Police on camera = 2/3 fewer violent encounters

[Nekojin]

http://www.informationliberation.com/?id=44427

Short version: The Rialto, CA police force made some of their police officers wear cameras while out on patrol. The police officers who had the cameras were involved in violent incidents only a third as often as they had been before; the ones who didn't get cameras still had violent encounters twice as often as the ones who had the cameras.

The police officers were asked to turn on the cameras when they left their vehicles, which would start recording. However, the cameras were also running passively pretty much all the time, and would only keep a 30 second buffer, which would be saved the moment the camera was turned on, so that incident reviewers would be able to see what it was that caused the police officer to turn on the camera in the first place, thereby preventing the cops from being antagonistic, and then turning on the cameras to only show the blow-back.

The conclusion is pretty obvious - the police officers were prone to engage in violent behavior where there was no call for it - behavior that they didn't want caught on camera, so they straightened up when they knew they were being watched.

I'm all for this. Not only will it catch bad cops being abusive with their authority (or stop them from being abusive, also good), but it'll provide evidence for when the violence wasn't the police officer's fault.

[bara]

You notice though that many places are already making it a crime to record police at all? I like to think that most police officers are professionals doing the job the best they can. I actually believe that, possibly due to the very few encounters I have had with police officers. I admit that there are those that are essentially bullies who are only to happy to abuse their authority. But if those numbers are accurate then clearly officers need to be monitored.

[Panacea]

I'm all for this. Not only will it catch bad cops being abusive with their authority (or stop them from being abusive, also good), but it'll provide evidence for when the violence wasn't the police officer's fault.

I'm all for it as well. I remember a police chief saying once that installing car cameras saved his department loads in defending baseless complaints about abuse of authority and excessive force, especially in DUI cases. They also improved conviction rates when you could see the drunk staggering all over the road.

You notice though that many places are already making it a crime to record police at all? I like to think that most police officers are professionals doing the job the best they can. I actually believe that, possibly due to the very few encounters I have had with police officers. I admit that there are those that are essentially bullies who are only to happy to abuse their authority. But if those numbers are accurate then clearly officers need to be monitored.

The courts are throwing those laws out, and citizens have won lawsuits when cops have deleted or attempted to delete photos or videos from cell phones. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/1...n_2201016.html

The SCOTUS declined to review a very stringent law on this, which means the law is overturned and people have the right to video cops. In the thread about the fawn, the DNR cops deleted photos from the shelter staff; those staff now have a civil liberties case against those cops.

[bara]

The courts are throwing those laws out, and citizens have won lawsuits when cops have deleted or attempted to delete photos or videos from cell phones. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/1...n_2201016.html

The SCOTUS declined to review a very stringent law on this, which means the law is overturned and people have the right to video cops. In the thread about the fawn, the DNR cops deleted photos from the shelter staff; those staff now have a civil liberties case against those cops.

This makes me happy... thank you for posting this.

[Cats]

Unfortunately, there is such a small pool here that one town's result is not an accurate big-picture prediction of how it will turn out on a wide scale. The results do seem promising in the meantime, though, so that's something at least.

The notes about laws and cops in general at the end of the article though I found VERY biased. Where I live, cops don't break traffic laws willy-nilly...they break them when they're answering a call and have their sirens blaring, in which case they aren't technically breaking laws, since an emergency status renders them temporarily expempt from some of those violations. In my experience, most cops ARE good people; it's just those few bad apples that ruins the public's perception since those are the ones people hear about. Not that I'm denying the existance of some communities being rife with corrupt cops of course, but the overall existance of law enforcement in the form of cops does more good than harm. If these cameras can turely keep more on the side of good, then I am all for them.

[Andara Bledin]

We watch local police and sheriff's break traffic laws pretty much about half the time we see the on the street. Everything from the driver talking on his cell phone (I see this way too often), to using their lights to get through red lights (when they flash them at all), to plain old speeding because whose going to call them on it?

[s_stabeler]

I'm not 100% sure it is the cops being excessively violent necessarily- It could be that the camera is proving that the cops had a reason to be violent, ergo, the camera is reducing baseless complaints about police brutality.

the solution is the same, ultimately, however, ( install the cameras, then punish any police officer than is proved to have used excessive violence.)

[Greenday]

I don't see how this could be a bad thing. Good cops will be protected from jerks who lie and attack them. Bad cops will be nailed for being jerks.

Win-win.

[Sarah Valentine]

I don't see how this could be a bad thing. Good cops will be protected from jerks who lie and attack them. Bad cops will be nailed for being jerks.

Win-win.

Couldn't have said it better myself.

[draco664]

I don't see how this could be a bad thing. Good cops will be protected from jerks who lie and attack them. Bad cops will be nailed for being jerks.

Win-win.

Nailed it.

[Panacea]

This makes me happy... thank you for posting this.

It won't stop all cops from being douches when citizens try to video their behavior. But over time, the message will get out not to do it. What is needed is for citizens to know their rights and challenge law enforcement officers who do this, in court if necessary. The precedent is there, and a few lawsuits should settle the matter in a few years.

We watch local police and sheriff's break traffic laws pretty much about half the time we see the on the street. Everything from the driver talking on his cell phone (I see this way too often), to using their lights to get through red lights (when they flash them at all), to plain old speeding because whose going to call them on it?

I did, once. Saw a cop blow through 3 stop signs and a red light, all while speeding. He wasn't even a cop in my town, so I knew he was not answering a call. I called 911 and reported him.

I don't see how this could be a bad thing. Good cops will be protected from jerks who lie and attack them. Bad cops will be nailed for being jerks.

Win-win.

Couldn't agree with you more. More importantly, law enforcement agencies increasingly agree with you, and are supplying cops with cameras for this very purpose.