Personal Cameras on each unit?

[Shimus]

I was just reading up on some articles here (Denver police chief wants to outfit 800 units with cameras) I feel this a very SMART idea. This would give a completely neutral and unbiased stand point. If instead of Dash-cams, you could equip on a per-unit basis and it would deliver up-to-date, on-the-spot information about the entire situation. A dash-board cam is only good for fixated views. You can't hear the processes outside the car too. I'm not saying take dash-cams - just add a single camera to each unit you have on the force. There could even be government applications for this too for their military units in the field.

This has the chance to eliminate the "He said, She said" part of law-enforcement. It would give a nice view to see how shady some people actually are up close when cops get out of their cars to go investigate. Sure, this leaves room for tampering but with all video evidence tampering abounds. But that happens no matter where the video evidence.

So, thoughts? Questions? Comments? Concerns? All four? Explain!

 

[Kittyworker]

There is a privacy issue here. The police are not allowed to film people in their own homes without a warrant or those peoples permission. Lets say a unit responds to a domestic disturbance call and is wearing one of these cameras. They can not legally enter the residence without first getting a warrant, disabling the camera, or getting the peoples permission to enter WITH the camera. I have no problem with units wearing one who are responding to calls in a public place though as once someone is out in public they have no Expectation of Privacy.

 

[jperd21]

Though I agree there are privacy issues related to this, I feel that the benefits outweigh the negative aspects. A lot of officers are under fire recently because of incidents like in Missouri, and I feel that this would better protect both officers and civilians.
A problem that has been plaguing the Tennessee area lately is Drug Task Force officers harassing motorists to allow searches, and even false-alerting their dogs. A camera on the officer could protect both parties in a case like this. The video (dash-cam) I saw recently where the officer obviously alerted the dog, even after the dog stuck his head in the passenger side window and didn't smell a thing. The task force then impounded the vehicle and seized the persons money. And the "suspect" was an out of state police office none the less. He immediately saw the rouse for what it was and brought it to the attention of the media. Personal cameras would avoid all this trouble because the facts are on tape.

 

[Shimus]

Thanks for all your responses. It's nice to know some people feel the same way as I do. However the breach of privacy issues that you may encounter, I believe this would be for the whole a benefit. This would stop all these common police brutality issues and the he-said she-said of it all. Evidence doesn't lie when it's mounted to a shoulder. You could even tell if the policeman/woman in question were stepping out of line. But this is a long way off due to current laws.

I feel it's a step in the right direction, though.

 

[tanker]

It is beneficial for the cops, and it is beneficial for the general public. That way when there are false accusations flying around the cameras can be used for evidence. There are a few bad cops, and a lot of the time they get away with thier actions, because it is the victim's word against the cops word. Bad cops make good cops who are actually doing their job look bad.

 

[Shimus]

Most people may think this akin to an attack on their personal privacy and issues, or the act of "Big Brother" - but if we can listen and all that for sleeper cells, and the government can already track our phones and everything, I doubt this would be outside the scope of achieve-ability. You'd need a high-end backer to push this through the government, however. People would protest. Whine about invasion issues.

But this is the right way, or should be. This way cops could be recorded in tow, and it would mean better upholding of the laws - for citizens and the policeforce alike.

 

[timelord731]

It's a nice idea, but there is no way it will be any kind of cost efficient.

 

[Shimus]

It's a nice idea, but there is no way it will be any kind of cost efficient.

That is a valid point, which is why I made another thread about cops being able to apply for grants for equipment. You should check it out; I don't believe cops to be any different when asking for money then a school kid for college, or for a surgery you need. People ask for money for everything these days, so funding wouldn't be anything different.

 

[timelord731]

It's a nice idea, but there is no way it will be any kind of cost efficient.

 

[Shimus]

You can't just say that over and over, it just makes you seem like you copy pasted it for another easy point score. We like intelligent conversations here, not just "No way cost efficient" twice over when I give a legitimate reasoning and point you to a second post.

 

[OMGnoWAY]

As I've heard it discussed, the officer WOULD have the power to switch his camera on and off depending on the situation. I believe there was talk of "minimum hours" of it being on required, but other than that they are pretty much free to turn it on and off at will. I think having the cameras will help police many times, but if their camera is off when something controversial happens the public will be angered that "turning the camera off" won't be considered evidence of it being the officer's fault.

