From Ballotpedia

Jump to: navigation, search

Civil Liberties Policy Logo.png
Affirmative action
Affirmative activeness past state
Affirmative action and anti-discrimination laws
Federal campaign finance laws and regulations
Nonprofit regulation
Public Policy Logo-one line.png

Police force torso-worn cameras are "pocket-size video cameras—typically fastened to an officer's clothing, helmet, or sunglasses—that can capture, from an officer's point of view, video and audio recordings of activities, including traffic stops, arrests, searches, interrogations, and critical incidents such as officer-involved shootings." Proponents contend that police trunk camera programs increase police accountability, thereby strengthening the public trust. Proponents in constabulary enforcement also say that body cameras are helpful in prove collection and protection. Opponents fence that these programs pose risks to individual privacy, may hamper the efforts of law enforcement, and are costly.[i] [2]

HIGHLIGHTS

  • In 2016, 47 percent "of the 15,328 general-purpose constabulary enforcement agencies in the United States had acquired torso-worn cameras (BWCs)," according to the U.S. Department of Justice's Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS).[three]

  • In fall 2014, Washington, D.C., New York City, and Los Angeles began pilot camera programs.[four]

  • A 2015 poll found that 88 percent of Americans supported the use of police trunk-worn cameras.[5]

    • Background

    History

    The U.S. Department of Justice awarded $23.2 one thousand thousand in grants "to aggrandize the apply of body-worn cameras and explore their impact."

    On Baronial 9, 2014, Michael Brown, an 18-year-old resident of Ferguson, Missouri, was shot and killed by law officer Darren Wilson. At virtually noon on that twenty-four hours, Wilson observed Brown and a friend on the street. Noting that Brown matched the description of a doubtable in a convenience store robbery, Wilson asked the 2 men to move to the sidewalk. An altercation reportedly ensued between Wilson and Dark-brown. Ultimately, Wilson fired upon Brown, who was unarmed. Brown did non survive.[six]

    According to the Washington Post, the events in Ferguson led to expanded use of police body-worn cameras. On Dec 2, 2014, President Barack Obama (D) proposed that the federal authorities reimburse localities half the cost of implementing body-worn camera programs. On September 21, 2015, Chaser General Loretta Lynch announced that the United States Department of Justice had disbursed $23.2 one thousand thousand in grants "to expand the apply of trunk-worn cameras and explore their touch." The grants were given to 73 local agencies in 32 states.[4] [seven]

    Co-ordinate to the Washington Post, "Only a few dozen departments, virtually of them small" had implemented trunk-worn photographic camera programs before 2014. In the aftermath of the shooting in Ferguson, Washington, D.C., New York, and Los Angeles commenced airplane pilot programs.[4]

    Usage

    In 2016, 47 percent "of the 15,328 general-purpose police enforcement agencies in the U.s. had acquired body-worn cameras (BWCs)," co-ordinate to the U.Southward. Department of Justice's Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS).[3]

    Support and opposition

    Arguments supporting body-worn cameras

    Proponents argue that police force torso-worn cameras are "useful for documenting evidence; officer training; preventing and resolving complaints brought by members of the public; and strengthening police transparency, performance, and accountability."[1] Jay Stanley, a policy analyst for the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), wrote the following in a March 2015 policy paper regarding the use of law trunk-worn cameras:[eight]

    " Although we at the ACLU generally take a dim view of the proliferation of surveillance cameras in American life, police on-body cameras are dissimilar considering of their potential to serve every bit a check confronting the abuse of power by law officers. Historically, at that place was no documentary evidence of most encounters between law officers and the public, and due to the volatile nature of those encounters, this often resulted in radically divergent accounts of incidents. Cameras have the potential to be a win-win, helping protect the public confronting constabulary misconduct, and at the same time helping protect police against false accusations of abuse.[9] "
    —Jay Stanley

    Additionally, a study conducted past George Mason institute that constabulary officers said the cameras were helpful when collecting bear witness and for protecting themselves. "Officers and citizens both seem to believe that BWCs can protect them from each other," the study said.[2]

    Arguments opposing body-worn cameras

    Opponents argue that torso-worn camera programs may make it more difficult for law officers to perform their duties. Boston police commissioner William Evans argued, "I fearfulness that a lot of people, and the dialogue nosotros have going, a lot of people might non want to have that interaction with us if they knew they're on photographic camera or they're being recorded."[ten]

    Opponents also argue that the implementation of body-worn photographic camera programs poses a risk to individual privacy, as footage from the cameras can sometimes exist subject to public inspection. Matt Pearce wrote the following for the Los Angeles Times in September 2014:[11]

