Say you’re a regular citizen that has done no wrong. You keep a loaded gun with you at all times. Police conduct a no knock on you at 3 am. You suspect burglars. You shoot and kill one. You get shot but survive. You are arrested and charged with murder of an LEO. You can say “self defense” but the law is stacked against you. You go to jail for life. Oh and the warrant they served? It was based on bad tips.
The people who support the police with no end don’t realize that they could be on the wrong end of this. Common law had it that police of whatever kind had to always announce themselves until the last 50 years. We need to go back to this. “What if evidence is destroyed? ” So what? Dealing crack and making meth is not a crime that needs this kind of recklessness. Even if the evidence was for a murder or something. Why risk ruining other people’s lives?
Yes, all police activities should be transparent to the public for trust and safety reasons. Police effective at what they are meant to do and far as enforcing the law. If the public does not hold as much trust in them, then the police become more ineffective because they lose public cooperation. Also, it is good know that the police are not over stepping their boundaries with their power. Transparency is essential.
I think that the activities of the police should be transparent to the public because they are supposed to be there to protect and serve the citizens of the country they are in, not be able to commit crimes under secrecy and not have to fear any prosecution for their actions.
The public sets laws either directly, or by electing people that will make the laws. They also pay taxes to provide police pay. They should be able to know what all activities go on with police. They should at least be able to review them upon request from the people involved to ensure the police don't abuse power.
The moment a method of surveillance becomes public knowledge, criminals are working to either detect or eliminate that method. Advancements in technology are helping the police to do their job with less specially trained technicians or even keeping the officers on the street rather than in a classroom due to the ease of use of a product, the public is better served. Keeping the specifics of how information is gathered, the science behind information analysis, or even the name and face of the officer that gathered the information is not necessarily something the public needs to know.
No knock warrants?
We do that to prevent a shootout. If criminals knew we were coming than they'd be sitting at the door ready for a shootout, or long gone with the evidence to convict them of their wrongdoing.
What good would a raid do if the criminals were neither on scene or prepared for a breach?
Can't catch a criminal in the act if they know they're dealing with cops.
Not unless you like criminals impervious to capture and a bunch of dead undercover cops.
No, not all police activities should be transparent to the public. While many such activities should be transparent, some must be secretive by their very nature. For example, police officers who are undercover in crime rings and syndicates should not be transparent. This would defeat the entire purpose of being undercover.