http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/07/busin ... d=all&_r=0 (http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/07/business/wearable-video-cameras-for-police-officers.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0)
QuoteNow, some police departments are using miniaturized video cameras and their microphones to capture, in full detail, officers' interactions with civilians. The cameras are so small that they can be attached to a collar, a cap or even to the side of an officer's sunglasses. High-capacity battery packs can last for an extended shift. And all of the videos are uploaded automatically to a central server that serves as a kind of digital evidence locker.
THE Rialto study began in February 2012 and will run until this July. The results from the first 12 months are striking. Even with only half of the 54 uniformed patrol officers wearing cameras at any given time, the department over all had an 88 percent decline in the number of complaints filed against officers, compared with the 12 months before the study, to 3 from 24.
Rialto's police officers also used force nearly 60 percent less often — in 25 instances, compared with 61. When force was used, it was twice as likely to have been applied by the officers who weren't wearing cameras during that shift, the study found. And, lest skeptics think that the officers with cameras are selective about which encounters they record, Mr. Farrar noted that those officers who apply force while wearing a camera have always captured the incident on video.
Who woulda' thought it... the police don't commit crimes when they know they cant get away with it.
Yeah I think this one works both ways, even though some will complain about a big brother state. I can understand both sides.... :-k
This needs to become universal. I respect cops, but unmonitored authority is a moral hazard. It would protect cops from false claims against them as well.
This needs to become universal. I don't respect cops, and unmonitored authority is a moral hazard. It would protect civilians from false claims against them as well.
Quote from: "Youssuf Ramadan"Yeah I think this one works both ways, even though some will complain about a big brother state. I can understand both sides.... :-k
I have no problem with closely monitoring the activities of those who have been given power over the rest of us. Keeping tabs on the actions of those in authority is not an aspect of a big brother state.
Can't wait until a protest happens in a district that mandates this. And yeah, it should be mandatory for all cops.
Sounds like a google glass beta.
In short, I agree with the above statements. =D>
Quote from: "Nonsensei"Quote from: "Youssuf Ramadan"Yeah I think this one works both ways, even though some will complain about a big brother state. I can understand both sides.... :-k
I have no problem with closely monitoring the activities of those who have been given power over the rest of us. Keeping tabs on the actions of those in authority is not an aspect of a big brother state.
I meant both ways in that it should protect civilians from police brutality and police from civilian brutality. My wording was a little ambiguous. :)
Quote from: "Youssuf Ramadan"Quote from: "Nonsensei"Quote from: "Youssuf Ramadan"Yeah I think this one works both ways, even though some will complain about a big brother state. I can understand both sides.... :-k
I have no problem with closely monitoring the activities of those who have been given power over the rest of us. Keeping tabs on the actions of those in authority is not an aspect of a big brother state.
I meant both ways in that it should protect civilians from police brutality and police from civilian brutality. My wording was a little ambiguous. :)
I think police are well equipped to deal with civilian brutality :p
Quote from: "Nonsensei"I think police are well equipped to deal with civilian brutality :p
In the USA, I would agree.