I've seen some body cam footage which has given me a lot of respect for what officers do. I know I couldn't do it. I think it can be a useful tool, but it still has some major flaws that cannot be overlooked. First, an officer can choose whether or not or when to turn on this footage so if something happened prior to an incident, how can you verify that. It's still their word against your own. Second, the footage can be distorted by where the camera is placed, head or chest or by the movement of the wearer, so you still may not get an accurate visual portrayal of what happened at a scene. Third, the body cam footage is often not available to the public and is at the discretion of the police department involved as to whether they will release it and even then, a lot of details may be obscured like a redacted document not allowing for an accurate understanding from either end, on what happened during an incident.
Largely though, I think the more evidence you can provide either on the side of the police or those on a scene can be helpful. There are police that lie and there are criminals that lie, and as always it's up to evidence, lawyers, trials, witnesses to sort it all out and hopefully prosecute the right people in the name of justice.
Mostly accurate. However bodycams are now rolling out that cannot be shut off by the officer. The departments in my county and surrounding counties have bodycams that can only be messed with from the precinct and there are strict procedures for when Sergeants and higher can shut them off or remove footage. Any officer below Sergeant in these departments have no way to cut the feed. If these cameras do lose feed (typically due to damage while dealing with a suspect), the Sergeant will typically make a personal appearance to the scene and start an investigation right then and there into why the feed cut off.
@libsaretards The thing is right now, this isn't nationwide. Largely body cam regulations are left to specific departments, counties, cities, etc. as evidenced by the fact many departments do not have them and have no current plans of getting them.
Most things in law enforcement are local. Only 10% of the entirety of laws in the U. S. are federal/handled at federal level.
They should always be worn and on.
There should be stiff fines, unpaid suspensions, and discipline if they're turned off for any reason other than maintenance after the cop has clocked off, or if they need to go to the bathroom during their shift.
The recordings of incidents should be able to be viewed by the public after they're censored for identity protection reasons (e. g. blur out faces of the public).
Not only does it protect the public, it also protects the officers.
No, they should not always be on.
If by “on” you mean actively recording.
Most models passively record what is in front of them, but none of it gets saved until the officer initiatives the active record button. Once this is activated, then, all will be actually recorded and saved, as well as the 30 seconds to a minute before the officer pressed the button.
Having it always on is not only a logistical issue but a privacy concern one.
There’s no need for it to be always on when it doesn’t have to be on.
A well-functioning police body camera is an HONEST Cop's best friend.
Many minority subcultures DO NOT WANT an unblinking 'witness' to
the reality of street culture interaction. That 'poor boy who lubs his Mama' and
sings in dah Sunday choir is the SAME boy checking parked cars doors if unlocked and
often making pocket change dealing 'dime bags' and runnin numbers in the hood.
And he ain't smart enough to 'game' an honest cop that he's whom his legal counsel
will try to portray him as... to the eventual jury.
I speak to you as BOTH a former inner city ghetto kid AND a retired Cop and
Federal Firearms Dealer. THERE ARE FEDERAL STATUTES regarding penalties
for firearms possession by MINORS and the NEGLIGENT owners where those
guns CAME from. MOST States Attorneys DON'T CHARGE THEM!
They're used as a 'plea bargain' tool to expedite prosecution through the
overburdened system and bolster 'conviction' statistics of lawyers
with political aspirations.
I am a big fan of them, I really do not put much trust in these bystanders that whip out their cell phones and start recording with no prior context to the incident.
I have had this happen to me as a citizen, had a guy jump out of his car at a stop light yelling and screaming, until I confronted him... he whips out his cell phone and his whole demeanor changed. He went form antagonist to victim in a blink of a eye.
You have these people whipping out cell phones, then talking about how the police are acting... but what they fail to capture is the crime that was just committed and why the police are there to begin with. Police are gas lite all the time by these folks, and they have to be 100% right all the time and these body cams are great. It keeps people honest, and it gives evidence from the other point of view.
Opinion
58Opinion
u I suspect that, in most instances, they will prove that law enforcement do their jobs appropriately. However, those cases don't get publicized. If they prove that an officer did something wrong, that will be front page news!
