Ford's New Police Interceptor will be able to monitor police driving behavior in real-time. This is an effort to increase driving safety by cops but also to deter the unintended uses of these vehicles. From wired:
Everyone’s seen a cop driving like a jerk: Double parking and blocking traffic. Cruising down the highway way beyond the speed limit, with no suspect to run down. Blatantly texting while driving. Pulling the old turn-on-the-siren-just-long-enough-to-run-the-red-light trick. And for anyone who’s fantasized about making a citizen’s arrest of one of their city’s finest, police departments soon will be able to track how their cops are driving, and when they’re behaving badly.
But at least some of the cops don't like curbs in their ability to engage in moral hazard. From The Free Thought Project:
Police union representatives have already spoken out against this new feature, calling it intrusive.
Moral hazard is the problem of separating the good you from the bad you. Police officers not wanting to have their driving monitored are not necessarily equated to keeping a license to be bad.
ReplyDeleteThe operational freedom that allows one to be bad also allows one to be good as well. While it does constitute a hazard for the state or federal agency that is ultimately responsible for their action, in most cases a sense of freedom is created. We should believe that a moral hazard can be reduced with longer and more intense training on making the right decisions.
Even in the plain by creating more rewards for hard work, should be an added deterrent to shirking responsibilities or plain bad behavior. In addition, having greater personal responsibility for their actions will give the same officers more to think about and more reasons to act appropriately. The previous stems from the conclusion that, “borrowers take bigger risks with other people’s money than with their own.”
Why shouldn’t cops be monitored? Why should only the people in the community be monitored by the law enforcement? I understand that the cops have a job to do but sometimes they need to be monitored because of the unsafe practices they are using on a daily basis. In my opinion, I believe most police officers consider they have a higher power than others and can do no wrong, well that is beginning to change. I have a problem with my county police officers because they consider themselves to not look at the whole picture when they come to arrest folks, and they seem to get away with criminal charges on themselves.
ReplyDeleteHere is an article you might find interesting. A Saratoga County, NY sheriff's sergeant abruptly resigned 11/10/14 as he was charged with official misconduct and harassment after a video was posted on the Internet that purportedly captured him slapping a man whose car he wanted to search (Retrieved from: http://www.timesunion.com/local/article/Saratoga-sheriff-to-discuss-viral-video-5883183.php ). I am really glad that the citizens of their communities are protecting themselves because if they didn’t, these charges would have never come about.
Here is another article you all might find interesting: http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_27401430/community-leaders-march-justice-after-teen-girl-was?source=infinite
Denver's independent monitor on Tuesday announced he is launching an evaluation of the police department's policies on shooting at moving vehicles after the fourth shooting in seven months of people who officers said were using cars as weapons.
The family of 17-year-old Jessica Hernandez has questions, too, after the teen was fatally shot multiple times by police early Monday in an alley in the Park Hill neighborhood. So far, police have released few details about the shooting, including whether any of the five teens in the car were armed or who reported the car stolen.
"We're not going to trickle out the facts of the case," said Sonny Jackson, a police department spokesman. "We're going to be transparent and will release information when we can."
Like I said previously, I believe police officers are getting out of control and are thinking that their actions should be dismissed. I believe everyone deserves a fair hearing, and should be able to prove themselves innocent. Police officers should be no different than the citizens that obey the law, and they should also follow protocol before breaking the law.
Work Cited:
Phillips, N. & Paul, J. (2015) Denver monitor launches investigation after police kill drivers. Retrieved from: http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_27401430/community-leaders-march-justice-after-teen-girl-was?source=infinite
Stanforth, L. (2014) Deputy in slap video is charged, steps down. Retrieved from: http://www.timesunion.com/local/article/Saratoga-sheriff-to-discuss-viral-video-5883183.php
TIFFANY ... STUDENT ID 0954241
ReplyDeleteNine years after the terrorist attacks of 2001, the United States has assembled a vast domestic intelligence apparatus to collect information about Americans, using the FBI, local police, state homeland security offices and military criminal investigators. The system, by far the largest and most technologically sophisticated in the nation's history, collects, stores and analyzes information about thousands of U.S. citizens and residents, many of whom have not been accused of any wrongdoing. The government's goal is to have every state and local law enforcement agency in the country feed information to Washington. If the government has been doing this to its citizens, cops should not be surprised the “big brother” wants to keep an eye on them too.
