Jump to content

Police Body Camera Videos!


Recommended Posts

  • Community Team

POLICEBODYCAMERAS.png.4a9a67f04c6c05adaa0d053ec8123460.png

 

 

bodycamcollage.thumb.png.5b952576128413d78896c850184b8f9d.png

 

 

Its 2017 new age in policing comes with new technology right? This is going to be a little topic dedicated to (BWV) Body Worn Video, (BWC) Body Worn Camera. 

 

In this topic I'm going to be posting body camera video's from current events, and past events. I have been in law enforcement for about three years now, and I have only been using a body camera for a little under 3 months. I will be glad to answer any questions you might have about the (BWC).

 

Now you might see me refer the body camera to BWC - Body Worn Camera and not BWV Body Worn Video they are the same thing I am just used to BWC due to my agency calling it that. 

 

I can answer questions to the functionality of the BWC, and on the field situational questions.

 

But Questions like below...

 

Why didn't the officer turn it on earlier?

 

What particular incidents does the officer have to turn on his body camera?  

 

Those types of questions I will answer solely based on my personal beliefs and what my protocols are. I cannot answer for sure due to different agencies having different standard operating procedures (SOPs) on there BWC. 

 

 

 

 

Police Body Cameras Definition - Wikipedia.com

 

Quote

Law enforcement

Body worn video (police equipment)

Wearable cameras are often utilized by law enforcement in several countries to record their interactions with the public or gather video evidence at crime scenes. It has been known to increase both officer and citizen accountability, although arguments have been made that BWVs primarily protect police.[2] The first generation of 'modern' police body cameras was introduced around 2005 in the United Kingdom.

 

 

 

The first video I will be posting is a BWC from Grand Rapids Police Department, Michigan USA.

 

 

The suspect was 18 year old Malik Carey who was wanted by the Grand Rapids Police Department for violation of his probation. Shooting involved three Grand Rapids Police Officers and one violent suspect.  

 

https://www.badgecameras.com/video-shows-gun-battle-grand-rapids-police-suspect/

Edited by Mags

5a0477ae1f41d_StaffSignaturev2trevor.png.cbc6f0a62435ffb63e35989486061ed5.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think they work in the officer's favour, as it provides an angle from the officer's perspective rather than someone filming the incident. Here in the UK, our armed officers in London, have been issued bodycams on helmets and on baseball caps. Previously they were mounted on their vests but as you can imagine the angles were not very good when you are holding a rifle. But then, the general public will still accuse the police of wrongdoing even if they weren't at fault.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's absolutely no reason at all for officers not to wear BWCs.  Some officers can claim they "violate my privacy". but you need to wake up and realize no one gives a damn if you shit talk in the squad car with your partner.  What everyone does care about is how a call of a suspicious vehicle turned into shots fired with someone dead.  Without bodycam and/or dashcam, it's purely he said, the he being the officer.  Those who are against BWCs have something to hide, plain and simple.  BWCs will save your life and your career.

I need donations to help fund my food addiction. DM for details 😂

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Kallus Rourke said:

but you need to wake up and realize no one gives a damn if you shit talk in the squad car with your partner.

 

If a defense attorney has your entire "roll" of body cam footage subpoenaed, and if you make any sort of joking derogatory remarks, or say anything about someone or something that may offend someone or isn't 100 percent politically correct, do you believe that it won't be used against you in some capacity to attack your character and/or fairness of handling things?

 

With that said, I do like the idea of body cams.  Provided that they be turned on only when a call/interaction begins.

Edited by FCV96
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Kallus Rourke said:

There's absolutely no reason at all for officers not to wear BWCs.  Some officers can claim they "violate my privacy". but you need to wake up and realize no one gives a damn if you shit talk in the squad car with your partner.  What everyone does care about is how a call of a suspicious vehicle turned into shots fired with someone dead.  Without bodycam and/or dashcam, it's purely he said, the he being the officer.  Those who are against BWCs have something to hide, plain and simple.  BWCs will save your life and your career.

