The Time has Come...Every Cop in America Must Wear a Camera

I for one think it is a superb idea. It not only protects citizens but it protects policemen also from unjust accusations.

That said, the police should also welcome anyone video taping their actions. When they and the TSA try and stop people from video taping it appears as if they have something to hide.

Also, when people say it violates the privacy of the perpetrator, stop and think. A person can not go out in public at any time of day or night without being on camera, on average every 150 feet (ATM's have cameras/all businesses have lots of cameras inside and outside the store/nearly every stoplight has a camera). There is no right to privacy of your image once you step out of your front door in the USA and this will not go away.

Really sad that it's come to this. I do agree with it, even though I dislike the privacy issues attached but what else can be done? Studies show that the cameras do help thwart bad behavior. Maybe then we can get to the root of the problem also, without ignoring it and just slapping on cameras? It seems the way officers are being trained, a possible insight cause for all of this, now days leaves much to be desired in the way of safety for citizens.

Yeah, too bad a huge celebrity backed fund raising cause can't raise money for awareness about this. We do have ourselves, to say spread awareness through the net-petitions, memes, selfies?, a water bucket type idea to challenge people with? and that's where the answer may be. Though, as a start at least, because the fund raising awareness causes are not always full proof in the long run, unless really large, I'd guess.

originally posted by: whyamIhere
a reply to: ObjectZero

The problem is when you deal with Police it could be the worst moment of your life.

Nobody wants to see that moment on Youtube.

There are some real Privacy concerns.

I get what you're saying however, Police have no private moments when they're on the clock and on duty. Neither does the person who's having contact with a LEO.

Sure, if they're at lunch or using the bathroom, turn it off for a limited amount of time. Otherwise, LIGHTS, CAMERA...ACTION!!!!

Just my opinion though

Sounds like more PD's need to follow what Ft. Worth has been doing down here.

www.wfaa.com...

FORT WORTH -- The Fort Worth Police Department is putting 400 new body cameras on the streets.

'We now have more cameras deployed than any other law enforcement agency in the U.S.,' said FWPD Police Chief Jeff Halstead.

Fort Worth is considered such a leader in the trend that it has trained seven other departments in the use of body cams. Cops from Canada and Scotland come to town in the next few weeks.

a reply to: buni11687

It's working where they use them.

I think the presence of a camera changes people.

Also, in this anti-cop environment it could protect an Innocent Cop.

Most Cops are great people just doing their job.

It only takes one bad one.

CCTV does not work in the US we're too spread apart in many areas. The areas that we're not does have CCTV in most locations and it's been used to help in solving crimes, but they are also high crime areas as well. Another reason CCTV dose not work here is because they are a static system, most are pointed in the wrong direction during a crime and we only get a small clip of what happened.

Placing them on the police will put the cameras right in the action and pointed in the direction they should be at all times. Also a lot of the CCTV footage is privet owned camera from retail stores this means the footage can be lost. A lot of use are not just talking about slapping a camera on a cop and calling it a day. We're talking about a whole system with rules, punishments and back up systems to support it.

No police really has a reason to disapprove the system, it's a blind system only there to record what has happened so the legal system can move along faster. It's also there to help curve the media spinning, we get real story right in front of us over the bits and piece they let out to feed the hype.

The only groups that have to worry over a system like this would be criminals and the media.

Although I get the idea I think its absolutely asinine. How about we just screen police officers better? Or end the war on drugs? Either of those would do about as much good as those cameras.

My fear, you know, living in a bonafide police state, is in the end those cameras will be used against us and NOT the police.

Yes, boys and girls, beg for more. That's why betting against humanity is so profitable. What's the name of the camera company?

originally posted by: Rosinitiate
Although I get the idea I think its absolutely asinine. How about we just screen police officers better? Or end the war on drugs? Either of those would do about as much good as those cameras.

My fear, you know, living in a bonafide police state, is in the end those cameras will be used against us and NOT the police.

Yes, boys and girls, beg for more. That's why betting against humanity is so profitable. What's the name of the camera company?

This why we're talking about a whole system of rules for them. Not just put a camera on it and call it a day. It has to be made clear that the video taken can be used by other besides police, and that rules needs to be set in stone and made 100% clear to all.

Other wise yes it won't help much. They would happen to miss an upload on a day they were near a large case.

Also should be noted that body camera should only be one camera, they should also mount a camera on their weapon. They can turn their head and look a different direction, a flew in the body mounted cameras. A camera on the weapon would make sure a key moment is recorded. They have to point their weapon in the directions they're looking to use it and that's the direction we want to see anyways.

Body camera are there to record key moments and back up a story. A CCTV is just there to record, if we place CCTV all over we're being recorded at all times not matter what. If it's placed on the police we're only recording when the police are there and that's what most of us want to record.