Priest, D. and Arkin, W., (2015) Monitoring America. www.washintonpost.com
A recent study by WYFF4 news revealed a 55% increase in the number of fatal shootings by police officers since 2009 to 2014 throughout South Carolina. It was noted, however, that 46% of the victims shot were white compared to 39% that were black (Walter, 2015). Since the latest shooting of unarmed victim, Walter Scott in Charleston, South Carolina last week (i.e., April 7, 2015), created public outcry, a dramatic increase in the number of municipalities across the United States stated they were going to implement body cameras for their law enforcement officers. The purpose is to record police interactions with the public to obtain clear evidence of what transpired during a routine traffic stop, or a more violent interaction.
ReplyDeleteMany police forces praise the benefits of using body cameras, with the city of Rialto, California reporting that during the first year after the body cameras were introduced, the use of force by police officers reportedly declined 60%, and complaints from citizens against law enforcement decreased by 88% (Admin., 2014). Other officials believe by informing individuals that they are being recorded, both sides take a more professional approach to police-civilian interactions, and that fewer problems occur (Brunt, 2014). The benefit for police forces and municipalities is that police officers are being forced to act in the best interest of public relations.
It appears that all of these pros would prompt body cameras to be issued with every badge, and the world may become a better and safer environment. But from a management perspective, body cameras are a way to monitor officer performance even in mundane situations, as it is an attempt to curb police officers’ abilities to engage in moral hazard, or risk-tasking (Froeb, McCann, Shor, & Ward, 2014, p. 234). With video and audio evidence, police officers become more liable for their actions. However, police officers will have challenges in explaining the amount of time the camera is turned off and justifying those “black -out periods.” Further, for every moment of a police officer’s shift, and in certain instances, the use of a body camera becomes an invasion of their privacy, and in cases of sexual or physical abuse, an embarrassment to the victim. This will require protocol that allows for proper discretion. As with most management issues there is not a single, easy answer. Yet, the uses of body cameras is clearly gaining momentum, and past data indicates that it will possibly make law enforcement officers more accountable for their own actions.
Regards,
Karen Whelpley
Work Cited
Admin. (November 29, 2014). Police Body Cameras: Do They Reduce Complaints of Officer Misconduct? Web. (April 12, 2015), Retrieved from: https://www.einvestigator.com/police-body-cameras-the-pros-and-cons-for-law-enforcement-and-citizens/ Police Body Cameras: Do They Reduce Complaints of Officer Misconduct?
Brunt, J. (March 10, 2014). Wash. Chief Weighs Pros and Cons of Body Cameras. Web. (April 12, 2014). Retrieved from: http://www.policeone.com/police-products/body-cameras/articles/6955826-Wash-chief-weighs-pros-and-cons-of-body-cameras/
Froeb, L., McCann, B., Shor, M., & Ward, M. (2014). Managerial Economics: A Problem Solving Approach (3rd ed.). Mason: South-Western Cengage Learning.
Walter, T. (April 8, 2015). Data shows steady rise in officer-involved shootings in SC. Web. (April 12, 2015). Retrieved from:http://www.wyff4.com/news/data-shows-steady-rise-in-officerinvolved-shootings-in-sc/32258698
Moral hazard refers to the reduced incentive to exercise care and arise from hidden actions. Solutions to the problem of moral hazard, center on efforts to eliminate the information asymmetry (e.g., by monitoring or by changing the incentives of individuals) (Luke, McCann, Shor, & Ward; 2014). I’m a little torn on this item, because I feel there is at times an abuse of power, but doesn’t that happen in every job or business. In a cart of apples, there is always going to be a couple of rotten ones. Let’s face the fact though, any of us who use a computer daily at work, can be monitored through out the entire day of our job. I for one could careless, because I know that I’m working my butt off for 9-10 hours, so if you want to monitor me go right ahead, I have nothing to hide. However, at the same time, doesn’t the company have something better to do with its resources then to watch me all day? This is why I’m so torn on the subject of monitoring everything. Yes big brother is watching, but at what cost? Aren’t we in general allowed to some privacy? At the same time, does the good out weigh the bad? I believe these are all factors that can weigh in the debate, but what the solution is at the end of the day, is in the eyes of the stakeholders.