Respectfully agree to disagree. The body camera concept is still pretty new and has several drawbacks. One of which is where they fail to catch a shooting, like the case locally here. Long story short: Officer Dear's body camera failed to catch the shooting, people argue the camera was either tampered with or had a mechanical issue. Dash cameras only catch the front of a vehicle, not anything off to the side or behind so they're useless if a shooting goes down behind a car. My local SO uses belt tape recorders, as old school as they are, they've never failed so I believe they're the most failproof way to protect an officer and his career. 

Join Blue Line Gaming Today! Accepting Applications for Law Enforcement, Fire and Rescue, Dispatch, and Civilian. More information here. 

Join my development discord here.

DO NOT CONTACT ME FOR SUPPORT! THAT IS WHAT THE FORUMS ARE FOR!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, FCV96 said:

 

If a defense attorney has your entire "roll" of body cam footage subpoenaed, and if you make any sort of joking derogatory remarks, or say anything about someone or something that may offend someone or isn't 100 percent politically correct, do you believe that it won't be used against you in some capacity to attack your character and/or fairness of handling things?

 

With that said, I do like the idea of body cams.  Provided that they be turned on only when a call/interaction begins.

 

Their character would definitely be attacked, and rightfully so!  You're at work, you shouldn't be saying derogatory things or making jokes about the people you were at a call with.  If you had a cubicle job and were saying derogatory things in the break room and were overheard, you'd be fired quite quickly.  No difference here.  On the job, you watch what you say.  I don't care if you're sitting in the cruiser with your partner and no one else is around.  You're at work, not playtime.

 

3 hours ago, Him1250 said:

Respectfully agree to disagree. The body camera concept is still pretty new and has several drawbacks. One of which is where they fail to catch a shooting, like the case locally here. Long story short: Officer Dear's body camera failed to catch the shooting, people argue the camera was either tampered with or had a mechanical issue. Dash cameras only catch the front of a vehicle, not anything off to the side or behind so they're useless if a shooting goes down behind a car. My local SO uses belt tape recorders, as old school as they are, they've never failed so I believe they're the most failproof way to protect an officer and his career. 

 

Body cams won't catch everything, no one expects it to.  The issue with them is that officers can turn them off and on at will.  Body cams should always be on. If not audio, at least video.  The only reason cops ever turn them off is to hide their crimes.  Again, cops can say "what about my privacy?" You're at work, you get no privacy.  You wearing that uniform means you're no longer on personal time, you're on the department's time.  Before anyone says it, I know sometimes officers would need to turn them off in order to speak with a CI and in that instances, put your hand over the camera and have the tech guys at the station distort the CI's voice.

I need donations to help fund my food addiction. DM for details 😂

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Kallus Rourke said:

Body cams won't catch everything, no one expects it to.  The issue with them is that officers can turn them off and on at will.  Body cams should always be on. If not audio, at least video.  The only reason cops ever turn them off is to hide their crimes.  Again, cops can say "what about my privacy?" You're at work, you get no privacy.  You wearing that uniform means you're no longer on personal time, you're on the department's time.  Before anyone says it, I know sometimes officers would need to turn them off in order to speak with a CI and in that instances, put your hand over the camera and have the tech guys at the station distort the CI's voice.

Everyone at work has some privacy, such as text messages, snapchats ect because legally departments can't search that type of stuff. Unions have thrown a massive fit and have won in cases such as this. 

Join Blue Line Gaming Today! Accepting Applications for Law Enforcement, Fire and Rescue, Dispatch, and Civilian. More information here. 

Join my development discord here.

DO NOT CONTACT ME FOR SUPPORT! THAT IS WHAT THE FORUMS ARE FOR!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Him1250 said:

Everyone at work has some privacy, such as text messages, snapchats ect because legally departments can't search that type of stuff. Unions have thrown a massive fit and have won in cases such as this. 