Definitely
Oh, this is a can of worms that once opened you can never get them back inside. I have seen police videos help cops and I have seen police videos PUT THEM IN JAIL!
https://www.youtube.com/embed/C-Ok5KsdonYI am a STRONG supporter of police cams. These cams should NOT be controlled by the officer and should activate when the car's emergency lights are activated. The footage should be downloaded into a safe server and available with some common sense redactions to FOIA requests. I have seen a lot of police videos where the cop self mutes. This is WRONG! Allow the supervisors to decide this later! I'm not anti-cop and I am not a defund the cop person. However, I am 100%, an anti-bad cop person! I was victimized by an Ohio Deputy Sheriff close to 25 years ago. To this day I wish I had that entire debacle on video. I DID NOTHING WRONG!
m of course... because in the cases in which they have abused their duty, the can opt to not wear them, they can opt to turn them off... they can take the batteries out or claim they died... and they also can claim that the recordings just failed, were corrupted or they are just gone, or they can just seal then with an order written by themselves
There’s policy that address the use, abuse, and consequences all relating to the operation of BWCs.
So, it is not as simple as “they can opt to not wear them” or “they can opt to turn them off.”
oh right... because people have never ever violated protocol before... not once
seriously, are you really this naive or are you just pretending to be naive
Laws, policy, regulations, etc.
Are you saying these things should not exist because a small minority disobey or go against them?
Of course there are consequences to disobeying established rules.
you are the one making that claim... not me
the question is not whether or not law should exist, which is an absurd proposition in the first place
my observation was one that has been pointed out before... not something I came up with
I’m saying there is policy around BWCs and there are consequences for going against this policy.
Are there going to be people that go against this policy? Yes
Are they going to face the consequences? Some will, some won’t. I would think the majority would.
and you would be wrong... because cops have one of the most powerful unions in this country, and they will always aim to protect the vast majority of the officers that have done wrong
every once in a while they throw one of their own under the bus though
but now you are re-directing this topic into something else
so lets go back a bit, to the original point... most police departments can give their cops full discretion as to whether or not they will turn their cameras on or off... also they have discretion to turn off their cameras for different reasons, if they see it fit or convenient
so when you say that there are laws that would make them record their problematic interactions and engagement, this is also false and you are wrong about it
so your perspective on this matter is also twisted... if you think that body cameras are somewhat proof that cops are doing a better job than not, this is just something easy to manipulate because the bad cops are in control of the cameras most of the time
and even when the cameras record something problematic... police can still restrict the access to such evidence... even as much as 24 hours per every five minutes of filmed evidence, police will rarely or never ever release footage that has not been extensively reviewed by them, and also edited/altered by them
I’m not convinced you are an expert on police unions and what exactly goes on within them to say what you just said.
Police body cams allow insight into what officers deal with, as well as holding them accountable to doing the right thing.
There are rules and regulations regarding the use/misuse of BWCs. Also, strict personnel who can access footage, as well as well when they can use it, whom to show it to, etc.
Keep in mind, there’s a ton of footage that is put into storage that is not of significant evidentiary value.
It is an issue of finances and logistics keeping BWCs efficiently running and doing what they are supposed to.
being an expert on police unions... that is another claim I never made, that is just another argument you made up, in order to redirect the topic, and you do not need to be an expert about it, you just need to be informed from the right sources on these matters
and yes, all of these obstacles and technicalities with the logistics will do play in favor of the police first
all you have to consider is this... 100% of the times, the accused of wrongdoing will be 100% in control of the evidence... till the accused of wrongdoing decides others can take a look at it, and with the chance of having manipulated it
if you think this is a fair representation, well... that is just you, being you
You just said “will always aim to protect the vast majority of the officers that have done wrong.”
So, you know every single case police unions have been apart of? Are you an expert of what police unions do?
You also have said “you just need to be informed from the right sources on these matters.”
I’m curious what these “right sources” are.
A law enforcement agency may have the footage, but that doesn’t mean anyone can edit or tamper with it.
Again, there is policy as to who can have access to footage, when they can have access to it, etc.
so that is the best argument you have...
my perspective as a non-expert has to be wrong because I am no expert
but your perspective as a non-expert is accurate because, why... because it is yours and it fits your narrative
what exactly is the point that you're trying to make here... other than ignoring the facts that do not favour your perception, of course
The claims you’ve made make it seem like you’re an expert.
