SoylentNews

New Add-on Activates Body Cameras When Officers Unholster Their Weapons

posted by Fnord666 on Sunday March 12 2017, @11:06PM   
from the shooting-and-shooting dept.

-- OriginalOwner_ writes:

TechDirt reports

Taser, the company, gets a lot of cop love because of its titular product, which is deployed (too) frequently to subdue arrestees. It probably doesn't get as much love for its body cameras, especially since it's already wired one line to sync footage with Taser deployment.

Its cameras are going to get even less love now. Taser's latest product looks to ensure no shooting goes unrecorded.

To ensure accountability during police encounters, Axon, Taser's police body camera division, has announced a small sensor for gun holsters that can detect when a gun 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 or forget to switch on their cameras during encounters with the public.

This isn't a welcome development for cops who'd rather have every shooting/killing go unrecorded. And it's probably not going to be picked up by many departments as it's an aftermarket add-on that serves the singular purpose of accountability.

[...] Say what you will about Taser's taser, but its camera division (Axon) continues to make strides towards better law enforcement accountability. In addition to the gun-out, camera-on clip, Axon has also made body/dash cameras that begin recording when squad car doors are opened and/or the cruiser's lights are turned on.

---

Original Submission

• Negative tone Negative tone (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 13 2017, @01:35AM (2 children)

  by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 13 2017, @01:35AM (#478280)

  Why the assumption in the summary that cops don't want to be recorded? The few cops I know welcome cameras. Body cams, dash cams. They protect the cops from false claims, as far as the the guys I know are concerned.

  We really need to get past this assumptive "cops are the enemies" bullshit.

• Re:Negative tone (Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 13 2017, @01:40AM

  by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 13 2017, @01:40AM (#478282)

  > Why the assumption in the summary that cops don't want to be recorded?

  Because police unions are nearly universal in their opposition to copcams.
  If they don't want people assuming that they are the enemy, then they should start by cleaning their own house first.

  Parent

• Re:Negative tone (Score: 4, Interesting) by takyon on Monday March 13 2017, @02:18AM

  by takyon (881) <takyonNO@SPAMsoylentnews.org> on Monday March 13 2017, @02:18AM (#478293) Journal

  Search "first amendment audit" on YouTube and you'll find countless instances of police trying to stop people from filming from public sidewalks/side of the road. They aren't isolated incidents, they are a result of bad "anti-terror" training mixed with plain ignorance and machismo.

  Maybe you think that isn't organic because the auditors are "baiting" the police. But you can find plenty of incidents where cops beat someone up and then went around and seized cameras/phones from bystanders in an attempt to destroy evidence. And you see incidents of police balking at drivers filming traffic stops, like this one [washingtonpost.com]. The article suggests a plausible motive for why many (not all) police don't like to be recorded:

  Bright said he never had any doubt that Becker was lying to him about the do-not-film law. “If a police officer gives you a lawful command and that command is disobeyed, they’ll arrest you,” Bright said. “The fact that I wasn’t arrested and he didn’t even try to arrest me is proof that he was being dishonest.” He said Becker’s command to stop recording and the searches — to which he didn’t consent — were a violation of his constitutional rights. He noted that suppressing video is in an officer’s best interest because it allows police to dictate the narrative later if a case arises. [emphasis mine]

  “I was mainly surprised because one of the officers who was there has had a trial in court with me and so he recognized me,” he said. “I’d think that once they’d recognized that I was a trial lawyer they would’ve changed their tone and stopped violating my rights.”

  Cops routinely lie on police reports to construct the narrative they want, and get away with it all the time. The proliferation of smartphone video has made it harder for police to lie, but not impossible. They can still attempt to destroy evidence or turn off phones. They still deal with people who might not carry cell phones. As for cops welcoming body cameras, sometimes they mysteriously break or get turned off [fox8live.com] at the "wrong" moment. Is this new Taser product supposed to be more convenient for officers, or to make it harder for them to avoid accountability?

  Even if a cop gets caught doing wrong, up to and including killing somebody without justification, they have a good chance of getting off scot-free every step of the way, typically being supported by their police chief/department, their police union, prosecutors, and judges and juries, in that order. In cases where cops do get punished, check to see if the punishment is a simple paid or (oh no!) unpaid suspension. If they get fired, they can often get hired by a different department in a different county or state.

  Body cams, dash cams. They protect the cops from false claims

  Several state legislatures are protecting police departments from having to release bodycam footage by adding more exemptions and restrictions to public records laws. So the camera that the cop is holding could protect them, but the camera that a citizen is holding may not.

  --
  [SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]

  Parent