 

I'm not saying they have zero privacy, but when you're at work, your privacy is very low compared to at home.  I don't care if you're a cop or a cubicle worker, when you're at work, your conversations should be appropriate.  If it's not something you'd say in front of your boss, it shouldn't be said.  It's even worse for cops because if you say something derogatory, no one is going to trust you around the set of people you said that about, and again, rightfully so.

I need donations to help fund my food addiction. DM for details 😂

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Him1250 said:

Everyone at work has some privacy, such as text messages, snapchats ect because legally departments can't search that type of stuff. Unions have thrown a massive fit and have won in cases such as this. 

 

M'yeah, but no. Technically, you're not supposed to text people for private stuff, or use snapchat, or FB, or Skype, or Discord, or anything that is not directly related to your work. If you're at work, you're there to work, plain and simple. If my boss caught me texting on my phone or using snapchat or whatever app, you bet your ass I'd get shouted at with a threat to be fired. You don't need privacy at work, as you're there to work. And it applies to everyone. Police officers included.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Kallus Rourke said:

 

Their character would definitely be attacked, and rightfully so!  You're at work, you shouldn't be saying derogatory things or making jokes about the people you were at a call with.  If you had a cubicle job and were saying derogatory things in the break room and were overheard, you'd be fired quite quickly.  No difference here.  On the job, you watch what you say.  I don't care if you're sitting in the cruiser with your partner and no one else is around.  You're at work, not playtime.

 

What you're describing is an unattainable fantasy IMO.  You're requesting nothing short of 100% productivity out of individuals, which unto itself is a bit much, but you're also asking them to leave any semblance of humanity that they have at the door such that they basically become robots.  You stick two guys in a car together for eight hours, running back and forth to job after job, and in their downtime there will be conversation.  Guaranteed.  There is also a high probability that something dumb or otherwise silly will be said.  You can be the most professional, perfect individual when dealing with others and your work duties, but the moment you get put with a friend and have to pass the time, you can't help but to shoot the breeze.  It's practically human nature.  You can't tell me that you've never taken a moment to interact with something or talk to someone about something that didn't have anything to do with your job, at work. 

 

The big difference between a cushy cubicle job and policing is that you aren't exposed to the worst horrors that society has to offer in your cubicle.  Sometimes the only way to combat what you've heard and seen is coping through humor, and oftentimes people that haven't shared those experiences will find that humor dark, or objectionable.

 

1 hour ago, Kallus Rourke said:

The only reason cops ever turn them off is to hide their crimes.  Again, cops can say "what about my privacy?" You're at work, you get no privacy.  You wearing that uniform means you're no longer on personal time, you're on the department's time.  Before anyone says it, I know sometimes officers would need to turn them off in order to speak with a CI and in that instances, put your hand over the camera and have the tech guys at the station distort the CI's voice.

 

Dealing in absolutes is dangerous.  A police officer never has to use the bathroom?  A police officer never has to make a personal telephone call or something of the sort while on a break?  If a complainant or informant refuses to speak with a camera active, what then - allow the officer to cover the camera with their hand?  That creates another precedent then - what is the difference between turning a camera off and obscuring the lens with your hand?  If the voice is distorted and a FOIA request comes through, what are the legal ramifications of handing over an edited clip versus the original?  Who can guarantee that, when editing voiceover clips, the video was not edited in some other fashion in the event of an incident that incurred litigation during or shortly following a situation in which you've said a camera may be obscured?  

Edited by FCV96
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, FCV96 said:

 

What you're describing is an unattainable fantasy IMO.  You're requesting nothing short of 100% productivity out of individuals, which unto itself is a bit much, but you're also asking them to leave any semblance of humanity that they have at the door.  You stick two guys in a car together for eight hours, running back and forth to job after job, and in their downtime there will be conversation.  Guaranteed.  There is also a high probability that something dumb or otherwise silly will be said.  You can be the most professional, perfect individual when dealing with others and your work duties, but the moment you get put with a friend and have to pass the time, you can't help but to shoot the breeze.  It's practically human nature.  You can't tell me that you've never taken a moment to interact with something or talk to someone about something that didn't have anything to do with your job, at work. 