Also this might stop a lot of the police from beating people up for recording them. If they're already being recorded they have no reason to get upset at them.

a reply to: ObjectZero

Right and I'm sure it will work nicely......at first. Slowly, you begin hearing that "oh, the file was corrupted" and eventually some stupid false flag will happen justifying the need to keep the TS for "National Security". No thanks.

If you want this to work, every man, woman and child needs one of these. Provided free by the government to protect their citizens from potentially corrupt cops, certainly not the other way around.

You know the saying; "Fool me once....."

a reply to: whyamIhere

Im 100% OK with the idea that cops should wear cameras. It makes the whole acting of the police more carefully, and also it supports the officers in investigations.

Totally thumbs up!

a reply to: Rosinitiate

And that is why back-up are made and police are made to make sure their camera is working as it should or they are cut from the force.

As I said be for there should be data back-up each upload they make and their duty hours should be marked by the recording data, no usable upload means no pay and a chance to lose their job. The data should be back-up in three or more location unreachable in at least two location. The two back-ups should not be able to have data removed from them and remove data from them as blind times stamps. A file ages 6 or more years are removed. To pull data from the back ups someone has to go in person to the back-up only data in none out by network connection. Only files that fit the needs are passed to the back-ups and are screened by the first server. If it does not past the first server the file is flagged and the officer is questioned.

a reply to: ObjectZero

I support it.

Let's get it done.

...enjoy your police being unable to use 'sensible discretion' anymore.
So many US citizens cry "UK tyranny!" over CCTV, but we are not the nation begging for cop-cameras.
I am unaware of any calls for UK cops to have body cameras, and I do not want them myself because I have had 'blind eyes' turned by friendly cops many many times in the UK. Cop-cams will be the kiss of death to that, even if the cop wants to be reasonable.

Cries of Crown subjects/peasants/slaves/etc by US members are almost amusing now, if it wasn't so tragic that while you appear to have horrible cops in your country, you are all begging for a camera that will prevent friendly cops from 'turning a blind eye' when it is probably the most sensible public order option. Enforcement of the law will be the priority when they are all cam'd up.
Who is really oppressed? I genuinely wonder.

Are UK citizens more 'free' than people in the US?

I would also like to add that if an officer messed with/turns off a wearable camera, he should be terminated no questions asked.

a reply to: MystikMushroom
...that is the same situation with anyone messing with CCTV in the UK, I assume you mean fired and prosecuted when you say 'terminated' ?
There are no calls for cop-cams in the UK because our cops don't generally abuse us and because cameras will tie the hands of a friendly cop to chase a conviction rather than verbally warn and say goodbye.
You all seem to be chasing a loss of freedom with cop-cams while the UK does not, for the reasons I explained with cops having the leeway to let someone go instead of being forced to arrest because 'the camera saw it'. That is interesting.

originally posted by: MystikMushroom
I would also like to add that if an officer messed with/turns off a wearable camera, he should be terminated no questions asked.

They already caught some LA Cops tampering with there cameras.

It would sure take the fun out of being a Cop.

We just can't have the perception our Cops are just waiting to kill a kid of color.

Unfortunately, many people here have that perception.

a reply to: whyamIhere
Wow, sad state of affairs when 'the land of the free' chooses cop-cams and UK citizens don't.
Cop-cams will stop decent cops making decent decisions when they know the camera saw that the law would've said "arrest".
...again I wonder which nation is 'free?'.

Are UK citizens more 'free' than people in the US?

a reply to: whyamIhere

Easy solution for them tampering with the cameras would be for the cameras to be shard by the department. At random time their camera is traded out for a new one. The old one checked and sent to a different person. If the camera has been found to be tampered with or damage in anyway that wasn't reported right away. All videos taken by that officer become open to the media and public.

Another nice thing about camera good cops would have less to fear from the public and corruption in the department. They would no long have to fear for calling out another officers miss deeds. It would be on camera they would no longer be the stool pigeon they would just happen to be the guy recording, someone dumb enough to commit a crime on camera. Also they're less likely to try and corrupt another since it can traced back to them.

Just about all of us have had that one boss that pulls you aside to ask you to do something and you know the only reason they do so is because what they're asking for breaks some rule and they don't want it linked to them.

You don't need elaborate systems of maintenance for the cameras. All you have to do is tell the courts that the situation is more likely to be in the citizens favor if the police aren't even competent enough to maintain their equipment that's meant to prove guilt. If they can't properly care for that equipment how can we have any faith in their professional ability to judge a situation?

a reply to: whyamIhere

Good!!
Too many police officers out there take advantage of the fact that they "uphold the law" by treating citizens like they're garbage below them.

It's about time people get an eyeful of how the police really are and I believe we will be seeing a lot of s# go down with these cameras.