NBA games postponed today p14 Players decide to resume Playoffs

[CBS7]

Nor whack him in the back of the head with a skateboard while he was running away.

Now that I'm more versed in the sequence of events, he had already shot someone in the head and killed them at the point the guy him in the head with a skateboard.

Still irrelevant to bring up their histories. No one deserves to be judge jury and executioner. The shooter didn't know the histories of the people he killed.

He also broke the law because the gun wasn't his.

I'm sure a 17-year-old with a rifle attempting to run away from an angry mob or from a guy tossing a molotov cocktail at him was playing Judge Dredd.

Watch on YouTube

Lot of new info to me here. Thanks.

[IliketheBullsNBearstoo]

I don't know. Not doing something is not doing anything. They want to boycott games then fine. But use that time to do something positive. Dig deeper into the issues and forget about politics. How about take the time and meet with the police in your state. Meet them, get to know them. Have discussions, have suggestions. Go on some ride alongs, lets gain some perspective. Actually work towards a resolution. Sending messages through the media or through boycotting is only causing negative reactions and we are seeing that way too often now. Do something truly meaningful with the time. Set a positive example out there.

I don't think doing those types of activities does anything to solve the problem at hand. How does getting to know the police and doing ridealongs stop systemic abuse of black people by police officers? It doesn't.

Look up the name Daryl Davis the blues musician. He has proven you can sit down and get to know someone and change their minds about you. Its going to be a lot of work but it can be a huge step in the right direction. Perspective is everything and we need more of it. All of us. This has nothing to do with Trump or the government.

[AshyLarrysDiaper]

We've seen activists swing moderate for decades. There isn't much evidence that it's produced policy gains.

Things aren't good for black people in this country and they aren't improving fast enough either. That said, really since the end of slavery (and really the politics leading up to the end of slavery) things have consistently been moving in the right direction.

Two generations ago, you had legalized segregation still. I've personally seen the importance of diversity hiring grow 10 fold over my professional career from nothing, to needing to fill a quota anywhere in the company, to an important strategic initiative to add diversity in leadership positions.

I completely get that it isn't good enough, especially when I travel to different regions of the country that have a view radically different than where I live (which I'm sure still isn't good enough but is light years ahead of some other areas), but I have a hard time believing anything other than through the slow march of time things are better and that each passing generation has it better than the previous one.

Fixing this problem has forever been too slow, simply because you often can't fix people or change people, and effectively you are waiting for the younger generations whom are more open to take over.

I'm not sure that swinging for moderates is going to us there faster or slower than not doing so. You may very well be right that getting moderate votes won't help. However, I think it's a mistake to say that progress hasn't been consistently made over any extended period of time. My personal guess is that without broad support of the white majority, blacks will never see the changes they want.

I think that support is there right now and this is a key moment because it is not only passively there now, but it is actively there now which has been different than in the past where most people wouldn't support racism, but few were actively trying to fight it.

I wasn't arguing that there's been no progress. I'm saying protesters pulling up the reins to appeal to the center and right rarely results in lasting progress. In fact, I'd say the opposite is true. Big shifts usually happen on the heels of massive - and in the eyes of the 'average' American, extreme - social upheaval.

Granted, once the protesters' aims are handed to lawmakers, you get watered-down policy just as often as not. But my point is that it's not the role of protesters to moderate. Elected leaders can do that job well enough on their own.

[coldfish]

Nor whack him in the back of the head with a skateboard while he was running away.

Now that I'm more versed in the sequence of events, he had already shot someone in the head and killed them at the point the guy him in the head with a skateboard.

Still irrelevant to bring up their histories. No one deserves to be judge jury and executioner. The shooter didn't know the histories of the people he killed.

He also broke the law because the gun wasn't his.

I'm sure a 17-year-old with a rifle attempting to run away from an angry mob or from a guy tossing a molotov cocktail at him was playing Judge Dredd.

Watch on YouTube

Great video. That guy was calm, well versed and well spoken.

[cjbulls]

Looks more like the walkout was a loss. They got no real concessions that the owners wouldn’t already have done anyways. No reform resulted from their efforts, which was seemingly their initial goal. And now the games go on and it’s forgotten. What happens if another police incident happens again in a week? Another holdout?

I don’t know if losing the season would have really mattered (probably not), but the little half step in and back out makes them look disorganized at best.

Literally have no idea how on Earth you could reasonably think this is true.