 

The big difference between a cushy cubicle job and policing is that you aren't exposed to the worst horrors that society has to offer in your cubicle.  Sometimes the only way to combat what you've heard and seen is coping through humor, and oftentimes people that haven't shared those experiences will find that humor dark, objectionable, and potentially abhorrent.   

 

 

Dealing in absolutes is dangerous.  A police officer never has to use the bathroom?  A police officer never has to make a personal telephone call or something of the sort while on a break?  If a complainant or informant refuses to speak with a camera active, what then -allow the officer to cover the camera with their hand?  That creates another precedent then - what is the difference between turning a camera off and obscuring the lens with your hand?  If the voice is distorted and a FOIA request comes through, what are the legal ramifications of handing over an edited clip versus the original?  Who can guarantee that, when editing voiceover clips, the video was not edited in some other fashion in the event of an incident that incurred litigation during or shortly following a situation in which you've said a camera may be obscured?  

 

I never said to leave humanity at the door, nor did I say officers can't have personal.  I never said an officer can't laugh and have fun with his partner.  There is a huge, HUGE difference between saying something racist/derogatory and say something silly or stupid.  I encourage officers riding in a car to talk normally and try to have some fun, but if talking normally is being derogatory or saying something bad about a person you just got off a call from, it shouldn't be said.   If these were not cops, if these were office workers, I guarantee the opinions would be different.  Just because they are cops who see a lot of bad things doesn't justify them degrading other people in the process.  Doctors, surgeons, nurses, etc see people at their worst as well, they cut people open and mess around inside their bodies, but you don't see medical professionals going "did you see how it looked in there? he's fat."   If someone ever did do that, they'd be fired on the spot.  As a medical professional AND LEO, you're expected to be professional at all times on the job.  That doesn't mean you can't have fun and have normal conversations, it means be a decent human being and don't say things you wouldn't want the world to hear.

 

There is an obvious difference between covering the camera with your hand and deliberately turning it off.  When you cover it with your hand, the audio is still going to be there, assuming it's on.  When you turn it off, it's 100% he-said and no way to validate if what the officer said is true.  That's the thing.  it's bullshit that we've gotten to this point, bullshit that bad cops have brought this on, but body cam needs to be mandatory and video rolling the entire shift in order to make sure cops aren't lying.  I love law enforcement, and I will always respect and love officers, but the fact is, there are a lot of them that lie and do illegal things.  There are a lot that do things in a rash nature that then result in an investigation in which there's no clear answer.  How many shootings have there been where the bodycam was deliberately turned off and left a lot of unanswered questions?  I'm sorry that good, legitimate officers have to be punished for what the bad ones do, but that is the world we live in now.  I'd much rather an officer be forced to moderate the things he says and be seen as innocent without a shadow of a doubt than to have an officer relish in whatever he wants to say and always be questioned about if the shooting, the taze, the fight, the whatever else he did was justified or not.

I need donations to help fund my food addiction. DM for details 😂

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/20/2017 at 5:53 PM, Kallus Rourke said:

There is a huge, HUGE difference between saying something racist/derogatory and say something silly or stupid.  I encourage officers riding in a car to talk normally and try to have some fun, but if talking normally is being derogatory or saying something bad about a person you just got off a call from, it shouldn't be said.   If these were not cops, if these were office workers, I guarantee the opinions would be different.  Just because they are cops who see a lot of bad things doesn't justify them degrading other people in the process.  Doctors, surgeons, nurses, etc see people at their worst as well, they cut people open and mess around inside their bodies, but you don't see medical professionals going "did you see how it looked in there? he's fat."   If someone ever did do that, they'd be fired on the spot.  As a medical professional AND LEO, you're expected to be professional at all times on the job.  That doesn't mean you can't have fun and have normal conversations, it means be a decent human being and don't say things you wouldn't want the world to hear.

