Should cops be made to wear video cameras?

[Captain America]

Maggie asked me to start a thread about this. I aim to please.

So, my guess is that, the police unions and the cops would be dead set against this idea as it would hold them more accountable and take a lot of fun out of their work.

What say ye?

View attachment 67162924

 

[Robbie Loucks]

I'm leaning towards supporting the use of cameras on officers. However, I feel like there may be some constitutional issues with this, but I'm not one to make an appeal to constitutionality.

 

[clownboy]

Not ready for government work as the saying goes. The tech and storage isn't there yet. They are doing this in certain parts of Britain, and even in that heavily monitored CCTV environment, the results are meh. Storage and archiving are a real problem and video quality is crap, lighting is all over the place and those little cameras just can't adjust. Add in to that, video doesn't not tell the whole story, though people seem to automatically think it does.

Keep it up and we'll need robocops just to carry all the gear.

 

[Hard Truth]

Definitely yes. And car cameras should also be required.

 

[KevinKohler]

5 years, and we'll have cameras that are tiny and decent quality, fisheye with infinite DOF, AND audio.




And I wager LEOs will be CLAMORING for them, as it protects them from us, more so than vice versa.

 

[Chocolate]

I think they should but smashed potatos is sooo good **** yeah america!

 

[jamesrage]

Maggie asked me to start a thread about this. I aim to please.

So, my guess is that, the police unions and the cops would be dead set against this idea as it would hold them more accountable and take a lot of fun out of their work.

What say ye?

View attachment 67162924

I say Yes.Whether or not the statistics in the video is true I do not know or care.I do know that sometimes cops lie,many times suspects lie, some people that believe cop's **** do not stink and you have some people that believe that cops are evil incarnate. Video protects both the cops and suspects.

 

[clownboy]

I've seen a couple of those Bait Car shows. And not knowing they are being filmed, when the cops pull them over, they lie like rugs. And of course the cop knows they're lying because they've been watching them the whole time. If all cops have little cameras attached, and the folks they stop know they're being filmed, who knows, maybe cops will come across more creative lies. The same ones folks tell now must be getting boring. :mrgreen:

 

[Beaudreaux]

For the cops that I know, they would love to have the cameras on their person, and they love the dash cams they already have but those are limited in what they show. A couple of them use small GoPro cameras, and that fact has saved one of their jobs already.

I would think that all cops, all good cops anyway, would want a camera for protection from law suits or criminal prosecution themselves.

I go to LiveLeak regularly and watch videos taken by personal cameras being used by cops all the time. One was posted yesterday of the full encounter that lead to the shooting of a former NY Giants running back, that had a knife at a woman's throat. If not for the video, the cop would have had a hard time justifying the shooting. After watching the video, I totally agree with the actions taken by the officer. He saved the woman's life, after giving multiple warnings and orders for the man to drop the knife and let the woman go. The guy had the knife at the woman's throat and said he was going to kill her.

I've also seen many video's that were taken by civilians without the cops knowing they were being taped that show the cops crossing the line, to say the least. If the cops would have been on their own camera, and by that fact knew they were being recorded, I seriously doubt the cops would have acted like they did.

I've also seen videos taken by civilians that the cops knew they were being recorded and got violently upset over the camera and threatened the civilian because of the camera.

And lastly, I've seen videos taken by civilians, both with and without the cops knowledge, that the cops were exactly how they should be, doing their very dangerous and thankless job professionally and following the law and Constitution. Those are the good guys.

 

[MaggieD]

Maggie asked me to start a thread about this. I aim to please.

So, my guess is that, the police unions and the cops would be dead set against this idea as it would hold them more accountable and take a lot of fun out of their work.

What say ye?

View attachment 67162924

Thank you, Captain America!! I made the suggestion, and then immediately left to serve dinner.

I'm sooooo all for this. And the results are irrefutable.

Rialto, a small, working-class city that bakes in the San Bernardino foothills outside Los Angeles, appeared in the films Transformers and The Hangover. Among law enforcers, however, it is becoming better known for pioneering the use of body cameras on police officers.

Over the past year all 70 of its uniformed officers have been kitted out with the oblong devices, about the size of stubby cigars, and the results have emboldened police forces elsewhere in the US and in the UK to follow suit....

Rialto has also become an example for US forces since a federal judge in New York praised its initiative.

"I think we've opened some eyes in the law enforcement world. We've shown the potential," said Tony Farrar, Rialto's police chief. "It's catching on."

Body-worn cameras are not new. Devon and Cornwall police launched a pilot scheme in 2006 and forces in Strathclyde, Hampshire and the Isle of Wight, among others, have also experimented.

