Posted on Dec 2, 2014
How does the majority feel about body cameras for police officers nationwide?
14.5K
239
116
10
10
0
I know some areas in the U.S, police departments have already implemented this plan in their daily routines. I wonder if it will in fact improve relations between cops and the communities or will it fail. It's a great idea because the cameras serve for the cops safety and ours as well. There's just a certain way I feel about police policing their own. I feel in many cases that a police officer will back up a fellow police officer no matter what. Maybe a neutral party to monitor these devices? What are your thoughts on this new plan?
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-30290308
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-30290308
Posted in these groups: 
Accountability
Police
Accountability Police
Posted 10 y ago
Responses: 55
2
2
0
I support it. It would offer a first person view of everything going on. As long as the videos aren't edited by corruption we should be good.
(2)
(0)
1
1
0
I agree that the cameras are needed, but not nationwide. Podunk small town America IMO does not have the problems that Urban ares have, plus I am sure the budget for Small town America Law Enforcement agencies could not afford it. I am all for it in in High Crime areas!
(1)
(0)
CPO Jason Meier
I am actually for it across the board. Coming from a small podunk town, they are not exempt from crooked or abusive police. You don't here about the small towns because they are not "news worthy". Though you are correct about the cost but another issue for small towns, the proper oversight to hold the police accountable.
(0)
(0)
1
1
0
It keeps everyone honest. In places where it's been implimented, it's being reported to have reduced incidents of force AND officers noted that they had less confrontations with "problem children." It's amazing how people start to behave when they know they're being recorded.
Obviously, it won't fix everything and I'm sure we'll have plenty of "camera was broken/video stolen by bunny saboteurs" incidents, but it'll help.
Obviously, it won't fix everything and I'm sure we'll have plenty of "camera was broken/video stolen by bunny saboteurs" incidents, but it'll help.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
This is just one step that should be imposed, more cameras in police cars on weapons and when in conflict drones to cover the operation.......
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
I'm all for it, but it doesn't replace the need for citizens to record police interactions from their side either (so long as it's legal in accordance with local laws). Call me paranoid, but I worry that video recorded by police via their body cameras could "accidentally" be misplaced/corrupted/deleted/what-have-you if said video happened to be evidence of police misconduct.
Regardless, putting body cameras on police is a good step in the right direction IMO.
Regardless, putting body cameras on police is a good step in the right direction IMO.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
If we can go into combat with GoPros on for trainings and accountability purposes, LEO's should go and be fully accounted for in their actions. They serve the people just as we do, they should not seek special treatment from the law when they abuse their status. To the LEO's in the group who I am sure are going to say all cops are not bad, that is great, show the good things you do on camera so others are able to learn from the experience. The bad cops should not be left unaccounted for any longer.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
I don't see a downside to it. I have had numerous situations over the years where I wish my Military Police men and women, as well as my para-military security police officers had been outfitted with body-cams.
I have been known to have my folks carry micro-cassette recorders, which have come in handy, on numerous occasions, to get to the truth about an incident (he said/she said).
I have been known to have my folks carry micro-cassette recorders, which have come in handy, on numerous occasions, to get to the truth about an incident (he said/she said).
(1)
(0)
LTC Paul Heinlein
COL Jean (John) F. B.,
Sir, I'm a big fan of cameras for law enforcement and I'm a proponent for them. But, there are limitations.
1. Current Body Cameras are limited in how long they can run and storage capacity, which means they have to be turned on by the officer when needed. Sometimes when they are needed the incident goes down so fast, the officer either does not have the time to turn it on or they forget in the moment because they are under extreme duress. People would have to accept that not everything is going to be caught on film and or audio, and it does not mean the officer is necessarily trying to hide something.
2. Body Cameras, based on type and location on the body are not going to see and hear everything the officer does. Also the camera may pickup something on video/audio that the officer does not see or hear. So people need to understand that. Just because it is or is not on film/ audio, does not mean it was/ was not what was seen/ heard by the officer (yes, I know this is a very confusing sentence).
3. Storage of this data is also a huge issue…a couple hours of HD video is a lot of Gigs multiple that by X amount of officers on X amount of shifts by X amount of days; you can start seeing the problem related to long term storage of video, etc… Look what happened with the IRS, they had a automation budget in the 100’s of millions of dollars and they could not even account for some emails!
 None of these are war stoppers, just things that need to be taken in account when these cameras go into full use.
Sir, I'm a big fan of cameras for law enforcement and I'm a proponent for them. But, there are limitations.
1. Current Body Cameras are limited in how long they can run and storage capacity, which means they have to be turned on by the officer when needed. Sometimes when they are needed the incident goes down so fast, the officer either does not have the time to turn it on or they forget in the moment because they are under extreme duress. People would have to accept that not everything is going to be caught on film and or audio, and it does not mean the officer is necessarily trying to hide something.
2. Body Cameras, based on type and location on the body are not going to see and hear everything the officer does. Also the camera may pickup something on video/audio that the officer does not see or hear. So people need to understand that. Just because it is or is not on film/ audio, does not mean it was/ was not what was seen/ heard by the officer (yes, I know this is a very confusing sentence).
3. Storage of this data is also a huge issue…a couple hours of HD video is a lot of Gigs multiple that by X amount of officers on X amount of shifts by X amount of days; you can start seeing the problem related to long term storage of video, etc… Look what happened with the IRS, they had a automation budget in the 100’s of millions of dollars and they could not even account for some emails!
 None of these are war stoppers, just things that need to be taken in account when these cameras go into full use.
(1)
(0)
COL Jean (John) F. B.
LTC Paul Heinlein
Paul, I agree and understand. However, having one, even with the limitations, is better than not having one, in my opinion.
Paul, I agree and understand. However, having one, even with the limitations, is better than not having one, in my opinion.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
I feel like this would be a great step. It would make it easy to ID cops who are abusing their power, but it would also make instances like Officer Wilson shooting Michael Brown much more black-and-white, rather than depending on unreliable witnesses.
(1)
(0)
Suspended Profile
I think it is a good idea just as having dash cams. For the protection of everyone involved.
1
1
0
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google