I’m challenging those claims.
This is all I am doing. I’m not saying you can’t know what you’re talking about, rather, if you’re not expert on this topic then why do you feel the need to make claims that suggest that you’re an expert on police unions?
You literally just said, I quote “will always aim to protect the vast majority of the officers that have done wrong.”
I’ve already made my point about how I feel about BWCs.
I’m taking my time to reasonably explain to you what I feel like you’re having some confusion on.
my simple claims are common knowledge for anyone informed...
now, by the level of ignorance and as gullible as you can, or as naive as you pretend to be, this can be seen as "expertise"
that would be a mistake from your part, not a claim that I've done
you talk about how you feel... which is biased of course
and I am merely pointing out an observation, an observation made and documented by many others
What you just said is not “common knowledge for anyone informed.”
Just because you say I’m ignorant or gullible doesn’t mean you’re right.
The line of dialogue present here proves you wrong in my opinion.
You are resorting to name calling and becoming hostile towards me, while I am calmly and reasonably proving you wrong and criticizing what you’ve written.
"I am right because in my opinion I agree with myself"
that's inspiring... lol
Simplifying what I’ve said, plus contorting it to fit your ulterior motives still does not make you right unfortunately
the sad part here is that you make it about being right or wrong... which is ultimately not the case
it is about the perception due to perspective, if you are not willing to see the other... then you are just blinding yourself
but as usual, you are too insecure and deluded to know better than that
Alright.
Well, libtards wanted them, because of all the horrible racism from cops, but now that the cameras are largely showing the opposite is true, of course they are complaining about it. Me, being a normal person, am happy with the body cams. Normal people think we should see the truth and not all the sensored bulls...
They are useful and at this point, required. however, the media of them needs counter balanced somehow. George floyd example... wasblown into a race issue but when one looks at the history, others were killed similar way of different color and nationality. It's a "how do yo police issue", not necessarily race. The media loves to blow emotional issues sky high, and that is a pain those who are victimized by the media messaging.
I like it, because it gives us a look in the day of the police officer what stressful situations they have to be in. Some things might be physical, arrests but others might just be quarrels I think that can be exhausting on the mind, and it's their job to be potentially exposed to that and get into people's business. I respect em! DONUTS TO THEM
We needed police body cameras 20-50 years ago when police corruption was actually real and widespread. Having them in 2020 just works against all the criminals trying to claim police corruption, which is why the overwhelming majority of police officers support wearing body cameras.
What you just said can apply to anything.
Would it have been better to have the medicines today 20-50 years ago? Yes
It is not always easy to figure out what is needed until mistakes are made. Also, technological, financial, legal, and logistical barriers can exist
I'm all for body cams. I am very pro police. If an officer does the right thing there is nothing to fear. I would prefer a dashcam and bodycam to protect myself from frivolous lawsuits. People think qualified immunity is an absolute protection for law enforcement. That is not true. Qualified immunity only protects officer acting within the law and department policy. Also a bodycam might pick up evidence I missed during the arrest.
I think they're a wonderful thing. They help both the public and the good officers. There really have to be pre-emptive checks to make sure that they're not turned off or "corrupted" regularly by particular officers, not just when there's a complaint made against them or they've shot someone.
I think they protect officers from false allegations and protect the public by serving as a deterrent to police misconduct. I don’t really see a downside other than cost.
Cost and all sorts of other logistics issues.
The using of BWCs should be carefully mapped out.
It's a good protection for them as nowadays people are so quick to judge and jump into conclusion.
I would extend it to shop employees for protection against more and more violent customers raging.
As someone with a degree in law enforcement I fully support body cameras and view them as a wonderful idea cause the media really does likes to lie
Certain media will ignore the pieces of footage that do not favor their goals, narratives, etc.
Footage, even if it is rare, if it fits someone’s narrative or beliefs will use that footage in a variety of ways.
Disingenuous ways potentially.
They’re great. They protect the officers much more than the public.
Officers get called to deal with the worst of our society daily… and then those bad customers tell their “truth” and the media, politicians and anyone looking for a spark eat it up.