ReplyDeleteLuke, F., McCann, B, Shor, M., & Ward, M. (2014). Managerial Economics; A Problem Solving Approach (3rd ed.). Mason: South-Western Cengage Learning
Cops are susceptible to the phenomenon of Moral Hazard, which is an increase in risky behavior due to a reduction in risk. Currently, there is nobody “policing” the police, so there is virtually no risk that they will be held accountable for dangerous driving. This is a moral hazard. Because they will not get a ticket, the incidence of cops breaking traffic laws and driving dangerously will, in theory, be higher than if the risk of consequences was present.
ReplyDeleteAccording to Managerial Economics: A problem solving approach, the first rule of moral hazards is to “anticipate moral hazard and protect yourself against it” (Froeb, et al, 2014, pg. 234). Ford is doing this by installing the monitoring devices in the police cars. They are introducing a risk of consequences for the cops that was not there before, thereby lowering the chances that they will partake in risky behavior.
Will they like it? Of course not. Is it moral,ethical, and economically sound to install these devices? Absolutely. By introducing a risk factor for the behavior, the risky behavior should diminish. This will lead to a reduction in accidents and other damages to the police departments. A “moral hazard represents an unconsummated wealth-creating transaction” (Froeb, et al, 2014, pg. 235). If a moral hazard has been identified, then the organization is irresponsible and negligent if they do not address it and take action to protect themselves against it. Since the police are funded with taxpayer money, it is in the best interest of the community at large to install the monitoring devices.
References:
Froeb, L.M., McCann, B.T., Shor, M., Ward, M.R. (2014) Managerial Economics: A problem solving approach. Third Edition. South-Western Cengage Learning: Mason.
Cops are susceptible to the phenomenon of Moral Hazard, which is an increase in risky behavior due to a reduction in risk. Currently, there is nobody “policing” the police, so there is virtually no risk that they will be held accountable for dangerous driving. This is a moral hazard. Because they will not get a ticket, the incidence of cops breaking traffic laws and driving dangerously will, in theory, be higher than if the risk of consequences was present.
ReplyDeleteAccording to Managerial Economics: A problem solving approach, the first rule of moral hazards is to “anticipate moral hazard and protect yourself against it” (Froeb, et al, 2014, pg. 234). Ford is doing this by installing the monitoring devices in the police cars. They are introducing a risk of consequences for the cops that was not there before, thereby lowering the chances that they will partake in risky behavior.
Will they like it? Of course not. Is it moral,ethical, and economically sound to install these devices? Absolutely. By introducing a risk factor for the behavior, the risky behavior should diminish. This will lead to a reduction in accidents and other damages to the police departments. A “moral hazard represents an unconsummated wealth-creating transaction” (Froeb, et al, 2014, pg. 235). If a moral hazard has been identified, then the organization is irresponsible and negligent if they do not address it and take action to protect themselves against it. Since the police are funded with taxpayer money, it is in the best interest of the community at large to install the monitoring devices.
References:
Froeb, L.M., McCann, B.T., Shor, M., Ward, M.R. (2014) Managerial Economics: A problem solving approach. Third Edition. South-Western Cengage Learning: Mason.
I love this idea! How are we supposed to feel safe when the people who are supposed to be protecting us are reckless and causing accidents, etc? Those officers that don’t like the new cars are obviously already doing wrong and/or careless things otherwise they wouldn’t care what kind of tracking systems where on the cars. I also think of the opposite end of the spectrum; if someone was trying to blame an officer of something related to their driving or any other behavior that is being monitored, there would be hard proof that exonerates him/her. A great book I’ve read on this topic is Working, Shirking, and Sabotage: Bureaucratic Response to a Democratic Public by John Brehm and Scott Gates. In it they write: “…the special problems of adverse selection facing a police force. To overcome these problems, police academics are designed to screen, train, and evaluate police recruits so as to foster professionalism…” You can couple education and the different kinds of monitoring to keep the moral hazard of policing in check.