Outside of the NBA:
The Bucks, after refusing to play, were on the phone within hours with high ranking Wisconsin political officials. A special session of the wisconsin senate was then called specifically to address this issue.

Is that all because of the Bucks? Maybe not, but it sure as heck was obviously a contributor to the situation.

Inside the NBA:
In every city where there is an arena, that arena will be attempted to be set up as a voting center. This was the case for maybe 6-8 arenas prior to this, but they now added 20+ more to that list.

They added advertising spots to promote social justice during playoff games which did not exist before.

They started a coalition between owners/players to advance social justice (who knows what this will do or if it will have teeth of course).

There absolutely was a huge affect by doing this.

You literally just provided the substance of your own answer for me, just now.

Giannis alone could get certain members of the legislature on the phone anytime he wants. Their meeting had absolutely nothing to do with the Bucks postponing a game and everything to do with Kenosha spiraling out of control while they were on vacation.

They added a few voting locations, which based on many cities, will not benefit many voters. I dont know how it works outside of Illinois, but what would it even matter? You already have your voting location set. So now, a few extra people can go to the UC instead of their library or whatever? Are states even prepared to reconfigure this change with only a few months to go?

There was no lack of “social justice advertising” during the restart. The courts literally have “Black Lives Matter” painted front and center, the jerseys have a set of causes listed on them and it’s a consistent mention by the announcers and media. Do you think anyone watching the games isn’t aware?

And the new coalition as you point out is an unknown, but I have a good feeling how it will go. The conservative owners will contribute the bare minimum and the liberal owners will be involved, as they already would have been without the walkout.

All of this was possible without the boycott. The players added nothing they couldn’t already have done. The only way to send a real message would have been taking a real stand.

I proposed just having the stars sit out so everyone else could play and still get paid. But certain stars (LeBron, cough cough) had an interesting change of heart on cancelling the season.

[cjbulls]

And we already have doubt much will be done, coming from a player.

http://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/29767784/celtics-jaylen-brown-says-skeptical-nba-owners-back-pledges-support

[League Circles]

I’ve read your posts. You do not have the same goals as the protesters, I promise you that.

Perhaps. I don't know how to conceptualize the protestors as having a monolithic set of goals, but I think we'd agree they want to come as close to eliminating racist abuse of police power, and I certainly have that as my goal. If you're suggesting that they just want to borrow more money from the rich to fund social programs and less to fund police, I'd have to see specifics to know if I agree or disagree.

What I was trying to say is that the more that activists show discrimination in how they view events, the greater hope there is for politicians and voters to be encouraged to show discrimination in how they view police. Basically, the more activists can view the Blake case as probably very different from say the Floyd case, the more likely their policy opponents will view actual police work as very different from "overwhelmingly great heroic (insert platitude) work".

We've seen activists swing moderate for decades. There isn't much evidence that it's produced policy gains.

Weird that you perceive treating each case on it's own to be moderate IMO.

[League Circles]

Slightly OT but I just wrote this or a slightly modified version to my US house rep, both US senators, my state legislative rep, and my state senator:

I write today to urge you to please introduce legislation to require that all law enforcement officers in this nation be equipped with full time body cameras and microphones that they cannot turn off (while on patrol), and that the video and audio collected be made available to the public after a reasonable waiting period through the freedom of information act. I'm convinced that this would very substantially help to curb abuses of power and instances of excessive police force and promote justice for all citizens. It cannot be considered an excessive burden by officers, nor an excessive expense in light of what we invest in as a nation. If you would like further input or suggestions regarding such a proposal please feel free to contact me to discuss. If not I look forward to seeing you propose this as stand alone legislation in the 116th Congress. I believe it would receive overwhelming support.

I urge you all to consider doing the same. It won't solve this problem but IMO it's the most obvious first big step towards improving it.

If it's a bad idea I'm open to a suggestion as to why. Perhaps there's something I'm overlooking, as I know BLM and Biden aren't promoting it and they're sort of at the forefront of the issue so maybe they know something I don't.

[AshyLarrysDiaper]

Perhaps. I don't know how to conceptualize the protestors as having a monolithic set of goals, but I think we'd agree they want to come as close to eliminating racist abuse of police power, and I certainly have that as my goal. If you're suggesting that they just want to borrow more money from the rich to fund social programs and less to fund police, I'd have to see specifics to know if I agree or disagree.

What I was trying to say is that the more that activists show discrimination in how they view events, the greater hope there is for politicians and voters to be encouraged to show discrimination in how they view police. Basically, the more activists can view the Blake case as probably very different from say the Floyd case, the more likely their policy opponents will view actual police work as very different from "overwhelmingly great heroic (insert platitude) work".