But Rialto's randomised controlled study has seized attention because it offers scientific – and encouraging – findings: after cameras were introduced in February 2012, public complaints against officers plunged 88% compared with the previous 12 months. Officers' use of force fell by 60%.

Not only will this encourage officers to be on their best professional behavior, but there's no doubt that some percentage of claims against officers are bogus. Having video evidence is going to save taxpayers money, protect suspects and protect police officers themselves.

I'm all for it.

 

[Manc Skipper]

It's not just the US. There have been a couple of notable incidents in the UK, and the Met police in particular have a need to regain public trust.

"Scotland Yard announced the world’s biggest trial of body-worn video cameras last night in a bid to change the face of modern policing.
Up to 1,000 high-definition cameras will be used by officers for a year in a £1.6million test of the cutting-edge technology.
Commanders hope the footage will help restore trust in the force and give an ‘objective’ account of the most controversial confrontations... "


Read more: Metropolitan Police announces £1.6m trial of wearing cameras: Commanders hope footage will help restore trust in force | Mail Online
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

 

[CalGun]

Many police officers fear it for getting them in trouble when they make mistakes. Others support it to give them political cover when citizens go wild and they get the blame. IDK what the technology bears for cop cameras. The hard part is when some thing is missed. If the camera misses "that something" which explains it all and is necessary.

In general I'd like it. I'm no longer LE officer but I carried a recorder back in my day to have something. I'd wear a google glass today, have a car dash cam, or record anything I could. I do think we need to weed out more bad, abusive cops.

 

[Spartacus FPV]

I like it.

 

[Hard Truth]

5 years, and we'll have cameras that are tiny and decent quality, fisheye with infinite DOF, AND audio.




And I wager LEOs will be CLAMORING for them, as it protects them from us, more so than vice versa.

I believe the quality and size is already good enough. You are right that cameras help protect officers from false accusations, will help obtain convictions, and discourage attacks on LEOs, but the general trend is for Law Enforcement Unions and organizations to resist all attempts to make officers more accountable.

"The LE2 is the most widely used wearable police camera designed specifically for law enforcement. The LE2 easily clips to a police or security uniform to record the actions of the wearer and those around them. The LE2 uses our proprietary VERIPATROL™ software system to securely store and manage video files. The LE2 camera and VERIPATROL software utilizes a FIPS 140-2 compliant Digital Signature process to prove that the video has not been altered and VidLock security prevents unauthorized access if the camera is lost or stolen. The LE2 camera is available in an IACP compliant green or covert black lens color.

Camera Features

4 hr Recording Time
4 hr Battery Life
4 GB Internal Memory
Date & Time Stamp (GMT)
Digital Signature Security
SD Video Resolution (640×480)
30 Frames Per Second
Field of View: 71 degrees
Color Video & Audio
Waterproof (IPX5)
Dimensions: 3″ ×2″ × .85″
Weight: 3.5oz
Compatible: Windows XP, Vista, 7, 8
Green Design – RoHS & WEEE certified"

Hardware

"NYPD, Union resists order to test body cameras
It's possible that cops can't be forced to wear the extra equipment without it being first negotiated as part of their union contract
The New York Post

NEW YORK — The NYPD won't implement a judge's order to outfit cops with surveillance cameras until it has a gun to its head, sources said yesterday.

And the department has an unaccustomed ally: the police union...."
NYPD, Union resists order to test body cameras

Police union threatens legal action over Metro’s decision to test body-mounted cameras
Metro Police don’t have dashboard cameras, but this month officers will begin testing one type of body-worn camera with hopes of purchasing more of the cameras and putting them into regular use within the next fiscal year....To get the body-mounted cameras in use, however, Metro might have to first defend itself in court. The Las Vegas Police Protective Association is not backing down from its contention such cameras can’t be forced upon officers without first negotiating with the union.

Chris Collins, union president, said the cameras represent a “clear change in working conditions,” as they add new requirements to an officer’s daily routine, including downloading the camera’s data. The cameras, he added, also could impact an officer’s safety. Both factors, he said, mean it is “mandatory” for the department to include the cameras within the scope of its union contract."
Police union threatens legal action over Metro's decision to test body-mounted cameras - Las Vegas Sun News

 

[CalGun]

Here is another question. Anti Orwellians already note how many cameras abound the cities and burbs....so now we make each officer a roving govt eye?

 

[Somerville]

Some cops lie about their actions
Video shows Dallas Police Lied About Shooting Unarmed Mentally Ill Man

Dash Cam Footage Shows Cops Beating A Man For No Reason, He Avoids 5 Years In Jail!