ReplyDeleteTopics like this seem to be coming up more frequently due to the recent events that have taken place. We as citizens want to believe that all cops have good morals, uphold the law, and have our best interest in mind. That is not always the case, as with any industry, there are good cops and there are bad cops, this creates a moral hazard. The idea of monitoring the cops is good suggestion, as they are paid employees and should not be treated as if they are above the law, they are meant to enforce it. Those cops that think it is intrusive, would make me think they have something to hide and would make me want to monitor them more. As with any business you want to monitor the process and continuously make improvements to make sure things are running smoothly.
ReplyDeleteMoral hazard is the problem of separating the good you from the bad you. The same should be said for police officers. Yes, we have all witnessed a police officer driving down the road talking in his cell phone which seems to be just fine if they are doing it. But, does that stop them from issuing tickets to those of us that have been pulled over for doing the same thing? I am all for monitoring the actions of police officers.
ReplyDeleteNot only will the monitoring help cut down on officers acting/re-acting inappropriately, but it will also offer one more level of protection for the officer. Law breakers are less likely to behave inappropriately if they know they are being monitored/video taped during a traffic stop.
So, in my opinion, making adjustments to the tools used by police departments to include recording devises such as body cameras and vehicle recording devises is a win-win situation for the police officers and the general public.
When an officer of the law acts irresponsibly, there can be rather significant consequences. The officer may be willing to take the risk only when he knows the consequences or costs that could be incurred as a result of the risk will not be felt by him. This is moral hazard as it applies to the article "Ford Police Cruisers Now Tattle When Cops Drive Like Jerks" on wired.com. In the business world, we know that when parties enter into an agreement recognizing that there is a risk in doing so, but little to hold either party accountable for that risk, a moral hazard is in play. Examples include an insurer insuring a consumer at a low premium when recognizing the consumer is "high risk" or a bank making a loan to a borrower with poor credit history. Whether in public service or business, the best defense against moral hazard is a good offense.
ReplyDeleteThe entity who is taking on the risk due to moral hazard, is best served by anticipating the risk, and then taking actions to mitigate that risk. Upon recognizing the risk, an insurer will raise premiums and the bank would adjust the interest rate for the risky borrower. The same applies in our example regarding law enforcement. In this case, law enforcement officials recognize the risk of having an unmonitored force. The risks are mostly around public safety, which is disturbing enough (and can prove costly) that the cost of offsetting the risk by spending resources on vehicles outfitted with monitoring tools can be offset in the long run.
References:
Froeb, McCann, Ward, Shor: (2014) Managerial Economics. A Problem Solving Approach, Ohio: South Western Cengage Learning
http://www.wired.com/2014/11/ford-police-tracking/
To be blunt, law enforcement is a public service much like customer service you enjoy from a large corporation, so I see no reason why Law Enforcement Officers should not be monitored on the job. There are lots of pluses for monitoring, it backs up the officers stories, protects the municipalities from liability and could also be used for training purposes. Monitoring the police would help ensure quality of public service and if officers have nothing to hide, this should not be an issue. With video recorders, many public interactions that have dragged out in the press could have been quickly resolved with lesser controversy. Monitoring law enforcement would also go a long way in building trust and protecting L.E.Os themselves from erroneous prosecution.
ReplyDeleteIn the wake of the recent unlawful arrests and deadly force, cops should absolutely be monitored, as should anyone serving the public. I don’t know how many times I was told by a customer service representative one thing and then spoke with another and they say they have no record of the conversation. The only harmful thing to come out of that is really just frustration (and them losing a customer) but the actions of a police office can be a bit more detrimental if handle inappropriately. A person dying while in police custody is more than enough reason that officers should have to be monitored regularly.