We've seen activists swing moderate for decades. There isn't much evidence that it's produced policy gains.

Weird that you perceive treating each case on it's own to be moderate IMO.

De-linking this case from the others on the grounds I’ve seen argued would be moving toward the right, for sure.

[johnnyvann840]

Now that I'm more versed in the sequence of events, he had already shot someone in the head and killed them at the point the guy him in the head with a skateboard.

Still irrelevant to bring up their histories. No one deserves to be judge jury and executioner. The shooter didn't know the histories of the people he killed.

He also broke the law because the gun wasn't his.

I'm sure a 17-year-old with a rifle attempting to run away from an angry mob or from a guy tossing a molotov cocktail at him was playing Judge Dredd.

Watch on YouTube

Great video. That guy was calm, well versed and well spoken.

I think he is right. The kid will not get convicted of murder based on self defense. I also agree that he shouldn't be convicted of murder. He was defending himself.

[johnnyvann840]

I don't know. Not doing something is not doing anything. They want to boycott games then fine. But use that time to do something positive. Dig deeper into the issues and forget about politics. How about take the time and meet with the police in your state. Meet them, get to know them. Have discussions, have suggestions. Go on some ride alongs, lets gain some perspective. Actually work towards a resolution. Sending messages through the media or through boycotting is only causing negative reactions and we are seeing that way too often now. Do something truly meaningful with the time. Set a positive example out there.

I don't think doing those types of activities does anything to solve the problem at hand. How does getting to know the police and doing ridealongs stop systemic abuse of black people by police officers? It doesn't.

Look up the name Daryl Davis the blues musician. He has proven you can sit down and get to know someone and change their minds about you. Its going to be a lot of work but it can be a huge step in the right direction. Perspective is everything and we need more of it. All of us. This has nothing to do with Trump or the government.

I saw the episode of United Shades that featured him. What a man he is. Very impressive.

[dougthonus]

You literally just provided the substance of your own answer for me, just now.

Giannis alone could get certain members of the legislature on the phone anytime he wants. Their meeting had absolutely nothing to do with the Bucks postponing a game and everything to do with Kenosha spiraling out of control while they were on vacation.

The meeting had everything to do with the total amount of pressure. The NBA boycotting was part of that pressure. That's how things work. It isn't anyone person or thing that creates that pressure. The primary purpose of the boycott, IMO, was to continue to ramp up pressure on this specific issue.

The NBA boycott almost certainly caused the MLB walkoff which was very unexpected.

The extra things they agreed to with the NBA were just side things IMO, and I agree they weren't huge, but they weren't nothing either. I'm not sure what reasonable expectations you would have for boycotting a game, apparently much larger than my expectations if you think nothing came from it.

Most times I think of actions like this, literally nothing comes from it. Like absolutely nothing. There was a massive amount of political pressure added, they caused another major sport to boycott games, they got minor concessions from owners, and they were part of the overall movement that caused enough pressure to have a special session of the senate.

What do you think a possible outcome would have been if they made "a real stand"? What other things do you think they could have gotten or would have gotten?

[MrSparkle]

Boy oh boy are we heading down an uplifting path as half the country says a 17-year old kid was well within his rights to cross state-lines with a borrowed assault rifle and patrol the streets and then murder 2 adults in the act of self-defense. The real point is that his mom shouldn't have driven him up there with a rifle. I don't care if Obama or Lauri Markannen are walking down the street with an assault rifle: I am getting the **** out and warning everybody that a very dangerous armed individual is walking in public. I have some gun enthusiast friends who hunt- that's it. They take their rifles to the forest with a buddy or two, and they go shoot a deer. Fine -- they love the fancy gun tech, and the animal meat and the outdoors -- I don't get it, but I get it. But carrying a rifle on concrete?

The mob chasing him was also very stupid, but I consider open-carry of assault rifles to be a completely psychotic policy. I think militias should be banned from protests unless the city passes a temporary measure to instate them in times of crisis. If so, the city and police department will be entirely responsible for their actions.

I am unfortunately predicting there will be a few more protest deaths in the coming months. Maybe by this logic, all the protesters should also bring guns for their own defense. They promise to only use them in self-defense. When the inevitable blood bath happens, the only question will be whether the NRA has to also support BLM protestors who decided to legally arm themselves.