    " Video from dashboard cameras in police cars, a more widely used technology, has long been exploited for entertainment purposes. Internet users have posted nuance-cam videos of arrests of naked women to YouTube, and TMZ sometimes obtains police videos of athletes and celebrities during small-scale or embarrassing traffic stops, turning officers into unwitting paparazzi. Officers wearing body cameras could extend that public eye into living rooms or bedrooms, should a call require them to enter a private home.[9] "
    —Matt Pearce

    Additionally, opponents argue that the cost of outfitting officers with body cameras is non fiscally possible for every police department. In 2018, after the Kansas State Senate considered a bill that would have required officers to wear body cameras, state Sen. Rick Wilborn (R) said in an interview that smaller cities would likely have a difficult time complying with the requirement if it became law. He said, "Nosotros endeavour to exist understanding, especially with smaller counties. You can't mandate something that'southward onerous to the point of breaking a budget."[2]

    Public opinion

    Polls

    An Economist/YouGov poll conducted in April 2015 establish that 88 per centum of respondents in the U.S. supported proposals requiring police officers to wear body cameras. The graphics beneath break down these results by age, race, and political credo.[12] [13]

    Reports on body photographic camera usage in the cities

    Law body-worn camera policies by city, 2017

    In November 2017, the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights released a report scoring torso-worn camera programs in 75 police departments.[14]

    The report scored programs on viii criteria, evaluating each department on whether it did the following:[fourteen]

    "
    • Makes the department policy publicly and readily available
    • Limits officeholder discretion on when to record
    • Addresses personal privacy concerns
    • Prohibits officer pre-report viewing
    • Limits retention of footage
    • Protects footage against tampering and misuse
    • Makes footage available to individuals filing complaints
    • Limits the use of biometric technologies[9]
    		"

    The table below summarizes the report's findings. "Yes" indicates that a section's programme fully met the criterion. "No" indicates that a program did not come across the criterion. "Partially" indicates that a program partially met the criterion. The tabular array includes information about body-worn cameras in 57 of the 100 largest cities in the United States; for the consummate findings, see the full study.

    Law body-worn photographic camera policies by urban center, 2015

    In November 2015, the Leadership Conference on Ceremonious and Human Rights released a study scoring body-worn camera programs in 25 police force departments. According to the report, "[Police departments] are moving quickly to deploy torso-worn cameras, and are experimenting with a wide range of policies in each of the dimensions we studied. Departments that accept a potent policy in ane area often stammer in some other–every department has room to improve. At the aforementioned fourth dimension, we are pleased to find examples of strong policy language currently in use for well-nigh all of our criteria."[15]

    The written report scored programs on eight criteria, evaluating each department on whether it did the following:[15]

    "
    • Makes the department policy publicly and readily bachelor
    • Limits officeholder discretion on when to tape
    • Addresses personal privacy concerns
    • Prohibits officer pre-report viewing
    • Limits memory of footage
    • Protects footage confronting tampering and misuse
    • Makes footage available to individuals filing complaints
    • Limits the utilize of biometric technologies (like facial recognition)[9]
    		"

    The table below summarizes the written report'due south findings. A light-green cheque mark indicates that a department'due south program fully met the criterion. A scarlet cross indicates that a program did not meet the criterion. A gray dash indicates that a program partially met the criterion. The 10 largest departments addressed in the written report are included in the table below; for the complete findings, see the total report.[15]

    Law body-worn camera policies, November 2015
    Section Policy available Officer discretion Personal privacy Office review Footage retention Footage misuse Footage admission Biometric utilise
    New York

    10px-600px-Red x.png

    {{{1}}}

    {{{1}}}

    10px-600px-Red x.png

    		Unresolved Unresolved

    10px-600px-Red x.png

    10px-600px-Red x.png

    Chicago

    {{{1}}}

    {{{1}}}

    {{{1}}}

    10px-600px-Red x.png

    10px-600px-Red x.png

    10px-600px-Red x.png

    10px-600px-Red x.png

    10px-600px-Red x.png

    Los Angeles

    {{{1}}}

    {{{1}}}

    		Unresolved

    10px-600px-Red x.png

    10px-600px-Red x.png

    		Unresolved

    10px-600px-Red x.png

    10px-600px-Red x.png

    Philadelphia

    {{{1}}}

    {{{1}}}

    {{{1}}}

    10px-600px-Red x.png

    10px-600px-Red x.png

    		Unresolved

    10px-600px-Red x.png

    10px-600px-Red x.png

    Houston

    {{{1}}}

    {{{1}}}

    		Unresolved

    10px-600px-Red x.png

    {{{1}}}

    10px-600px-Red x.png

    10px-600px-Red x.png

    10px-600px-Red x.png

    Washington, D.C.

