• Mango@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    10 months ago

    I kinda get it, but at the same time I think it should be our right to monitor police. I’m not sure how to reconcile the personal info part though.

    • SeriousBug@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      10 months ago

      Agreed. But I think the right to monitor the police doesn’t have to mean real-time access to police radio. The radio could be recorded, like body cam footage, and released on demand with FOIA. FOIA allows redactions when needed, so sensitive information like victims names and addresses could be redacted.

        • Tyfud@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          10 months ago

          How is he bootlicking?

          We live in a society. Compromises need to be made. If they end up being in the wrong direction, then we correct.

          The answer to solving this problem isn’t to burn the system to the ground, and it’s also probably not to keep letting the crazies get involved in crime scenes. It’s also not to give police carte blanche or obscure the information of it’s needed.

          His suggestion was a reasonable first step.

          Now. Can the NYPD be trusted to do the right thing when they get a FOIA request? Probably not without being forced. They don’t have a great track record of transparency. But that’s no reason to remain stuck in the past.

        • R0cket_M00se@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          Tell me, has the currently unencrypted radios kept the cops from doing shady and unethical shit so far? No? Well then it seems like they already have ways to break the rules outside of what the citizen is currently capable of monitoring, yes?