is based on money and big business concerns (which are outdated now due to more and more cars being built for the 'world'), not safety for emissions.
 
benXJ said:
Well you can import a car into any state now that is less than 25/21 years old (potentially in parts, depending on age/make/model/customs official mood/country of origin/ if it has an engine/etc), the issue is that you can't title or register it for legal road use.
So why can't a state allow you to register/title a car less than 25 years old for legal road use once its in that state?
California has super strict rules about what cars can be registered there, but I can drive any car I want on CA roads, as long as its registered in another state.
Seems that states could do what they want, where the NC governor could allow any cars on the roads...just like SC has weaker requirements than NC....cause we all know the 25 year rule is based on money and big business concerns (which are outdated now due to more and more cars being built for the 'world'), not safety for emissions.
Click to expand...
I don't think its a matter of "can't" meaning there is a legal barrier, its a matter that it will take time for the state to realize they have this option AND have a reason to change their regulations. So a better term is "Won't".
Note also, that even though you can get title and tags for any particular state, if you take that car to another state you still have to met the regs for that state. E.g. some states have bumper height laws, you can still get a ticket for being over even w/ a different plate. Its just often overlooked or waived as a courtesy.
 
Yea...of course they won't...to much work on their end to accommodate the constituents,.

Not talking about mods...just a stock vehicle. I can drive a 1981 car into CA from Texas and be free to move about, even though that 1981 car does not meet CA smog requirements.
 
Loganwayne said:
im about ready to take this tractor off market place. Ive had the same guy ask me three times if i would trade for two black walnut trees that id have to cut down and an old barn that i would need to take down....
Click to expand...
More info on the trees and barn?
 
Back
Top