• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Use of Body Cameras in Law Enforcement

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,317
Location
Valhalla
More bashing by those who want to turn this into another CopWatch.

A quick search turns up studies on what happens when departments start using body cams. This report is an easy enough read.

Excerpts:

For three years prior to the experiment, the PD posted roughly 65 use-of-force incidents per year. ... In the year before the experiment, 24 citizens lodged grievances against officers.

During the experimental period, the UOF rate dropped significantly, to 25 incidents total, a reduction of 58 percent to 64 percent compared to previous years. Only eight of the incidents occurred when officers were wearing body cams. In other words, during the test period the likelihood of force being used was roughly doubled when cameras were not deployed.

Citizen complaints plunged to a total of three (3), a precipitous drop of 88 percent.

...

If there are studies showing any negative effects, I'd be open to read them. But I'd prefer something concrete rather than emphatic assertion or cop bashing bigotries.
Seriously doubt that you'll find such a study.

BTW - davidmcbeth was banned a long time ago.
 

wabbit

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 19, 2011
Messages
153
Location
briar patch, NM
Oh Charles, from your new found 'bub':

Police use of force is at the forefront of public awareness in many countries. Body-worn videos (BWVs) have been proposed as a new way of reducing police use of force, as well as assaults against officers. To date, only a handful of peer-reviewed randomised trials have looked at the effectiveness of BWVs, primarily focusing on use of force and complaints. We sought to replicate these studies, adding assaults against police officers as an additional outcome. Using a prospective meta-analysis of multi-site, multi-national randomised controlled trials from 10 discrete tests with a total population of +2 million, and 2.2 million police officer-hours, we assess the effect of BWVs on the rates of (i) police use of force and (ii) assaults against officers. Averaged over 10 trials, BWVs had no effect on police use of force (d = 0.021; SE = 0.056; 95% CI: –0.089–0.130), but led to an increased rate of assaults against officers wearing cameras (d = 0.176; SE = 0.058; 95% CI: 0.061–0.290). As there is evidence that cameras may increase the risk of assaults against officers, more attention should be paid to how these devices are implemented. Likewise, since other public-facing organisations are considering equipping their staff with BWVs (e.g. firefighters, private security, traffic wardens), the findings on risks associated with BWVs are transferrable to those occupations as well.

http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1477370816643734

We have previously reported results from a global multisite randomized controlled trial on the effect of BWCs on various outcomes, including use of force, complaints against the police, and assaults against officers (Ariel et al. 2016). Averaged over ten trials, we reported that the use of police BWCs had no overall effect on use of force. However, our results varied, with force increasing in some trials and reducing in others. These conflicting results were puzzling and disturbing. Why would officers, knowing that their actions were being filmed by their own equipment, choose to apply force more often when cameras were on in some instances? Similarly, why would suspects’ demeanor become more aggressive or noncompliant under these circumstances? This runs contrary to both common sense and a good deal of research across disciplines on the effect of deterrence on compliance behavior as well as the law (see Nagin 2013; in the framework of BWCs, see Ariel 2016).

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11292-016-9261-3

So Charles, two enough?

Of course Charles, a concept to remember is the studies being brought forth are from those institutions, e.g., force science, criminalogy perspective, etc., which have a vested interest in representing the .gov Mr. McBeth was referring to.

BuB
 
Last edited:

utbagpiper

Banned
Joined
Jul 5, 2006
Messages
4,061
Location
Utah
So Charles, two enough?

Two meta-studies looking at data from the number of raw studies is more than enough for me to reconsider on my position that body cams were reducing use of force. A very interesting and non-intuitive result from these two studies. Thank you.

I haven't taken time to dig in yet, but I note your summaries don't provide any information on what effect, if any, body cams on allegations of excessive force from police, nor on the outcome of those allegations. Those were the primary areas of concern from our previous troll.
 

countryclubjoe

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2013
Messages
2,505
Location
nj
Go to youtube, type in First amendment audit while open carrying..

There you will learn of the power of the video recorder..

My .02
CCJ
 

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,317
Location
Valhalla
Since everyone is complaining about body cameras, how about this new camera technology by Veridian Weapons Technologies: Firearm mounted camera system?

Not enough room for attaching my light, laser sight, sound supressor etc as it is. Locating a holster that will accommodate all is problematic.

Does it work if you forget to turn it on? Can it be erased by the user in the field?
 
Top