Overall though, I think the cameras will be a positive thing. People will feel like the don't need to fear the police because they're being taped and maybe they will seek them out when they need help more often.

 

[Shimus]

If there's a fear of being taped it's because generally you're doing something to warrant BEING taped. I'm just saying the average person doesn't walk down the street paranoid that cops and other places are filming them, either. We just casually stroll on with life, and the people who get sketched out would easy to be spotted.

 

[OMGnoWAY]

If there's a fear of being taped it's because generally you're doing something to warrant BEING taped. I'm just saying the average person doesn't walk down the street paranoid that cops and other places are filming them, either. We just casually stroll on with life, and the people who get sketched out would easy to be spotted.

Well I think walking down the street is one thing, you're in public. But the fear is about when cops respond to calls within people's houses. We ALL do things in our houses we wouldn't want video taped

God, and just imagine, what if someone figures out how to hack wherever these videos are stored? Imagine if a cop saw your naked mom when he busted in, and then next thing you know your naked mom is online being made fun of. Or imagine you're running for office and then all the sudden someone leaks video of your old college apartment that has a bong (for MEDICAL marijuana) in the background. That's not only a privacy violation that's a HIPAA violation there. The whole world has no right to know about your medications.

I could come up with more examples but you get the point, we ALL wouldn't want government surveillance in our homes 24/7 and we ALL would be subject to government surveillance in our homes at any given time if it came to be that they could keep their cameras on. I mean, every year THOUSANDS of warrants get mis-written and innocent people get barged in on.

 

[Laura Greenbrier]

There is a privacy issue here. The police are not allowed to film people in their own homes without a warrant or those peoples permission. Lets say a unit responds to a domestic disturbance call and is wearing one of these cameras. They can not legally enter the residence without first getting a warrant, disabling the camera, or getting the peoples permission to enter WITH the camera. I have no problem with units wearing one who are responding to calls in a public place though as once someone is out in public they have no Expectation of Privacy.

This is a good observation and could be a troublesome issue if the ongoing crime changes venue. As a suspected shooter races from the sidewalk to enter his or her home, the officer would be inconvenienced to have to stop, disable the camera, and so forth. Failure to disable the camera in a private setting, in addition, could conceivably lead to cripplingly expensive lawsuits. The technology is still new. As officers become familiar with individual cameras, I feel the overall benefit outweighs any errors made during their use.

 

[Shimus]

I just think it would solve all the necessary bull that they have to deal with in the case of "He said, She said." it's easy to just pull up solid evidence of wrongdoing.

 

[PrideKidd]

Shimus you are everywhere!

I agree with you though it would be SMART to have these cameras, that way the he-said/she-said stuff is cut out and only the raw footage can capture it all without choosing sides. As far as privacy is concerned, I would rather be safe than sorry!

 

[Profit5500]

I was just reading up on some articles here (Denver police chief wants to outfit 800 units with cameras) I feel this a very SMART idea. This would give a completely neutral and unbiased stand point. If instead of Dash-cams, you could equip on a per-unit basis and it would deliver up-to-date, on-the-spot information about the entire situation. A dash-board cam is only good for fixated views. You can't hear the processes outside the car too. I'm not saying take dash-cams - just add a single camera to each unit you have on the force. There could even be government applications for this too for their military units in the field.

This has the chance to eliminate the "He said, She said" part of law-enforcement. It would give a nice view to see how shady some people actually are up close when cops get out of their cars to go investigate. Sure, this leaves room for tampering but with all video evidence tampering abounds. But that happens no matter where the video evidence.

So, thoughts? Questions? Comments? Concerns? All four? Explain!

If the police started having body cameras then there would be more restraint on the cops end. Now the police officers would have to think twice about what they do.

 

[Shimus]

That's what I hoped for. It's more to help those type of situations because Cops can oftentimes overstep their true means of authority.

 

[jesuslover0314]

I believe this would be a great idea because some people try to accuse cops of doing wrong things when they really don't. The camera's would help prove to the people that are accusing the cop that they are wrong. It would help a lot!