ReplyDeleteThe new guideline of officers wearing body cameras is a brilliant idea. It would lessen the ability of officers to abuse their authority. There have been countless cases where officer’s actions are questioned for corruption, abuse and misconduct that have not been addressed or citizens have been railroaded. Police officers should be held to the same accountability as someone holding a public office. If they aren’t doing anything wrong, the body cam with voice recording should not affect them any. This new protocol will help the public in their concern for misconduct and it would also clear the name of any officer who is accused if they are truly innocent.
Salam, R. (2014, August 15). Tape Everything. Retrieved November 8, 2015, from http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2014/08/ferguson_police_officers_should_be_forced_to_videotape_themselves_for_our.html
ReplyDeleteI always enjoy monitoring and contributing to this ever popular debate...
Yes... We should track every movement of our police vehicles, strap video cameras to their chests, and install computer chips in the brains of every Police Officer in America. All great ideas! After all, these public servants are not human beings. They have no margin for error, and get to make split-second decisions in the middle of the night only to be criticized in the morning by those who slept under the very blanket of protection which they provided.
For those of you who have no idea what law enforcement jobs entail, and know only of police work through watching ridiculous portrayals of police in television shows and movies, here this...
This country's law-enforcement is comprised primarily of good men and women who want only to serve the public and make our communities safer and more enjoyable for the rest of us. Are there a few rotten apples in the bunch? Absolutely. Show me a profession that doesn't have its share of those less worthy, and I will recant this entire statement. But let's be reasonable here!
After all, it's not like people are jumping through hoops to take these jobs. Long hours, risk your life, work nights, weekends and holidays, stand out in inclement weather, take crap from those who feel that laws don't pertain to them, have cell phone cameras shoved in your face every time you try to do your job or take action, be judged by millions of "experts", stand between individuals who want to harm each other all for crap pay. Oh and yes, I forgot... You're a public servant, so do it all with a smile on your face and your best customer-centric disposition!
If my position on this matter has yet to reveal it, I spent 20 years as a Police Officer working some of the most crime infested neighborhoods in New York City. As I reflect back on some of my shifts, I consider myself extremely fortunate to be "blogging" here with you today.
I, like a majority of my former co-workers was an honest and dedicated Police Officer. Would I wear a video camera on my chest or allow my patrol car to be monitored? Absolutely! In fact, I would have to guess that most of our nation's Police Officers would respond the same. Surprised by the answer? Why you ask?
The general public would be enlightened as to how police involved incidents actually go-down, and often the nano-seconds that Officers actually get to make life-altering decisions. Perhaps after seeing a police officer's perspective, in it's entirety, and not just a clip often edited to drum up the media, the general public may get an insightful look as to how difficult this job really is, and may actually extract some sympathy from those who can rationally reason. In fact, I would go out on a limb and say that captured recordings would be used to indemnify and clear alleged wrong-doings and false accusations in most instances.
So before you chime in on this topic, ask yourself this... Would you be willing to strap a monitoring device to yourself for every minute of your every workday? And remember... You're not allowed to hit the pause button, take it off if you're having a bad day, or go back and delete a mistake you made!
Police officers often have little measure of their performance, and they go from heroes to villains depending on the person being helped or arrested. It is likely that their performance reviews do not take into consideration the inconsiderate things that they do, that they consider “perks” brought by having an official vehicle and wearing a uniform. There is a lot of power to the job, but also a lot of visibility, and acting ethically may be part of the job description, but often ethics are in the eye of the beholder. What may be to you or I the picture of a police officer running a light for fun, might be the officer needing to clear the light but keep their lights and sirens off afterwards because of the nature of the call they received. What seems to us like a police officer braking to a sharp stop and running into a store like it might be the officer stopping a robbery might just be the officer needing to use the restroom. Tracking in the manner described by the potential of the new cruisers would allow the alleviation of these perceived inconsistencies with their actions. It would be a simple matter to line the vehicle’s information up with the officer’s shift that evening and the records kept by dispatch to make sure that actions are in line with requirements of the job. Why don’t they like it? Because of transparency.
ReplyDelete