In the few cases where a misconduct happens it allows the system to get rid of those unfit officers.
They are good BUT needs improvements such as camera location and cameras on in and around the police car at all times! None of this push a button to start recording! Image quality needs improvement. So does the microphone. Lets add night vision.
All of this is either costly, requires more training, or impractical.
It is always easier for those not involved to recommend things that are either too expensive or not realistic and practical.
Has its flaws, but I think it's a step in the right direction.
I think policing should be a career field in which one must go to school for law at least 4 years to become a cadet. Psych evaluations and free therapy offered after their first year on their own. I like the idea of having people accompanying officers to help mitigate escalation. And offer better solutions instead of shooting people for not responding the right way despite having a mental disability.
Don’t know why they’re allowed to take them off.
I have 20 years of vhs hoarding digitized and uploaded online. Seems like the cops could record an entire shift and keep it for a week jnc something happened. A “video clip per police report” should be the law.
Every cop we’ve brought to court had to have video. It’s literally a standard.
Its a good thing, I actually bought one formyself as citizen as well. Can just film some guys passing by me on road and doing aggressive maneuver and report them with evidence.
Good tool to call toxic people accountable
They are very useful and I believe every officer should be required to have one that is on and recording.
That being said the news media is selective in what they show. George Floyd was acting crazy and resisting arrest in the police car. Jacob Blake was scuffling with an officer and reaching into a car. The news will not show you the whole video. But instead will only show some cop shooting a “defenseless” black man. It’s horse shit. They know what they are doing.
I think they are justified and necessary, for both parties to feel safe.
It shows a true and accurate story and scenario of what occurs at a scene for the police and the public.
You cannot hide or lie with these camera anymore.
They save more officers than they hurt by showing what happened before an incident. Media edits cell phone footage to make officers look bad but the media don’t control body cams, and the truth comes out.
I just don't like it when they turn off their cameras at suspicious times in order to hide their misconduct. But for the most part I think it helps police in keeping honest.
Both cops and those they serve are behaving better because of them. by the way I use a dash cam when I'm driving and I'll often wear a pocket spy pen when I'm in spaces with public access.
If anything it disproves a lot of the assumed misconduct and brutality we always hear about.
Even before body cams were a thing I've never met a bad cop they've always been nice and professional at least where I live.
From what i have seen and heard, I think they're a really good idea and pretty helpful.
Police body cameras are there to provide a better record of what happens. They don't always tell the whole story though. Overall, they are a plus and I support them.
The only issue I have with body cams are the precincts that give cops the ability to turn their cams on and off. I am aware of that there are precincts using body cams that automatically turn off when the officer exits their car.
i think they shouldn't be able to turn it on or off. because they just use it to legally cover their ass. which is fine. but i think the police should also do some self-controll in order to inhibit police brutality and abuse of executive power.
They are very useful when used before, during, and after a crime. I hate when the news reports the cops had their body cams off.
They were originally conceived as a means of improving the behavior of the police.
Instead, they have been beneficial in reducing false claims against them.
I agree with them. I have one on my motorcycle helmet. Evens the odds.
I wouldn’t say it is the same.
If your cam has what you think is you doing wrongdoing then I doubt you will be inclined to use that against yourself. You will probably find a way to get rid of the footage or edit it.
Law enforcement BWCs follow a stricter/fairer policy.
A civilian cam? You can do anything you want with it.
So, not exactly “evens the odds.”
lol Law enforcement has been know to lose footage just as easily. Don’t be fooled. Or just “had their cameras off at the time”.
I’m not going to say what you cite has never happened in the history of policing, but I feel like you may think this is as big or common of an issue than it actually is.
It is not.
You will only favor your cam if it supports you, 100% this is true.
Investigations will allow access to unaltered body cam footage. Policy dictates whom can view the footage and who has access to it.
There’s a lot of safeguards and regulations surrounding body cams.
It’s not as easy to do whatever you want with the footage.
If it happens at all, that makes it true.
Solar eclipses have happened, but they are extremely rare.
I would say one up above “extremely rare.”
. . .
I’m sure you’re a smart woman, you see where I’m going with this.
Back to my original point. Both having cameras evens the odds. 😉
Back to my original point: Not necessarily.
