Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
While this will be good for evidence it will also be issues of why it "didn't work" that time, it broke in the attack, turned off just before the police do something wrong, corrupt jobs and or other things. Cameras will be come the "tell all" yet I think in the crooked cases we will find strange things happen to the videos.
So you will be fighting funding, technology fixes, and durability. Did the cop do everything to the letter, in the camera when clearly it will about the COP not about the crime!
Wondering if you think the police should wear body camera.
It seems like such an easy solution to so many potential problems. It could:
Justify an officers actions,
It could be an deterrent to (or confirm) a abuse of power.
It could deter either party from doing something stupid.
I think it's a win-win.
I have reading about some cities thinking about requiring body cameras on officers.
The argument against it is privacy.
-If a criminal is doing something illegal they don't deserve much privacy.
-If it's something as small as pulling a car over for a broken light, or a speeding ticket, complaints etc. I'm sure if anything goes smoothly a video could be deleted.
I wouldn't see any reason for that video to be held on to.
I know the concerns of cost. I think it would be a helpful investment for some cities.
I would think it would some kind of way to have an camera begin recording once an officer leaves his car, or takes a call for help.
Do you think Law enforcement should be required to use Body Cameras?
Sure.
The lunatic fringe can always use more evidence to ignore.
Location: East of Seattle since 1992, 615' Elevation, Zone 8b - originally from SF Bay Area
44,580 posts, read 81,186,228 times
Reputation: 57818
I have to say no, for a good reason. People in government seem to be making a habit of doing things like this without thinking it through. Kind of like the "affordable" Care Act.
In our nearby cities of Poulsbo and Bremerton (pop. 10,000 & 39,000) they have bought and are using the body cameras. After only a few months, they are talking about abandoning them. The reason is public disclosure requests. In states like ours, anyone may request any records from a public agency, including the police. Unless the law is changed to exempt the footage, these police departments simply do not have the staff to meet the number of public disclosure requests they have been getting. Apparently people are even requesting them to post on Youtube as entertainment, as well as to help fight traffic tickets. Imagine what will happen if larger cities start to use the cameras and get these requests.
I have to say no, for a good reason. People in government seem to be making a habit of doing things like this without thinking it through. Kind of like the "affordable" Care Act.
In our nearby cities of Poulsbo and Bremerton (pop. 10,000 & 39,000) they have bought and are using the body cameras. After only a few months, they are talking about abandoning them. The reason is public disclosure requests. In states like ours, anyone may request any records from a public agency, including the police. Unless the law is changed to exempt the footage, these police departments simply do not have the staff to meet the number of public disclosure requests they have been getting. Apparently people are even requesting them to post on Youtube as entertainment, as well as to help fight traffic tickets. Imagine what will happen if larger cities start to use the cameras and get these requests.
Interesting point. Wouldn't the video footage be considered evidence and not subject to general disclosure if there were charges pending?
I know that in the Jody Foster trial here in PHX, no evidence related to the case could be released to the public until the trial and sentencing phase was completed.
It isn't just about the cost of the cameras; it is also about the cost of the whole bureaucracy that has to be created to 'review' the footage. What good are cameras if nobody scrutinizes and nitpicks our police actions? How long are we going to store these records - can lawyers challenge the police after twenty years of review and changing attitudes?
What I am waiting for is rioting outside the WH or any of our wealthier neighborhoods and our police not responding. Of course they will not be able to respond - if their racial sensitivity training is not up to date or the batteries on their new cameras are not charged.
People really have to think about what this is all about. Are we asking our police not to respond when needed? That could be the outcome. Why should any policeman jeopardize their job or even their freedom to protect people that don't want their protection?
It isn't just about the cost of the cameras; it is also about the cost of the whole bureaucracy that has to be created to 'review' the footage. What good are cameras if nobody scrutinizes and nitpicks our police actions? How long are we going to store these records - can lawyers challenge the police after twenty years of review and changing attitudes?
What I am waiting for is rioting outside the WH or any of our wealthier neighborhoods and our police not responding. Of course they will not be able to respond - if their racial sensitivity training is not up to date or the batteries on their new cameras are not charged.
People really have to think about what this is all about. Are we asking our police not to respond when needed? That could be the outcome. Why should any policeman jeopardize their job or even their freedom to protect people that don't want their protection?
I think this is way over thought.
Cops would wear cameras. There would be an external review board for when sketchy cases need to be reviewed. When someone makes a claim, the footage is pulled from the database, it's reviewed by a NON police board, and taken from there.
There is a lot of daily interaction with cops that are pretty cut and clear. It would just be advantageous to ALL parties for those cases where things go south.
Memory cards are cheap/ Body cameras are cheap. It's cheap insurance for both Police and Civilian for our armed civil servants to have a body camera.
It isn't just about the cost of the cameras; it is also about the cost of the whole bureaucracy that has to be created to 'review' the footage. What good are cameras if nobody scrutinizes and nitpicks our police actions? How long are we going to store these records - can lawyers challenge the police after twenty years of review and changing attitudes?
What I am waiting for is rioting outside the WH or any of our wealthier neighborhoods and our police not responding. Of course they will not be able to respond - if their racial sensitivity training is not up to date or the batteries on their new cameras are not charged.
People really have to think about what this is all about. Are we asking our police not to respond when needed? That could be the outcome. Why should any policeman jeopardize their job or even their freedom to protect people that don't want their protection?
Right now, almost all police depts. have dash cameras. They are not experiencing all the problems you speak of.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
