Body Camera Maker Will Let Cops Live-Stream Their Encounters (fastcompany.com) 71
tedlistens writes: Police officers wearing new cameras by Axon, the U.S.'s largest body camera supplier, will soon be able to send live video from their cameras back to base and elsewhere, potentially expanding police surveillance. Another feature of the new device -- set to be released next year -- triggers the camera to start recording and alerts command staff once an officer has fired their weapon, a possible corrective to the problem of officers forgetting to switch them on. (The initial price of $699 doesn't include other costs, like a subscription to Axon's Evidence.com data management system.)
But adding new technologies to body camera video introduces new privacy concerns, say legal experts, who have cautioned that a network of live-streaming cameras risks turning officers into roving sentinels for a giant panopticon-like surveillance system. Harlan Yu, the executive director of Upturn, a Washington nonprofit consultancy that has studied body cameras, says that live-streaming could erode community trust and help enable more controversial technologies like real-time face recognition. "The capability to live stream all BWC footage back to a department- or precinct-wide command center... will further entrench body-worn cameras as tools for police surveillance of communities, rather than tools for transparency," he said.
But adding new technologies to body camera video introduces new privacy concerns, say legal experts, who have cautioned that a network of live-streaming cameras risks turning officers into roving sentinels for a giant panopticon-like surveillance system. Harlan Yu, the executive director of Upturn, a Washington nonprofit consultancy that has studied body cameras, says that live-streaming could erode community trust and help enable more controversial technologies like real-time face recognition. "The capability to live stream all BWC footage back to a department- or precinct-wide command center... will further entrench body-worn cameras as tools for police surveillance of communities, rather than tools for transparency," he said.
Cops - LIVE! (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
I think I have a new favorite Twitch channel!
Trump can't possibly be for this... (Score:1, Insightful)
"MORE Video evidence? NO THANKS!" - Donald J Traitor
recording after? (Score:5, Insightful)
Huh, wouldn't it seem that the events just prior to the cop shooting are what is actually relevant.
Perhaps they should figure out a way to trigger recording when the cop starts showing stress reactions (which could be triggered by fear, anger, etc)
Re: recording after? (Score:3)
hopefully cops are not running around with their weapon drawn much and that seems a better starting time to my mind (it should be easy enough to figure out when they draw).
Re: (Score:2)
Well even then; you wouldn't know what made the cop draw in the first place. Still better than after they shoot though.
Re: (Score:3)
From TFA: "These technologies aren’t completely new: A similar sensor Axon released last year is meant to activate cameras once a weapon is drawn from its holster"
Re: (Score:1)
A 60 second look back from the time a weapon is drawn would seem reasonable to me.
LK
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I recall reading that some early body cameras were designed to continuously record into a 30-60s buffer, and then when the camera is set to 'record' it dumps the buffer and then appends in real time. Whether this actually happens or is better or worse is up for debate.
Re:recording after? (Score:5, Interesting)
continuously record into a 30-60s buffer, and then when the camera is set to 'record' it dumps the buffer
This feature caught Baltimore police planting drugs [nytimes.com] in an attempt to fake body camera footage. Had they been an extra 30 seconds corrupt they would have got away with it.
Re:recording after? (Score:5, Insightful)
This feature caught Baltimore police planting drugs [nytimes.com] in an attempt to fake body camera footage.
If you watch the video, you can see one cop planting the drugs, while two other cops stand and watch as if planting evidence is perfectly normal and routine.
Only the cop planting the evidence was fired. The other two corrupt cops are still Baltimore police officers.
Re: (Score:2)
More like a 30-60 day buffer... If the gov is demanding that tech companies hold user data for two+ years, why can't we just demand police do the same?
And regarding emergency recording based on gunshots.. Uh, yeah, that's a bit too late for describing events leading up to the need to discharge a gun. Cameras should come on the moment a cop finds reason to engage with the general public...maybe a proximity sensor via Bluetooth that immediately turns them on when a cop exits his car.
Re: (Score:3)
I think technology should've improved to the point where we can get a day's worth of recordings. The unit records immediately once taken off the charger and stops at the end of the shift being placed back on the charger.
To make life easier, yo
Re: (Score:2)
I am under the impression that usually body cameras are continuously recording- when they get "switched on" they then start saving- as well as the previous minute or two before the turn-on. If these are not designed like that it is a huge flaw.
Re: (Score:2)
Comment removed (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
I think the honest police love body cams because they can protect them from false allegations or questioning their judgement once you have the benefit of hindsight. If someone pulls a gun on an officer and the officer fires, the body cam will show that the officer acted properly. The footage can help clear an honest police officer's name.