You are free to have your stance. I disagree. It’s completely necessary.
I’m just saying it’s not necessarily true what you’ve said and why.
In your opinion. You haven’t had the same experiences with law enforcement that I have had. Nor have I yours. But I respect your stance.
Okay.
They need to be controlled by a third party , if they can be turned off or the video edited they are useless.
They should be required to have their body cams on at all times with the audio. Or else the arrest should be tossed out. Also, the public should be allowed access to ALL bodycam footage of arrests.
Police body cameras are a good thing, but I don't know if they can be turned off by officers or are they locked on for the whole of the shift when they have been removed from their charger.
They don't take "oh, the camera wasn't on" excuses with sufficient scepticism or punishment.
I don't mind the cops filming me in my car, as long as they don't mind if I dress like the uni-bomber while they do it.
I approve of them. They convict bad cops and exonerate good cops.
I agree with your opinion. There are a great majority of good cops. The body cams help protect the cops from lawsuits and false accusations.
That's kind of what I say. It amazes me that given where we're at as a society right now that anyone would CHOOSE to be a cop.
It’s like they can have their cameras but they can shoot black people when they try to tape them because these pigs 🐷 would lie and say it was a gun. Screw cops and cop lovers
It's a good idea, as long as they don't shut them off, as some are won't to do.
Since the police in the states cannot be trusted it should be obligated.
They should allow me to record them too. That's what really concerns me.
I’m not sure where you live, but in the US, you are 100% allowed to record peace officers.
Now, if you’re talking about restricted areas like certain parts of a hospital, government building, and more then I’m sure you can understand why anyone would not be allowed to personally record in these areas.
According to law it is allowed to record in Europe as well. The difference with european countries is that the law only counts when it serves the system. Coppers here will bully you in the best case or beat your ass and arrest you in the worst if you dare to take your phone out.
I think that they are good, because while both police officers and civilians can lie cameras tell the truth.
I think they're great. Whether it proves and officer innocent or proves him guilty of misconduct, it's exactly what we need.
It’s a good thing and bad. Footage can still be manipulated to the other persons perspective
I think they are a good idea. It will remove doubt on who is or isn't being truthful.
Mostly good. But there’s good and bad things about it.
They're good. We can see what really happened. We can really hold police accountable
I'm completely for them.
They protect the officer and the civilian equally.
There is no disputing what really happened good or bad. Makes investigating much easier. Should be worn by every police officer everywhere.
Great idea. Looks like several cases where it was a cop's word against someone could be proven on tape, and vice versa.
can go both ways. You can have an "opps" moment and go ape shit on someone or can do something good. But we know how the wind blows here..
Cool thing. Students should have it when visiting treacherous lecturers. Should be epic.
Serves right. Word against word proved nothing compared to video.
They’re fantastic. They’ve shown how horrible suspects are to police.
It makes police accountable when they abuse their powers due to racism etc.
Fantastic! These protect officers as much as the citizens they pull over, etc.
I like them. I also think the footage should be available to anyone who requests it.
In the U. S. they are. You can fill out a Freedom Of Information Act (FOIA) request. Filling out one of these forms is how you exercise your Freedom of Press 1st Amendment right. The department can give you a redacted version (which is most likely what you will get), but they will not completely deny the request. Most likely you will not get the unredacted form. There are several practical reasons for this. For one, the dashcam might have evidence of a scene they do not want released to the public while they are hunting a suspect. Two, privacy reasons. There are many practical reasons for a redacted version, but the redacted version is sufficient if the purpose of the request is to see if the officer did any wrongdoing or not.
More insight in their reasoning during high stress situations seems like a positive to me.
They have been very helpful showing exactly what police have to put up with daily.
You can also add your opinion below!
Girl's Behavior 
Guy's Behavior 
Flirting 
Dating 
Relationships 
Fashion & Beauty 
Health & Fitness 
Marriage & Weddings 
Shopping & Gifts 
Technology & Internet 
Break Up & Divorce 
Education & Career 
Entertainment & Arts 
Family & Friends 
Food & Beverage 
Hobbies & Leisure 
Other 
Religion & Spirituality 
Society & Politics 
Sports 
Travel 
Trending & News 