 

I completely agree with you on the racist aspect (but not necessarily the derogatory one, as it is highly subjective based upon interpretations.  What is silly or stupid to you or I might be the end of the world to someone else.).  If you truly believe that doctors, nurses, and surgeons don't laugh about or poke fun at their patients constantly then you are mistaken.  Office workers talk shit about each other all the time.  People are people - no one can be one-hundred perfect professional and perfect from the time they wake up to the time they go to sleep at night.  Sometimes blowing off steam or otherwise breaking monotonous silence with a comment is necessary; my problem is that when everyone starts scrutinizing every single little thing that you say, no matter how much you watch your words and think of possible negative interpretations, they're going to find something that could be interpreted badly, given the varied nature of interpretations.  Your intentions could have been perfectly fine while saying what was said, but they no longer matter. 

 

On 8/20/2017 at 5:53 PM, Kallus Rourke said:

There is an obvious difference between covering the camera with your hand and deliberately turning it off.  When you cover it with your hand, the audio is still going to be there, assuming it's on.  When you turn it off, it's 100% he-said and no way to validate if what the officer said is true.  That's the thing.  it's bullshit that we've gotten to this point, bullshit that bad cops have brought this on, but body cam needs to be mandatory and video rolling the entire shift in order to make sure cops aren't lying.  I love law enforcement, and I will always respect and love officers, but the fact is, there are a lot of them that lie and do illegal things.  There are a lot that do things in a rash nature that then result in an investigation in which there's no clear answer.  How many shootings have there been where the bodycam was deliberately turned off and left a lot of unanswered questions?  I'm sorry that good, legitimate officers have to be punished for what the bad ones do, but that is the world we live in now.  I'd much rather an officer be forced to moderate the things he says and be seen as innocent without a shadow of a doubt than to have an officer relish in whatever he wants to say and always be questioned about if the shooting, the taze, the fight, the whatever else he did was justified or not.

 

You then create the precedent of "if it isn't on tape, it never happened" though, effectively calling into question every officer's testimony.  What if an officer turned his head and witnessed a traffic infraction, but his torso with the body-cam attached remained facing where he was originally looking?  Does the officer's sworn testimony that he witnessed the infraction count, or could it be argued that it never happened because it wasn't on video? 

 

Again, I'm all for body cams.  I believe they will cut down on a lot of false complaints, generally make the job easier, and especially assist in figuring out chains of events for important incidents.  I don't know how many shootings have occurred where a body camera was turned off, but if the ability to turn the camera off exists, there should be some form of repercussions for having the camera off at a time that it should have been on.  I still maintain that a camera should be controlled by the officer though.  What if a CI refuses to talk to an officer with a bodycam that is on, because he is cognizant of the audio-recording capabilities, and doesn't trust that the footage will be treated with a high priority in terms of editing by the respective department?  Not to mention the logistical challenges of storing that much data (and potentially having to employ editing staff, and yet having someone editing the clips would call the validity of them into question), having to power the cameras for eight hours (and potentially significantly more if overtime is incurred), and the list goes on. 

Edited by FCV96
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Community Team

When I first received my BWC I was a little hesitant, but after using it for a few months I love it.  My agency requires that my body camera be on the whole shift which mean that the system is simply on. Now it is recording but only in 60 second loops (no sound) so its constantly overwriting until I start an event.  The reason that this is beneficial is if something were to happen, and I started an event (recording) its programmed to add 60 seconds prior to me hitting the record button. 

 

Now my agency requires me to hit the record button when I am on a traffic stop, responding to a call (which I don't really do now because I am on a specialized unit), dealing with a citizen in a law enforcement capacity. 

 

Now first thoughts I was thinking ok I have to use the bathroom or when I am on the phone texting I don't want my texts to be public record. The big thing is talking with your co-workers. Well most of the time when I am dealing with those said calls I'm not socializing this took me a little bit to get used to, but it worked for the better. Using my phone regardless of what people think Officers are going to be on their phones at work so that still hasn't changed for me I am still going to use my phone. I don't get a designated lunch brake at work so I get to use my phone whenever I need to throughout the day. We are all adults we can handle it the job still gets done. 