Now, corrupt police are another story. They hate body cam footage because the footage will show that the guy didn't pull a gun when he was shot, but that a gun was planted
Re: (Score:2)
A 1,000 times this. Otherwise we'll have non-stop police brutality claims and mass riots every time a suspect or perpetrator gets hit, knocked down, or shot. Context is key.
2 views (Score:1)
The encounters will expose either the cop or the perpetrator. Now if you're a perpetrator you don't want the cop to livestream your encounter. You just want to be able to say cop was bad. Too many situations have brought us to this point of people not telling the truth
Re:2 views (Score:4, Informative)
Now if you're a perpetrator you don't want the cop to livestream your encounter.
If you're the perpetrator that gets pulled over for speeding and then shot for smelling like cannabis, you definitely want the cop's camera on.
Re: (Score:1)
shot for smelling like cannabis
Where do these paranoid fantasies come from? A lot needs improvement in law enforcement, but solving problems begins with talking about them honestly.
Re:2 views (Score:4, Informative)
Where do these paranoid fantasies come from?
Fantasies? [washingtonpost.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I don't mind the cops having a camera on me any more than they should mind me having a camera on them
With you 100%. The laws backing cops barring cameras are offensive.
You're probably being overly paranoid if you expect that to happen to you, as it's probably within an order or two of magnitude of pulling down a huge lotto jackpot.
Of course it's not going to happen to me. I'm white. Shouldn't happen at all.
Re: (Score:2)
You're probably being overly paranoid if you expect that to happen to you, as it's probably within an order or two of magnitude of pulling down a huge lotto jackpot.
Median rate nationwide of officers killing civilians [mappingpol...olence.org] is 3.8 per million people. It's hard to find statistics on lottery winnings - the states running them don't want people to know how bad the odds are - but in most states big winners number in the single digits per year. The biggest state, California, only has about 10 per year. So if you were saying that there were an order of magnitude fewer officer killings, you were wrong. If you were correctly pointing out that it's only slightly more likely than win
Re: (Score:3)
A lot needs improvement in law enforcement
American police kill more Americans [washingtonpost.com] than terrorists do.
Re: (Score:2)
Evidence suggests that police body cameras result in better behaviour from the police and from the police with whom they're interacting.
Something that simple that reduces violence during an arrest is surely a good thing for everybody.
Why not activate (Score:5, Insightful)
the body camera as soon as a weapon leaves the holster instead of when it's fired?
This may end up more entertaining than Russian Car Crash Compilations.
Re: (Score:1)
Start the moment they set foot outside the police station.
Here's an idea.... (Score:5, Insightful)
Seems to me that turning it on at the sound of the gun shot might be a bit too late to get the complete picture of if the use of force was justified or not.
How about they are always recording a 2 min buffer and the sound of a gunshot triggers it to write the buffer and start the recording at a point 2 min in the past..
Authority AND Accountability (Score:4, Insightful)
There is a rumor that the Romans had a double-sided ax that represented two things:
* Authority
* Accountability
Why?
* Authority without Accountability leads to abuse of power.
* Accountability without Authority leads to Bureaucracy and constant bikeshedding.
It's time that people start demanding accountability from those in power -- to keep everyone honest.
Accountability, not Surveillance (Score:1)
potentially expanding police surveillance
You misspelled accountability.
Re: (Score:2)
I wish you were being cynical but sadly you are right.
The founding fathers share your lament.
Ironically it has lost its context [npr.org]
Purpose of body cams? (Score:4, Interesting)
I thought the whole point of body cameras was to establish what happened during police shootings. Am I missing something? You can't have it both ways; either 1) you get recordings of police (mis)behavior, or 2) you get no recordings and your privacy remains intact. Pick one. Personally, I'd opt for letting the police record their interaction with me. I think it decreases the likelihood that things will end badly for me.
Re: (Score:2)
Outrage News for Nerds (Score:2)
Uhh, shouldn't we be more impressed that the evidence they normally delete is going to be livestreamed instead?
Like a girl who accidentally (ha! "accidentally!") flashes her nipple on Twitch, and it's on the web FOREVER.
Granted, it's not necessarily online. But it's at least one step harder to delete incriminating videos when you need TWO or more people "in on it." When a cop can just shut his camera off (why tf was that ever an option?) then do something illegal, a livestreamed, hypothetically, requires th
This should be fun (Score:2)
Since all cops are at very least, "bad cop adjacent", this should make for some very interesting Twitch streaming.
Comment removed (Score:3)
Surveillance must be equal (Score:1)
when gun is fired (Score:2)
Recording after the gun has been fired is way too late.
Better would be to trigger recording on certain words/phrases.
Taser (Score:2)
It's hardly more surveillance. (Score:2)
In other words, NO CHANGE.
It's not like the cameras are going to catch you doing something naughty while you don't think anyone is looking. There will be a cop standing t