Every most idiotic thing you can possible conceive in your mind shall continue happening in America for the coming future. The Empire is burning with stupidity, and path is strewn with garbage.

[dice]

Oh and I'm sorry but voting is not going to fix anything. No president, racist or not, has the magic wand to fix this.

You can only take a step in the direct direction with elections. Getting rid of Trump, even if you could replace him with a different republican president with an attitude similar to Reagon, Bush, or Bush jr, would be a massive step in the right direction. Obviously that's not possible to replace him with a different republican, but I only mean it as this is not a partisan thing, Trump is singularly awful regardless of party affiliation.

He's the only president in my life time to use game theory to get elected and completely ignore and give the finger to half the country to secure the other half more completely. This has created a wider spread in our policy and our political parties than ever before. I'm actually pretty concerned that this will become a new trend, and if so, it will be devastating overall.

it won't be a long-term trend. and it isn't even good strategy (at least not from the right wing perspective - not with the demographic changes we are seeing). it's just the only one trump knows. political strategists didn't advise prior GOP candidates to behave like he has, and they didn't advise him to either. he's not playing 3-D chess. he's playing checkers. he got away with it in 2016 because of clinton fatigue, sexism and the electoral college. and if he gets away with it again in 2020 it will be because of some combination of voter suppression, the electoral college and the democrats again putting up a poor candidate

had trump not carelessly botched the response to the pandemic, as well as made some effort to appeal to moderates, he'd be the favorite right now. instead he's not only alienated moderates, but has risked activating a too-often-dormant left wing voter base

[dice]

Boy oh boy are we heading down an uplifting path as half the country says a 17-year old kid was well within his rights to cross state-lines with a borrowed assault rifle and patrol the streets and then murder 2 adults in the act of self-defense. The real point is that his mom shouldn't have driven him up there with a rifle. The mob chasing him was also very stupid, but I consider open-carry of assault rifles to be a completely psychotic policy, I think militias to be bogus, and I am unfortunately predicting there will be a few more nightmare accidents in the coming months.

Maybe by this logic, all the protesters should also bring guns for their own defense. They promise to only use them in self-defense. When the inevitable blood bath happens, the only question will be whether the NRA has to also support BLM protestors who decided to legally arm themselves.

Every most idiotic thing you can possible conceive in your mind shall continue happening in America for the coming future. The Empire is burning with stupidity, and path is strewn with garbage.

you didn't even mention the fundamental flaw in all of this: the ineptitude of the kenosha police department. first of all, they allowed these nutty vigilante groups to "help" them when in the past they have asked them to stay home. their police chief has both made any number of foolish statements and failed to condemn the utterly incompetent act of the cop that started the whole situation. and their police union is now arguing that the cop's actions were entirely justified

"take up arms and defend our city tonight from the evil thugs" - facebook post from pop-up vigilante group Kenosha Guard, obviously showing up armed not only with heavy weaponry, but also one-dimensional, extremely prejudiced notions about who they would be encountering. and by the way, can you imagine the uproar if a bunch of black men with large firearms marched down the center of the street in kenosha? but i digress...

know what the proper response to an unarmed man resisting arrest and entering his family's vehicle is? let him drive the f*** away. you have his goddamn license plate number!

this notion that he had grabbed a knife or was any sort of threat to MULTIPLE ARMED OFFICERS at any point is an outright lie. and anyone who tries to make that claim should be deeply ashamed of their complicity in the toxic "brothers in blue" aspect of american police culture. the victim was shot seven times immediately upon opening the door to his vehicle. we have video, folks. watch it, process it like an unbiased human being and stop making **** up to try and justify this massacre. stop trying to dupe wildly imaginative, prejudiced people into believing that something happened behind that open door which didn't happen

whether a knife was later found hidden on the floor of the automobile is wholly irrelevant (common sense would suggest that such a weapon would not just be left out in the open at all times, particularly w/ kids in the car). the attempted murderer surely didn't see it when he committed his heinous act...seven times. and guess what? even if the victim HAD grabbed a knife...still no justification for what followed! i can't believe i even have to say it, but if you've got a gun and someone grabs a knife, the sensible course of action is to back off and say "hey man, you're gonna want to put that down right now. because if you come toward me you're about to die." what you DON'T do is shoot him SEVEN TIMES in the back before he's even turned to face you. because that's one of two things: premeditated intent to kill or complete **** in your pants incompetence...particularly when you're presumably a trained professional

