Archive for January, 2008

Another media misrepresentation

January 24, 2008

I’m actually getting tired of talking about these stories, but I feel I should. Too often do we see the media jump to conclusions quickly, talk about subjects they don’t understand and use a short video clip to justify a full sensationalized news story. This is the case yet again with a video from Victoria of an incident that occurred three years ago.

The video is of a detention cell and a youth who was held in cells after being arrested while intoxicated and drunk at party. The video shows the youth having her legs restrained (with a hobble, not a leash as the reporter called it). I haven’t used my leg restraint yet, but would during instances which its necessary, including aggressive arrestees, regardless of their age.  Also, why does the reporter seem that by taking parts of your clothing off is so offensive?  Anything could be used against officers or the subject themselves, such as shoe laces, bra straps, belts, elastic waist bands, ad nauseum.  To the reporter, Kathy Tomlinson: perhaps you should learn about regular police procedures and terminology first before attempting to sensationalize the incident.  Also, why did you only include a short clip from the officer and then have a long story from the girl’s family?

After watching and reading about the story, I can’t help but wonder a few questions: Who released this video? Was it the plantiff in the civil case? For what reason? Due to the timing, it seems the reasoning behind the video release is not for ‘public awareness’ of what occurred, but to benefit somehow the civil suit which begins next week in court. Why did it take 3 years for this story to be released?

There is more to this story than we are lead to believe.

Ban Handguns, now.

January 20, 2008

With the recent shootings in Toronto, the mayor David Miller has repeated his appeal to the federal government to ban all handguns in Canada. I would support such a ban and I’d like to think that many others would as well.

Handguns have no other purpose than for shooting other people. Despite those that must possess a handgun for workplace use, such as police or military, I can see no reason why anyone must own a personal use handgun. Handguns lack any social purpose other than nefarious ones — unless of course you’re from the States — where they appear as their own living, breathing ‘entity’. We must resist falling into the influence from the US culture and the outrageous arguments from gun lobbyists about self-defence and rights under their constitution. The bottom line is that we aren’t the US, nor do we want to be.

When I was younger, we lived in a country which had a ban on personal ownership of all guns. Even as a young kid, I felt safe walking around on my own, taking the train to school — it was a society that we generally felt secure. The only persons who could legally possess guns were the police, but I imagine there was an illegal trade as well. We’re not going to prevent all handguns from entering the country by illegal means and the criminals would find their own ways to get handguns. However, at least they wouldn’t be able to steal guns from private citizens, borrow from a legitimate owner or order them through the States.

A perfect example of a successful ban on guns is the automatic weapon prohibition. Occasionally, an automatic rifle shows up on the radar during a police seizure, but it is a rare event. Using this as an example to a handgun ban, we could surely reduce the prevalence of handgun crimes to a rareity. Its a long term proposal, but definately worth it to save lives.

This isn’t candid camera

January 12, 2008

I’ve been busy at work lately, and as a result, haven’t had much time for posting. The little hiatus though has given me a chance to think of some things to talk about. One topic has been nagging me ever since New Year’s Eve.

I worked New Year’s Eve voluntarily this year. (I know, crazy eh?) The service was offering to anyone interested for a call-out shift to bolster the usual numbers for New Years. Seeing that I’m a junkie for call-out, I accepted and we went around putting ‘fires’ out and passing ‘band-aids’ out all night as per usual on such a busy evening.  At one of our many house party calls, we attended to backup another car who had an arrest. The officers had asked us to watch their prisoner while they were inside dealing with the incident and I stood outside watching the guy who was sitting in the back of their car. A few minutes later, one of the party-goers began video recording me with their cell phone. I stood there for a while, then realized that someone was video taping me while standing around near the porch area. I approached him, told him to stop and he tried to lie about what he was doing. He put down the phone and left after I confronted him about it. A few minutes later, the arrest began doing something stupid in the back of the car. Needless to say, the arrest was taken out of the back of the car and sorted out. While we were doing this, the citizen began recording again from just outside the house. I didn’t notice as I was dealing with the arrest, but my partner confronted him a second time and he eventually was led back into the house.

The irony in this story is incredible. In my previous job, I was a researcher and organized research studies on police, private security and the like. I never video taped officers, but I audio taped them with their permission. I did however read many studies on the proliferation of video recording devices and how they are reversing the stereotypical Big Brother analogy from state-derived surveillance to civilian surveillance. Now, more than ever, anyone can have access to video or photo technology and without much effort, post it to a world-wide audience. The prevalence of this type of technology has changed our notions of surveillance and social control greatly. Not only are citizens observed more easily, they observe the observers just as well (or better!).

While I would be the first to defend civil rights and the Charter Rights of the individual, I’m starting to feel that for many civilian amateur videographers, its not about ‘being a voice’ for the people, human rights or whatever. Sadly, these videographers are only out for one thing, fortune (and with that, maybe a little fame too). Recent publicized video recordings such as the Vancouver Airport video, the downtown Calgary video, and others have garnered sensational media attention. In some cases, these videos have ‘earned’ a significant windfall of cash for the camera person. (In the Vancouver case, it was several thousand dollars from each tv station).

Another problem arises with these videos: they are still only a snapshot of the incident. They do not show the circumstances that lead up to the video being started, the TOTALITY of the incident (ie. what lead to the arrest, the dealings with the arrestee, what was said, etc). Usually what occurs is the video is misunderstood and it becomes a media event.

In the end, with all that said, I don’t like being video recorded without my knowledge. Too often it seems there are those out to make a quick buck from a short video taken out of context. There are those that say, “Well, if you’re not doing anything wrong…you have nothing to worry about.” I don’t need someone else to tell me, because I know I do the right things at work. However, I would never want to be the scapegoat of a media circus, bent on making stories sensational in order to sell their product.