No cameras = police brutality and no accountability.
Pick one. Can’t have it both ways.
This is.. somewhat insane. Body cams are probably one of the biggest policing win-wins in recent history. They allow dodgy officers to be held accountable while also adding much needed context to heavily edited twitter videos.
>This is a view shared by the Police Federation, a staff association for police officers. A spokesperson for the organisation said: “Selective clips of policing interactions filmed by members of the public and posted across social media are a growing issue as they risk damaging public confidence in the service.” They added that body-worn cameras “are one of the best introductions into policing in the past 10 years”, making officers feel safer and reducing false claims against them.
If anything I think their use should be heavily expanded, and possibly even data protection law amended where necessary to allow body cam footage to be plastered all over the internet.
This article sounds like it was written by someone who only just discovered that body cams can also be used to record members of the public who abuse police officers.
If you don’t feel safe around police, wear your own.
So long as the cameras are not linked back to a real-time facial recognition system and the police can’t easily delete/alter what is recorded; I’m cool with the cameras.
In fact, bring them on!
An op Ed piece making baseless claims, like the claim that body work cameras somehow exacerbate discrimination against minorities? Please do tell how having an independent digital witness in an exchange between an officer and citizen contributes to discrimination?
So are they allowed to record on my property with no permission?
The real issue:
Where will this data go? Is it streamed? Will it always be uploaded to a server? Does it ultimately end up at GCHQ no matter its relevance to crime?
If it is, that is one step from total surveillance…. run that stuff through a CNN for facial recognition, do some gait analysis etc…. Police (and then other folk) will effectively be mobile surveillance outposts.
Worrying.
What an utter load of drivel. They literally start the article by discussing a case of Police abuse that was only uncovered due to the bodycam footage, then try to claim that it wasn’t enough to stop the abuse happening.
What did they expect? The Camera’s to fly into the sky and zap the bent cops into submission?
Bodycams are the best win for everyone. They provide an exact unbiased account of exactly what happened, that no one can manipulate to their advantage. As long as the footage is held by a separate body (which it already is), what exactly is the problem?
Who loses out from having an accurate example of what exactly went down?
8 comments
Body worn cameras = police state.
No cameras = police brutality and no accountability.
Pick one. Can’t have it both ways.
This is.. somewhat insane. Body cams are probably one of the biggest policing win-wins in recent history. They allow dodgy officers to be held accountable while also adding much needed context to heavily edited twitter videos.
>This is a view shared by the Police Federation, a staff association for police officers. A spokesperson for the organisation said: “Selective clips of policing interactions filmed by members of the public and posted across social media are a growing issue as they risk damaging public confidence in the service.” They added that body-worn cameras “are one of the best introductions into policing in the past 10 years”, making officers feel safer and reducing false claims against them.
If anything I think their use should be heavily expanded, and possibly even data protection law amended where necessary to allow body cam footage to be plastered all over the internet.
This article sounds like it was written by someone who only just discovered that body cams can also be used to record members of the public who abuse police officers.
If you don’t feel safe around police, wear your own.
So long as the cameras are not linked back to a real-time facial recognition system and the police can’t easily delete/alter what is recorded; I’m cool with the cameras.
In fact, bring them on!
An op Ed piece making baseless claims, like the claim that body work cameras somehow exacerbate discrimination against minorities? Please do tell how having an independent digital witness in an exchange between an officer and citizen contributes to discrimination?
So are they allowed to record on my property with no permission?
The real issue:
Where will this data go? Is it streamed? Will it always be uploaded to a server? Does it ultimately end up at GCHQ no matter its relevance to crime?
If it is, that is one step from total surveillance…. run that stuff through a CNN for facial recognition, do some gait analysis etc…. Police (and then other folk) will effectively be mobile surveillance outposts.
Worrying.
What an utter load of drivel. They literally start the article by discussing a case of Police abuse that was only uncovered due to the bodycam footage, then try to claim that it wasn’t enough to stop the abuse happening.
What did they expect? The Camera’s to fly into the sky and zap the bent cops into submission?
Bodycams are the best win for everyone. They provide an exact unbiased account of exactly what happened, that no one can manipulate to their advantage. As long as the footage is held by a separate body (which it already is), what exactly is the problem?
Who loses out from having an accurate example of what exactly went down?