The use of previous videos can be detrimental to new cops because it can teach them how to deal with many different situations correctly that way they don’t put their career in jeopardy or the lives of their partners in danger. Everyone knows that there is always three sides to a story: what one individual says happens, what the other individual says happened, and what happened. With the execution of body-worn cameras, it would eliminate, the reduction seen in complaints filed and sustained against officers and videos can reduce the need for lengthy
There is some of your information you are told not to give for many reasons. A big reason not to is you could give out too much information and something could get hacked into or stolen from you. If you give the officer on the scene your information, you are not allowed to give it to the other person involved in the crash. The information you are told to give is, your name and address, your vehicle registration number, and your insurance information including an agent or provider’s name and their phone number. If the driver of the vehicle is not with their vehicle you are supposed to leave a note with this information on the vehicle.
[concluding sentence] Because of these behaviors in certain situations, how exactly would this law be enforced? It would be a waste of time. First of all, as with other laws, numerous people can’t recall or some wouldn’t know that a bystander law was legislated. Furthermore, since people may not think of the law as their initial response, they might not even help victims at all. In fact, the authorities would have to find and prove that a specific person was a bystander in any given situation.
Also, the cameras would record private conversations between authorities discuss amongst one another. The officer could turn off the body camera during private situations but may neglect the thought of turning the camera back on. Not only is privacy a concern with body cameras, but also the property of the footage. Citizens are concerned that the video footage can be modified, obliterated, or improperly stored by police authorities. An agency, other than the police agency, should control the property of the footage.
As an adversary, I have to disagree with self driving cars. They have caused several accidents, some even fatal. Driverless cars are never going to be able to handle every situation like a human can. Plus, the car might be programmed a certain way, but fail to respond when it comes time to. Since the car is basically a computer, it could get hacked and the hacker could use the car as a weapon or steal any information that they can get from it.
This problem hasn’t been solved yet due to the lack of law. Civilians are not getting justice, when a police officer commits a crime and gets away with it, other police officers find out about the situation and they feel that if that one officer got away with it why can’t they? If Police officers were getting punished for their lack of duty, other officers would step up and try to avoid what that officer did. This problem has also not been solved due to the lack of judges not finding any officers guilty. Not finding them guilty leads to more police brutality.
Additionally, the computers can be damaged by serious weather conditions causing accidents and much more. Lastly, the security of a self driving car can cause problems because they would be targets for hackers. To start with, if there is an accident or a technology fail self driving cars can’t read human signals causing accidents. On the roads, if there is an accident, construction, or the technology on a self driving car fails, then the car won’t be able to recognize or read any of the human signals used to get around the problem. When testing one of the cars, it was found that, “the perils of lacking an intuition for state of mind are already evident.
Reaction Decisions made by officers in intense situations can be reviewed and evaluated. Constantly wearing body cameras could consider police responsible for their appropriate, and inappropriate, conduct. Imagine how body cameras could prevent cases like Baltimore and Ferguson, where there was no chance for the public to know what actually happened. Officers can no longer make false claims because video recording can be used as evidence to prove them
While many criminal justice policies are loosely based on criminological theories if at all. The lack of consideration for criminological theories could come from the reluctance of scholars to test out the implications of theories on policy. In addition policymakers may simply be unfamiliar with crime theories and therefore have no theoretical knowledge to inform polices. Programs that lack theoretical support are more likely to fail, proving that many criminal justice policies are unlikely to be effective due to poor conceptualization. Even polices that are grounded in theory often are not well supported or are difficult to implement.
It could get hacked, and you could be kidnapped, or wreck. With self-driving cars there will be fewer jobs for people that have something to do with a car. Also, there would be conflicts between self-driving cars and human drivers, because not everyone will agree on having a self-driving car. Self-driving cars should not replace human drivers. First, a self-driving car could get hacked.
When it come to helping first responders as civilians we can not really protect them. Because we are not as well trained as they are in their particular field. Even though we can not protect them we can assist them in many ways to insure their safety. There are many ways we could assist them such as protecting the crime seen. We could also tell them what is going on in the area so they will not be injured.
Thirdly, C-51 now has the ability to stop both physical and online copies of material, considered by a judge to be propaganda. Propaganda is often misleading in this case, trying to persuade the viewer to join the act of terrorization. This is why Bill C-51 is trying to stop propaganda. Now, if a judge finds material to be propaganda they can ask for the content to be permanently deleted, so it can 't be used to influence and persuade others to create or take part in future terroristic acts. Since Bill C-51 now has better accessibility to information, many people are worried that their private and personal information would be invaded.
Most people have the standpoint that because it doesn’t affect them, they shouldn’t really bother with doing anything about it. However, doesn’t the NSA breach our Fourth Amendment rights? The Fourth Amendment guarantees, "the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated," but doesn’t mass phone data collection violate that? Legally to search someone you need a warrant but the NSA completely bypasses that. But there is also the problem that if the NSA become completely transparent, the terrorist and other people the NSA is trying to catch, will have more knowledge as how to not get caught, which would just make the NSA ineffective.
Although you may be a safe driver, the person driving next to you may not be a safe driver. If their reckless driving results in an accident with you, it’s important that you have a team of experts on your side. That’s what we offer, a team of expert insurance agents ready to protect you following an accident. Uninsured motorists. There are a lot of motorists driving without proper insurance coverage.