3
3
0
The rise in police shootings over the last few years has caused many to call for increased accountability of police officers. A recent study shows that only 25% of police departments use body cams. Because they are a relatively new idea there is very little research that proves body cams are actually effective at curbing police violence and they can be expensive to implement.
The ACLU backs the expansion of body cams, but also note they could become tools for the invasion of privacy. "For the ACLU, the challenge of on-officer cameras is the tension between their potential to invade privacy and their strong benefit in promoting police accountability." They recommend the use of body cams with stringent policies as to what footage would be stored and what would be deleted.
Should body cams be implemented by all police departments, some departments, or none at all? Are they useful tools to increase transparency and protect both officers and citizens? Is the benefit of a body cam worth the investment?
https://www.aclu.org/police-body-mounted-cameras-right-policies-place-win-all
The ACLU backs the expansion of body cams, but also note they could become tools for the invasion of privacy. "For the ACLU, the challenge of on-officer cameras is the tension between their potential to invade privacy and their strong benefit in promoting police accountability." They recommend the use of body cams with stringent policies as to what footage would be stored and what would be deleted.
Should body cams be implemented by all police departments, some departments, or none at all? Are they useful tools to increase transparency and protect both officers and citizens? Is the benefit of a body cam worth the investment?
https://www.aclu.org/police-body-mounted-cameras-right-policies-place-win-all
Police
Privacy
Accountability
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 11
3
3
0
Personally, I think as "Public Servants" I think the interactions should be recorded for the benefit of Public Record. Personal Accounts are notoriously unreliable, but cameras don't lie.
Of course there are logistical concerns with implementing it on a wide scale. There are also financial concerns with paying out MILLIONS of dollars on lawsuits. Body cameras have been shown to reduce lawsuits because they calm reactions on both sides.
As for the Privacy issue. When acting as a Public Agent, there is no expectation of Privacy. The Agents are walking around in Public and recording what they could normally see. This is not the same as a "surveillance state" this is documentation of what a sworn officer would normally see anyways. Just like dash cams.
As for whether it should be a State/Local/Federal issue. Of course it should be decided at the lowest level, however... that doesn't mean it shouldn't be done everywhere. Not everywhere needs it immediately, but everywhere needs it eventually. Locales that have huge issues should invest in the tech first, so they can reduce their liability (by being sued), and eventually everyone will catch up.
From an administrative standpoint, the State & Fed can "coordinate" and "testbed" the best way to protect and store the information.
Of course there are logistical concerns with implementing it on a wide scale. There are also financial concerns with paying out MILLIONS of dollars on lawsuits. Body cameras have been shown to reduce lawsuits because they calm reactions on both sides.
As for the Privacy issue. When acting as a Public Agent, there is no expectation of Privacy. The Agents are walking around in Public and recording what they could normally see. This is not the same as a "surveillance state" this is documentation of what a sworn officer would normally see anyways. Just like dash cams.
As for whether it should be a State/Local/Federal issue. Of course it should be decided at the lowest level, however... that doesn't mean it shouldn't be done everywhere. Not everywhere needs it immediately, but everywhere needs it eventually. Locales that have huge issues should invest in the tech first, so they can reduce their liability (by being sued), and eventually everyone will catch up.
From an administrative standpoint, the State & Fed can "coordinate" and "testbed" the best way to protect and store the information.
(3)
(0)
PFC Michael Korach
The privacy Concerns are not an issue for the officers its the citizen that all of a sudden is concerned about it . the issue that comes up is allowing the officers to review the video at will in order to complete reports and to give statements. which is only a problem for defense attorneys since the can not pick apart officers written statements any more since they often are confirmed by the video. The other issue is that the camera systems do not record the complete event some of these systems do have gaps in the video based on the number of frames they record at. The video's do a decent job of recording but are not the be all end all documentation of the event. Now the privacy issues are a concern for the public once officers enter their home which again is only an issue for the defense attorneys since every thing the citizen says and does is recorded and often that prevents false claims and shows what idiot's the civilian is at the time of the incident. The reality is that 99% of officers do an excellent job and the subjects they come in contact with at least 50% of the time often do not want law enforcement presence to begin with. The problem of law enforcement isn't corruption or lack of training it is the public's feeling of entitlement and lack of personal accountability for their actions,words and deeds .
(0)
(0)
CPT Lawrence Cable
PFC Michael Korach - That seems to be direction of the objection to Body Cams, that they allow hard evidence on the subject involved and as of right now, I don't know of any officer that has been convicted of any excessive force because of it. The trend seems to be the same as the original resistance to the dash cams, which are now seen as a vital part of evidence collection. I think it may end up being the officers best friend in the present urban environment.
(1)
(0)
PFC Michael Korach
officers generally have no issue with the camera its the administration that fails to provide the proper policy and SOP for the systems that becomes an issue. Then their is the public's belief that these systems are fool proof and have a 360 view of the event. once people find that the systems have limits and are not the be all end all to transparency and that they are a tool for documentation from the POV of the officer then they may get a better understanding of the limited value of the system. Like any new piece of equipment it will require fine tuning of both use and policy and that requires time. Which often means failures along the way.
(0)
(0)
SP5 Dennis Dorsey
PFC Michael Korach - Chicago just through out 12 convictions due to the recording of an officer planting drugs on them, so yes, it is a good thing.
(0)
(0)
3
3
0
1
1
0
Yes as many police abuse cases were only brought to light by third party video filming.
(1)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google