Candid camera: Thoughts about police body cameras

More law enforcement agencies are using body cameras to record interactions between police officers and the public. Advocates say the cameras will provide information useful for to investigate crimes and citizen complaints. Others have privacy and other concerns. Members of The Gazette Writers Circle met in June to discuss the issue.

PROS OUTWEIGH THE CONS

Linda Seger

As a nation we are now faced with technology, social media and access to vast amounts of information. We have the capacity to record, photograph and film billions of pieces of information.

We have become accustomed to dash cam videos from a police vehicle in recent years. Visual range is somewhat limited. Yet it has proved a valuable tool. I am told the departments download those video records at the end of a shift onto a server. The video is protected and secured. The information is logged and stored for possible future needs.

A similar server system to maintain the camera data would be necessary for all body cameras to download at the end of each shift. Cameras cost on average approximately $300. It is the cost of the servers, data preservation and documentation to maintain the entire system that will be more costly for department budgets. Public demand to provide officers with body cameras should be aware of the additional expenses of maintaining the entire computer data systems.

I reached out to law officers in the Corridor with the question, 'Considering everything you are required to do in the line of duty would you want to also wear a body camera?” The response was yes. They felt it would reduce some of the confrontation they receive from citizens when they realize they are on camera. It would reduce complaints. It would protect officers and validate what occurred. Witnesses would still be needed. If there were no witnesses or none that come forward there would be a record of what transpired.

What I found is the cons expressed by those responding were few. Violation of rights to privacy, too expensive for departments, a distraction to the police officers in some situations, no way to identify who was wearing the camera were some concerns.

The pros included accurate validation of evidence, a reduction in the number of citizens who might respond violently when officers arrive at a call and as a tool to help with investigations. In the event there is a question of conduct it would help show what took place.

Cameras are here to stay. Having police wear body cameras makes good sense - cameras can be a benefit to all involved.

To our law enforcement members thank you for the service you provide in our communities, counties and highways every day.

' Linda Seger is past president of the Northwest Neighborhood Association and a member of The Gazette Writers Circle. Comments: lsiglin44@gmail.com

PRIVACY? WHAT PRIVACY? Paul Forbes

The rise of online social networking means people no longer have an expectation of privacy.

Technology companies invade our privacy on a daily basis: Google, Facebook, Twitter and more. All are eagerly used by the general public.

Personally, I have no issues with traffic cameras, body cameras, watch cameras, ink pen cameras and every other type of camera on the market today.

So when people get upset with the use of cameras to control traffic, or body cameras used by law enforcement officers, which probably provide a more complete truth than someone's select use of a smartphone which only captures a small part of an interaction, I want to go 'huh?” Where is your common sense?

Why are people upset with traffic cameras? They dramatically cut the number of accidents and they save lives. They can see inside my car - OK, and so what? If the cameras catch a kidnapper, everyone is all for them, but if they catch you picking your nose, now it is an invasion of privacy.

All I ask is they get my good side.

'If you have something that you don't want anyone to know, maybe you should not be doing it in the first place,” said Eric Schmidt, former chief executive of Google. I agree with his assessment.

There is no privacy in today's world. Technology has made the world a very public place, for all to see or find out. From far-reaching microphones to smartphones to hidden and not-so-hidden cameras, and you better throw in a drone or two.

Do not get upset with law enforcement because they want to use the same technology everyone else has. If police had a body camera in use in Ferguson, MO., there may have been far less controversy, allowing everyone to view the incident for themselves.

As long as the film cannot be edited, and there is retention of the film for an appropriate amount of time, I see a lot of benefit from their use. It is win-win for all. When I agree with the ACLU on anything, it scares me, but in this case, we agree.

One day the only issue will be whether they need more pixels, and whether I look good in high definition.

' Paul Forbes is a photographer, blogger and member of The Gazette Writers Circle. Comments: www.LifeInIA.com