 

 

I saw above someone was comparing it to there job if I were to use my phone I would get in trouble. Honestly you can't compare a LEO job to something else. Being a police officer is not a job its a way of life. We have 8 hours to enforce the law etc.... So our jobs are more free ranging when it comes down to little stuff like that. Now they might frown upon phone usage in retail and the business world, but not in policing. A lot of officers don't even see or hear from their supervisors like I do. I can go a whole shift without talking or hearing from my supervisor. I have that trust that I'm going to get it done. 

 

 

After months of toying with the new BWC I would not take them away. I used to use my patrol vehicles dash camera in court for traffic violations (absolutely loved it) because when someone would try and fight my ticket I would just hand the video over to the judge. I have had 100% guilty rate that way. Now with the BWC if someone admits something to me on camera then when it comes time to go to court he can't tell the court I was pressured into saying that, the officer is making it up, or I was nervous and I don't remember what I said. I have seen a lot of case thrown out because of that. You cannot argue with video. 

5a0477ae1f41d_StaffSignaturev2trevor.png.cbc6f0a62435ffb63e35989486061ed5.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/20/2017 at 3:17 PM, Kallus Rourke said:

 

You're at work, you shouldn't be saying derogatory things or making jokes about the people you were at a call with.

humor is an outlet for many. that includes joking about things that 95% of people think shouldn't be joked about. it isn't uncommon for officers to joke about suicides (or any deaths) and all sorts of shit like that. it's not with ill intent either. you just have to laugh to keep from crying. besides that, if an officer clears a call and calls a complainant a fucking idiot in private, chances are he probably was. like Mags said, LE is not like anything else in the world.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, TA120 said:

humor is an outlet for many. that includes joking about things that 95% of people think shouldn't be joked about. it isn't uncommon for officers to joke about suicides (or any deaths) and all sorts of shit like that. it's not with ill intent either. you just have to laugh to keep from crying. besides that, if an officer clears a call and calls a complainant a fucking idiot in private, chances are he probably was. like Mags said, LE is not like anything else in the world.

 

LE being a unique job does not justify being a dick.  In fact, it means you should have even more professionalism.  You can have humor and laugh, but not at the expense of the people you were on a call with.  Regardless of why you're there, you were sent to HELP and take care of the situation. I don't give a damn if someone is stupid as nails, you don't have any right to talk crap about that person while on the job.  At home, your personal time, fine, whatever.  That is your PERSONAL time.  When you're in the cruiser, you're on the job, you're on work's time.  I have a lot of medical issues wrong with me.  If officers came and had to strip off all my clothes, I would not want them to ever speak about me, even in the privacy of their car.  If I ever found out that happened, I'd never call 911 again.  Even if we're the perpetrator, we still have a right to privacy like anyone else.

 

What it comes down to, I don't care what you just witnessed, you're expected to be professional while at work.  Professional isn't "That guy was stupid as shit.  I don't pity his death.".  That is just an example, but I have no doubt things similar have been said.  LE doesn't exclude you from having to be professional while on the job.

Edited by Kallus Rourke

I need donations to help fund my food addiction. DM for details 😂

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Community Team
6 hours ago, TA120 said:

humor is an outlet for many. that includes joking about things that 95% of people think shouldn't be joked about. it isn't uncommon for officers to joke about suicides (or any deaths) and all sorts of shit like that. it's not with ill intent either. you just have to laugh to keep from crying. besides that, if an officer clears a call and calls a complainant a fucking idiot in private, chances are he probably was. like Mags said, LE is not like anything else in the world.

 

6 hours ago, Kallus Rourke said:

 

LE being a unique job does not justify being a dick.  In fact, it means you should have even more professionalism.  You can have humor and laugh, but not at the expense of the people you were on a call with.  Regardless of why you're there, you were sent to HELP and take care of the situation. I don't give a damn if someone is stupid as nails, you don't have any right to talk crap about that person while on the job.  At home, your personal time, fine, whatever.  That is your PERSONAL time.  When you're in the cruiser, you're on the job, you're on work's time.  I have a lot of medical issues wrong with me.  If officers came and had to strip off all my clothes, I would not want them to ever speak about me, even in the privacy of their car.  If I ever found out that happened, I'd never call 911 again.  Even if we're the perpetrator, we still have a right to privacy like anyone else.