now...let's go another step into fantasy land and imagine that the mere act of the victim reaching for a knife (which didn't happen - hadn't even bent over to enter the vehicle before he was shot) justifies shooting him in the back (which it doesn't). why the F*** is a single shot in the back not enough to subdue him? did this cop think that black men are like zombies who can endure a bullet hole in the back and continue on with their mission of carving up multiple armed police officers with a freaking knife? if so, i've got news for him: IF YOU SHOOT SOMEONE ARMED MERELY WITH A KNIFE IN THE BACK, YOU'VE GOT NOTHING TO WORRY ABOUT! you can be confident that if you turn and walk away at that very moment, you're safe

anyone defending what that cop did has either lost their damn mind or has a sick agenda (the latter requires the former, perhaps). there were nine mistakes made in the course of about nine seconds:

1) didn't throw him up against the car from behind as he walked around to the driver's side (understandable mistake)
2) didn't back off when he attempted to get in the car with his kids
3) bullet #1
4) bullet #2
5) bullet #3
6) bullet #4
7) bullet #5
8) bullet #6
9) bullet #7

[] suspect doesn't comply with orders, [] cop feels slighted and looks for any excuse to use his itchy trigger finger. that's what happened. insert skin colors into the provided brackets if you wish

[AshyLarrysDiaper]

Slightly OT but I just wrote this or a slightly modified version to my US house rep, both US senators, my state legislative rep, and my state senator:

I write today to urge you to please introduce legislation to require that all law enforcement officers in this nation be equipped with full time body cameras and microphones that they cannot turn off (while on patrol), and that the video and audio collected be made available to the public after a reasonable waiting period through the freedom of information act. I'm convinced that this would very substantially help to curb abuses of power and instances of excessive police force and promote justice for all citizens. It cannot be considered an excessive burden by officers, nor an excessive expense in light of what we invest in as a nation. If you would like further input or suggestions regarding such a proposal please feel free to contact me to discuss. If not I look forward to seeing you propose this as stand alone legislation in the 116th Congress. I believe it would receive overwhelming support.

I urge you all to consider doing the same. It won't solve this problem but IMO it's the most obvious first big step towards improving it.

If it's a bad idea I'm open to a suggestion as to why. Perhaps there's something I'm overlooking, as I know BLM and Biden aren't promoting it and they're sort of at the forefront of the issue so maybe they know something I don't.

I think what you’ve done here is admirable. I mean that genuinely. But it’s now widely believed that body cams have limited value when it comes to reducing use of force.

https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/10/20/558832090/body-cam-study-shows-no-effect-on-police-use-of-force-or-citizen-complaints

Which makes sense when you consider that a number of these high profile cases have involved cops who either knew they had on body cameras or that they were being filmed by bystanders.

[League Circles]

Slightly OT but I just wrote this or a slightly modified version to my US house rep, both US senators, my state legislative rep, and my state senator:

I write today to urge you to please introduce legislation to require that all law enforcement officers in this nation be equipped with full time body cameras and microphones that they cannot turn off (while on patrol), and that the video and audio collected be made available to the public after a reasonable waiting period through the freedom of information act. I'm convinced that this would very substantially help to curb abuses of power and instances of excessive police force and promote justice for all citizens. It cannot be considered an excessive burden by officers, nor an excessive expense in light of what we invest in as a nation. If you would like further input or suggestions regarding such a proposal please feel free to contact me to discuss. If not I look forward to seeing you propose this as stand alone legislation in the 116th Congress. I believe it would receive overwhelming support.

I urge you all to consider doing the same. It won't solve this problem but IMO it's the most obvious first big step towards improving it.

If it's a bad idea I'm open to a suggestion as to why. Perhaps there's something I'm overlooking, as I know BLM and Biden aren't promoting it and they're sort of at the forefront of the issue so maybe they know something I don't.

I think what you’ve done here is admirable. I mean that genuinely. But it’s now widely believed that body cams have limited value when it comes to reducing use of force.

https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/10/20/558832090/body-cam-study-shows-no-effect-on-police-use-of-force-or-citizen-complaints

Which makes sense when you consider that a number of these high profile cases have involved cops who either knew they had on body cameras or that they were being filmed by bystanders.

Thanks, I think it's important.

I don't think that article says what you suggest at all. first of all it only discusses whether or not complaints and use-of-force decreased which they did not at a statistically significant level. but that's the wrong metric. The right metric is whether or not justified complaints and unjustified use of force went down. there are a massive number of unjustified complaints and justified use of force in police work.