Fort Lauderdale pays arrested man $30,000 when video contradicts cop's report

Some cops don't like being recorded
Chicago Cop Slaps Man’s Camera for Recording her Car, Threatens him with Arrest

Massachusetts Cop Threatens to Smash Camera into Man’s Face

and it's not just in the US
Durham police constable threatens to beat up man and plant cocaine on him, video shows

Gloucestershire police sergeant filmed threatening photographer and saying he would 'make his life hell'


Yeah, cops should be required to wear cameras at all times when on duty. If a camera, for some reason stops working, the cop should be put on desk duty until any problems are sorted out.

 

[Aunt Spiker]

Maggie asked me to start a thread about this. I aim to please.

So, my guess is that, the police unions and the cops would be dead set against this idea as it would hold them more accountable and take a lot of fun out of their work.

What say ye?

Wasn't this the purpose of dash-cams?

 

[Captain America]

Wasn't this the purpose of dash-cams?

I'm sure the purpose was similar. And, I think it was a great move. I think when dash cams were introduced it was very helpful with prosecutions. Even when the one's prosecuted were the police.

Technology has advanced now to where we can protect all party's concerned with micro mini-cams that can record what the officer sees, hears and says. And it's FAR less cumbersome than some of the other gear they require.

The stats say it all. It's very hard to argue against them unless it's a money thang. But I do believe my officers, if I ran the ship, would have top line bullet-proof vests before I bought the cameras, priority-wise.

 

[Captain America]

Note***

I know that only 12 people have voted in this poll at this time, (mash potato vote notwithstanding, :mrgreen: ,) but everybody mark this point in time in Debate Politics history....

Because.........

This is the first time I recall EVERYBODY here agreeing on anything!

I'm waiting for some whacko to chime in.......

5, 4, 3, 2, .......... :doh

 

[Thoreau72]

Just as I and most other drivers faithfully obey the traffic laws when a police car is present, so too will most cops faithfully obey the laws that bind them when they know their actions are being recorded.

When there is no police car present, myself and most other drivers tend to disregard certain traffic laws.

 

[notquiteright]

SW OK is not over burdened with CCTV, in fact we have very few. We do however have dash cams and body mics for many officers. One deputy was fired for turning his off as he approached a car driven by an elderly lady. She complained about his language to the sheriff who when he reviewed the dash cam fired the guy. Turning the mic off when on a traffic stop was against policy. There are many times where the vehicle isn't present, like inside a dwelling during a domestic, out in the woods hunting for an escaped prisoner, or just plain evader- we had a rash of them last summer on the H.E. Bailey.

Now the Union Lawton City Cops are VERY resistant to dash cams, body mics, and i'd imagine vest cams. In our area the LE has the benefit of the doubt to a very high degree, I doubt they would welcome anything that might contradict what they testify to as the actual event.

Still it would be a very good thing for the taxpayer...

 

[Ikari]

Maggie asked me to start a thread about this. I aim to please.

So, my guess is that, the police unions and the cops would be dead set against this idea as it would hold them more accountable and take a lot of fun out of their work.

What say ye?

View attachment 67162924

I think they should and that the video is made available as well. I think almost all police interaction should be recorded such as interviewing suspects and that the recordings are made available to both prosecution and defense.

 

[Hard Truth]

Here is another question. Anti Orwellians already note how many cameras abound the cities and burbs....so now we make each officer a roving govt eye?

We have reached the point where surveillance at work and in public spaces is normal, expected and is considered fully legal, with changes to surviellance legality and standard practices not expected in the foreseeable future. If citizens are under near constant surveillance, then the authorities, especially law enforcement and others with extraordinary power (i.e carries a gun) should be also. Also, people have no reasonable expectation of privacy while they are working, which is not a new development, only the method of surveillance has changed.

 

[longview]

I voted yes, but think some safeguards should be in place to protect the officers.
An officer's actions might be the absolutely correct for a given situation,
but may not present well on a vest camera.
The videos may be public record, but think they should be sequestered until required
by the courts.

 

[AlbqOwl]

Maggie asked me to start a thread about this. I aim to please.

So, my guess is that, the police unions and the cops would be dead set against this idea as it would hold them more accountable and take a lot of fun out of their work.

What say ye?

View attachment 67162924

Required to wear them? No.
Have an option to wear them? Yes.

Who wouldn't like to have a video to show his/her innocence when wrongly accused?
I'm guessing the large majority of police officers would like to have that protection.