 

What it comes down to, I don't care what you just witnessed, you're expected to be professional while at work.  Professional isn't "That guy was stupid as shit.  I don't pity his death.".  That is just an example, but I have no doubt things similar have been said.  LE doesn't exclude you from having to be professional while on the job.

 

 

In a response to both of you I can see both sides, but @Kallus Rourke I personally have seen many natural death, and  suicide scenes. I have seen people jump from high rises, I have seen people hung from trees, I have seen people in dead in water for extended amount of time, I have seen people with decapitated faces due to close range shotgun rounds, I have seen people stuffed in abandon buildings for 3 months in 98 degree weather, and I have seen people shot up to extent of 15 rounds. I don't care what anybody says that is just not normal for a human being to see. Sociologist have proven you have to have someway to cope with it or you can be mentally/physically in trouble. it may cause you to want to harm yourself or extreme depression. A lot of officers cope with it by joking that is a very common coping mechanism. For example I can see a death scene like that, and go to eat 20 minutes later. Most of the world can't do that. I can go on those scenes and not stare the whole time at the body most people can't do that either. 

 

Every officer has a different way of coping with situations. You personally cannot say that its right or wrong without physically being put into that situation. Because it happens daily all the time. 

5a0477ae1f41d_StaffSignaturev2trevor.png.cbc6f0a62435ffb63e35989486061ed5.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Mags said:

 

 

 

In a response to both of you I can see both sides, but @Kallus Rourke I personally have seen many natural death, and  suicide scenes. I have seen people jump from high rises, I have seen people hung from trees, I have seen people in dead in water for extended amount of time, I have seen people with decapitated faces due to close range shotgun rounds, I have seen people stuffed in abandon buildings for 3 months in 98 degree weather, and I have seen people shot up to extent of 15 rounds. I don't care what anybody says that is just not normal for a human being to see. Sociologist have proven you have to have someway to cope with it or you can be mentally/physically in trouble. it may cause you to want to harm yourself or extreme depression. A lot of officers cope with it by joking that is a very common coping mechanism. For example I can see a death scene like that, and go to eat 20 minutes later. Most of the world can't do that. I can go on those scenes and not stare the whole time at the body most people can't do that either. 

 

Every officer has a different way of coping with situations. You personally cannot say that its right or wrong without physically being put into that situation. Because it happens daily all the time. 

 

I never once said it was wrong to have a sense of humor, nor is that what I implied.  Would you talk to your partner and laugh about some guy who committed suicide in front of you?  THAT is my point!    I don't even care about the stupid calls of some drunk, heavy redneck singing to a pig.  I'm talking about the serious calls. If you spoke to those people you laughed at and told them you laughed at them and made jokes about their dire situation, what do you think would be their response?  There are plenty of ways to laugh that aren't at the expense of someone you're supposed to serve.  Laugh at something your pet did, your child did, your family member did, something you saw on tv.  Anything else.

 

My point is, when you're at work, you be professional about the people you're sent to serve. Being LE and seeing terrible things doesn't justify talking crap and laughing at people's dire situations.

Edited by Kallus Rourke

I need donations to help fund my food addiction. DM for details 😂

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Community Team
8 hours ago, Kallus Rourke said:

My point is, when you're at work, you be professional about the people you're sent to serve. Being LE and seeing terrible things doesn't justify talking crap and laughing at people's dire situations.

 

Officers are going to laugh and joke in those serious situations to cope with stress of it all. I'm not saying that they are laughing at the situation at hand, but what I am saying they are going to make jokes about something that happened the night before or an inside joke to help with the stresses of seeing something extreme.

5a0477ae1f41d_StaffSignaturev2trevor.png.cbc6f0a62435ffb63e35989486061ed5.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...