From the article:

"Perhaps, he says, that is because his officers "were doing the right thing in the first place."

To me this is somewhat plausible in DC of all places.

Then the article goes into a discussion about how it can help police legitimacy. Such as in the case where a suspect was brandishing a knife and many people suggested he wasn't but the video proved that he was.

[League Circles]

To me the idea of trying to make it easier to punish officers by removing the things like qualified immunity and stuff like that while not simultaneously enabling the public to have a maximum amount of material evidence is just absolutely bonkers.

[dice]

Slightly OT but I just wrote this or a slightly modified version to my US house rep, both US senators, my state legislative rep, and my state senator:

I write today to urge you to please introduce legislation to require that all law enforcement officers in this nation be equipped with full time body cameras and microphones that they cannot turn off (while on patrol), and that the video and audio collected be made available to the public after a reasonable waiting period through the freedom of information act. I'm convinced that this would very substantially help to curb abuses of power and instances of excessive police force and promote justice for all citizens. It cannot be considered an excessive burden by officers, nor an excessive expense in light of what we invest in as a nation. If you would like further input or suggestions regarding such a proposal please feel free to contact me to discuss. If not I look forward to seeing you propose this as stand alone legislation in the 116th Congress. I believe it would receive overwhelming support.

I urge you all to consider doing the same. It won't solve this problem but IMO it's the most obvious first big step towards improving it.

If it's a bad idea I'm open to a suggestion as to why. Perhaps there's something I'm overlooking, as I know BLM and Biden aren't promoting it and they're sort of at the forefront of the issue so maybe they know something I don't.

I think what you’ve done here is admirable. I mean that genuinely. But it’s now widely believed that body cams have limited value when it comes to reducing use of force.

https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/10/20/558832090/body-cam-study-shows-no-effect-on-police-use-of-force-or-citizen-complaints

Which makes sense when you consider that a number of these high profile cases have involved cops who either knew they had on body cameras or that they were being filmed by bystanders.

it still makes sense to require them, though. not only so we have the evidence to hold cops accountable, but to prevent false accusations. and i would assume that in the long run it WILL reduce incidents of excessive force. perhaps we're just too early in the use of the technology for behavior to have been affected

[AshyLarrysDiaper]

Slightly OT but I just wrote this or a slightly modified version to my US house rep, both US senators, my state legislative rep, and my state senator:

I write today to urge you to please introduce legislation to require that all law enforcement officers in this nation be equipped with full time body cameras and microphones that they cannot turn off (while on patrol), and that the video and audio collected be made available to the public after a reasonable waiting period through the freedom of information act. I'm convinced that this would very substantially help to curb abuses of power and instances of excessive police force and promote justice for all citizens. It cannot be considered an excessive burden by officers, nor an excessive expense in light of what we invest in as a nation. If you would like further input or suggestions regarding such a proposal please feel free to contact me to discuss. If not I look forward to seeing you propose this as stand alone legislation in the 116th Congress. I believe it would receive overwhelming support.

I urge you all to consider doing the same. It won't solve this problem but IMO it's the most obvious first big step towards improving it.

If it's a bad idea I'm open to a suggestion as to why. Perhaps there's something I'm overlooking, as I know BLM and Biden aren't promoting it and they're sort of at the forefront of the issue so maybe they know something I don't.

I think what you’ve done here is admirable. I mean that genuinely. But it’s now widely believed that body cams have limited value when it comes to reducing use of force.

https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/10/20/558832090/body-cam-study-shows-no-effect-on-police-use-of-force-or-citizen-complaints

Which makes sense when you consider that a number of these high profile cases have involved cops who either knew they had on body cameras or that they were being filmed by bystanders.

Thanks, I think it's important.

I don't think that article says what you suggest at all. first of all it only discusses whether or not complaints and use-of-force decreased which they did not at a statistically significant level. but that's the wrong metric. The right metric is whether or not justified complaints and unjustified use of force went down. there are a massive number of unjustified complaints and justified use of force in police work.

From the article:

"Perhaps, he says, that is because his officers "were doing the right thing in the first place."

To me this is somewhat plausible in DC of all places.

Then the article goes into a discussion about how it can help police legitimacy. Such as in the case where a suspect was brandishing a knife and many people suggested he wasn't but the video proved that he was.

How would you tally cases of “justified” use of force?

DC, for example, routes a lot of misconduct complaints to a confidential mediation process.

Who decides what’s justified for the purposes of a study?