Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Ferguson police began wearing the cameras on Saturday, according to the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, quoting the town's police chief Tom Jackson as saying the force was donated about 50 body cameras by two companies.
"We are still playing with them," Jackson reportedly said, adding that each officer will get one to use.
"The quality is good," he said.
Critics believe police will be more accountable if they wear cameras, which will also allow judges and juries to view for themselves police action in disputed incidents.
Y'all know they can be shut off by the user, right?
For example, after the police department in Rialto, Calif., began a pilot program to require about half of its officers to wear cameras, use of force by police dropped 59%, and complaints against police fell by 88%.
A one-year study of police in Mesa, Ariz., found that citizen complaints dropped 50% against officers who wore cameras. "Once people realize they're being videotaped, everyone's just a little politer," Mesa police Chief Frank Milstead told KPHO-TV in Phoenix.
No point recording a patrol where nothing happens. Data storage fees probably make the turning of them off more economic. Gonna turn it on every call to document it like. Simple audit of emergency responses to video data aquisitoin will reveal anyone keeping it off maliciously like.
My office has a camera system that stores 24-hour video surveillance on its system for up to 60 days. So it can't be too hard.
No point recording a patrol where nothing happens. Data storage fees probably make the turning of them off more economic. Gonna turn it on every call to document it like. Simple audit of emergency responses to video data aquisitoin will reveal anyone keeping it off maliciously like.
It will not help a bit. The cameras will just be racist. There is a surveillance camera film of Mike Brown robbing a convenience store. Did that help? No. The film itself was a "smear" against the good character of Thug Brown. Body cameras on police officers won't fare any better.
My office has a camera system that stores 24-hour video surveillance on its system for up to 60 days. So it can't be too hard.
1 camera then? Ferguson PD hs like 47 sworn officers is it? Bigger departments hundreds or thousands. That's alot of hd with redundant backups as you'd expect. All that storage and insurance costs money. Cams themselves are about a $1000 a piece, time however many officers, plus monthly data storage costs. It adds up.
My office has a camera system that stores 24-hour video surveillance on its system for up to 60 days. So it can't be too hard.
1 camera then? Ferguson PD hs like 47 sworn officers is it? Bigger departments hundreds or thousands. That's alot of hd with redundant backups as you'd expect. All that storage and insurance costs money. Cams themselves are about a $1000 a piece, time however many officers, plus monthly data storage costs. It adds up.
It will not help a bit. The cameras will just be racist. There is a surveillance camera film of Mike Brown robbing a convenience store. Did that help? No. The film itself was a "smear" against the good character of Thug Brown. Body cameras on police officers won't fare any better.
The video of Brown in the store had no bearing on the encounter he had with Wilson.
My office has a camera system that stores 24-hour video surveillance on its system for up to 60 days. So it can't be too hard.
1 camera then? Ferguson PD hs like 47 sworn officers is it? Bigger departments hundreds or thousands. That's alot of hd with redundant backups as you'd expect. All that storage and insurance costs money. Cams themselves are about a $1000 a piece, time however many officers, plus monthly data storage costs. It adds up.
My office has 16 cameras. Big difference I know but I see no reason for police to have trouble managing it. The article I linked to said the camera's were about $300 - $400 dollars which is expensive but like you mentioned earlier so are lawsuits.
not really....you do realize how little Harddrives go for these days?
1000$? wow someone is getting ripped off. Put a helmet on them and strap a go-pro on them. Seriously your excuse for this can't be money.
yeah its not that much...and most people wont mind it. I rather see my taxes go towards data storage, than tanksnot really....you do realize how little Harddrives go for these days?
1000$? wow someone is getting ripped off. Put a helmet on them and strap a go-pro on them. Seriously your excuse for this can't be money.
Presumedly the departments hire a company for the data storage. They're not walking into a Best Buy or something. And those sort of data storage providers cost money. More so for the high end professional stuff with redundancy which you'd want if you're hanging on to things for use in a legal claim.
yeah its not that much...and most people wont mind it. I rather see my taxes go towards data storage, than tanksnot really....you do realize how little Harddrives go for these days?
1000$? wow someone is getting ripped off. Put a helmet on them and strap a go-pro on them. Seriously your excuse for this can't be money.
Presumedly the departments hire a company for the data storage. They're not walking into a Best Buy or something. And those sort of data storage providers cost money. More so for the high end professional stuff with redundancy which you'd want if you're hanging on to things for use in a legal claim.
Y'all know they can be shut off by the user, right?
My office has a camera system that stores 24-hour video surveillance on its system for up to 60 days. So it can't be too hard.
1 camera then? Ferguson PD hs like 47 sworn officers is it? Bigger departments hundreds or thousands. That's alot of hd with redundant backups as you'd expect. All that storage and insurance costs money. Cams themselves are about a $1000 a piece, time however many officers, plus monthly data storage costs. It adds up.