    {{{1}}}

    {{{1}}}

    		Unresolved

    10px-600px-Red x.png

    10px-600px-Red x.png

    		Unresolved Unresolved

    10px-600px-Red x.png

    Dallas

    10px-600px-Red x.png

    {{{1}}}

    		Unresolved

    10px-600px-Red x.png

    {{{1}}}

    		Unresolved

    10px-600px-Red x.png

    10px-600px-Red x.png

    Phoenix

    10px-600px-Red x.png

    		Unresolved Unresolved

    10px-600px-Red x.png

    10px-600px-Red x.png

    10px-600px-Red x.png

    10px-600px-Red x.png

    10px-600px-Red x.png

    Baltimore

    10px-600px-Red x.png

    		Unresolved Unresolved Unresolved

    10px-600px-Red x.png

    {{{1}}}

    10px-600px-Red x.png

    {{{1}}}

    Miami-Dade

    10px-600px-Red x.png

    {{{1}}}

    		Unresolved

    10px-600px-Red x.png

    		Unresolved Unresolved

    10px-600px-Red x.png

    10px-600px-Red x.png

    State legislation

    Proposed state legislation

    The following is a listing of recent bills relating to police policy generally, and body-worn photographic camera policy specifically, that have been introduced in or passed by state legislatures throughout the U.s.. To acquire more about each of these bills, click the neb title. This information is provided past BillTrack50 and LegiScan.

    Note: Due to the nature of the sorting process used to generate this list, some results may not be relevant to the topic. If no bills are displayed below, and so no legislation pertaining to this topic has been introduced in the legislatures recently.

    News feed

    The link below is to the most contempo stories in a Google news search for the terms police force body camera. These results are automatically generated from Google. Ballotpedia does not curate or endorse these articles.

    See too

    • Federal policy on crime and justice, 2017-2020
    • Changes to policing policy in united states and 100 largest cities, 2020

    References

    1. ↑ 1.0 1.ane U.South. Department of Justice, Customs Oriented Policing Services; Policy Executive Research Forum, "Implementing a Body-Worn Photographic camera Program: Recommendations and Lessons Learned," accessed 2014 Cite mistake: Invalid <ref> tag; proper name "report" defined multiple times with different content
    2. ↑ 2.0 2.1 ii.2 The Pew Charitable Trusts, "Body Cameras May Not Be the Easy Answer Anybody Was Looking For," Jan xiv, 2020
    3. ↑ iii.0 iii.1 U.South. Department of Justice, Agency of Justice Statistics, "Body-Worn Cameras in Constabulary Enforcement Agencies, 2016," November 2018
    4. ↑ 4.0 4.i 4.2 The Washington Post, "Bug over police shooting in Ferguson lead push button for officers and trunk cameras," December ii, 2014
    5. ↑ YouGov, "Unlike Ferguson, the shooting of Walter Scott finds racial agreement," April 15, 2015
    6. ↑ The New York Times, "What Happened in Ferguson?" August 10, 2015
    7. ↑ United States Department of Justice, "Justice Department Awards over $23 Meg in Funding for Body Worn Camera Pilot Program to Support Police Enforcement Agencies in 32 States," September 21, 2015
    8. ↑ American Civil Liberties Spousal relationship, "Police force Torso-Mounted Cameras: With Right Policies In Place, A Win For All," updated March 2015
    9. ↑ 9.0 ix.1 9.2 9.iii Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source.
    10. ↑ PoliceOne.com, "Boston brass, police union fearfulness body cams on cops," Dec 3, 2014
    11. ↑ The Los Angeles Times, "Growing utilize of police trunk cameras raises privacy concerns," September 27, 2014
    12. ↑ YouGov, "Unlike Ferguson, the shooting of Walter Scott finds racial understanding," April 15, 2015
    13. ↑ YouGov, "The Economist/YouGov Poll, April 11-xiii, 2015," accessed Apr 10, 2016
    14. ↑ 14.0 14.1 Leadership Conference on Civil and Man Rights, "Police Body Worn Cameras: A Policy Scorecard," November 2017
    15. ↑ 15.0 15.i xv.2 The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, "Police Body Worn Cameras: A Policy Scorecard," November 2015