Can Technology Prevent Cops From Forgetting To Turn On Their Body Cameras? (fastcompany.com)

tedlistens writes from a report via Fast Company: Axon, Taser's growing police camera division, has announced a new wireless sensor for gun and Taser holsters that can detect when a weapon is drawn and automatically activate all nearby cameras. The sensor, Signal Sidearm, is part of a suite of products aimed at reducing the possibility that officers will fail to switch on their cameras during encounters with the public. It happens more than it should: Last year in Chicago, for instance, an officer apparently forgot to turn on his camera before fatally shooting and killing an unarmed 18-year-old named Paul O'Neal. Taser isn't alone in trying to address this and other technical and procedural issues with cameras, but reformers emphasize that just as body cameras won't solve problems with policing, new sensors won't prevent officers from failing to record. Fast Company adds: "Automatically-activated cameras won't be completely effective at providing oversight of police encounters: As happened when Baton Rouge police shot Alton Sterling last year, cameras can fall off during physical encounters, a problem that Taser has worked to address. They can also malfunction, or videos can be deleted. And civil liberties advocates complain that cameras are only as effective as the rules that guide their use: [...] the ACLU has complained that current city policy allowing officers to switch cameras off for privacy reasons gives police too much discretion over when to record. Other issues with cameras being resolved at the local level include the heavy costs of cloud video storage, and the question of whether officers are allowed to view their footage immediately after violent encounters -- a privilege not extended to the public."

Comments

Re:Make it illegal to not turn them on

[Opportunist]

We're not talking about average citizens. We hand these people a LOT of power. Essentially they have the power monopoly in the country (in most countries at least). They are granted powers above and beyond what the average person may do. But those powers are not granted to them as individuals but as their function, and they are not granted to be used at their whims.

These powers are handed to them so they can use them to protect our common interests.

The same applies to politicians, by the way. Oddly enough you never see anyone wonder why they aren't under surveillance, considering their ability to harm our interest is by some margin greater.