I didn't put it in the article precisely because I didn't want the shift in focus--but this incident made me think a lot harder about wearing my Google Glass again.
That being said, there's absolutely no reason that cops should not have a camera on them at all times. It's more for their benefit than ours.
As far as technologies that reliably work, the stop-and-frisk app is actually quite good, but requires practice like anything else.
I'd also be all for photographing cops out of habit. I stopped short of recommending that...but, hell, there's plenty of fodder here for a good month's worth of posts.
> That being said, there's absolutely no reason that cops should not have a camera on them at all times.
True. This would be a major positive change to our system.
> It's more for their benefit than ours.
False. Everything is already all the cops' way. They have nowhere to go but down. Their court testimony is legally privileged over yours (this really galls me in the face of the idea that "all are equal before the law"). They don't like being filmed because it hurts them. In this case, what we have is a case of "good for us because it's bad for the cops".
Oh, a Glass would actually be pretty useful. Make a photo every 10-30 seconds and automatically upload it to a secure server (offshore). Then, give the access credentials to your lawyer.
If you get arrested the lawyer can download the last photos.
That being said, there's absolutely no reason that cops should not have a camera on them at all times. It's more for their benefit than ours.
As far as technologies that reliably work, the stop-and-frisk app is actually quite good, but requires practice like anything else.
I'd also be all for photographing cops out of habit. I stopped short of recommending that...but, hell, there's plenty of fodder here for a good month's worth of posts.