This is yet another example of how the government (federal, state, and even local) moves at a "glacial pace" to get anything done. The bureaucratic delays, inefficient processes - no one should be surprised. It's truly just how the government operates.
We should be more upset about the waste of taxpayer dollars on a day to day basis and the fact that the government enjoys zero pushback to do and be better.
We should be more upset about the waste of taxpayer dollars on a day to day basis and the fact that the government enjoys zero pushback to do and be better.
NYPD will start using body cameras when the 2nd Avenue Subway is completed (Never).
The biggest armed gang in NYC is not going to lower themselves to accountability. Does anyone remember Bratton's Twitter brainstorm, "My NYPD"?
it was shut down overnight when the public began posting camera shots of cops sleeping and snarling at and bullying the public.
The culture of the NYPD is not going to change unless rogue officers are subject to consequences for their conduct, backed by visual documentary evidence.
The biggest armed gang in NYC is not going to lower themselves to accountability. Does anyone remember Bratton's Twitter brainstorm, "My NYPD"?
it was shut down overnight when the public began posting camera shots of cops sleeping and snarling at and bullying the public.
The culture of the NYPD is not going to change unless rogue officers are subject to consequences for their conduct, backed by visual documentary evidence.
4
Mayor De Blasio's argument that the delay is caused by "making sure we get it right" is so specious that I'm surprised the reporter of this article didn't get answers from him as to what "making sure we get it right" even means.
To get body camera on police:
1. Buy the body cameras
2. Install them on the officer
3. Turn on the camera
These three steps are so hard to execute that it requires at least 3 years to "Get it right"?
To get body camera on police:
1. Buy the body cameras
2. Install them on the officer
3. Turn on the camera
These three steps are so hard to execute that it requires at least 3 years to "Get it right"?
6
it takes a lengthy time to arrange for political contributions.
I have noticed from quite a few cases that when police officers kill innocent civilians, taxpayers in the city that employs them typically pay about $6 million in legal damages to the families of the deceased. That is far more than any police officer is worth to a city, over his entire career.
The need to increase local taxes to settle these $6 million cases implies either higher taxes or reduced local services. Both push local property values down.
Body cameras on cops should have the opposite effect: less bad publicity for the city, higher property values for residents.
The need to increase local taxes to settle these $6 million cases implies either higher taxes or reduced local services. Both push local property values down.
Body cameras on cops should have the opposite effect: less bad publicity for the city, higher property values for residents.
1
Body camera to police officer is like GPS to driver. You don't need to turn it on if you are in your own neighborhood where everyone knows your name. Otherwise, leave it on cause it is a good work companion.
1
I spent 20+ years as a police officer with the NYPD. What I was told to do or not do policy wise or equipment wise was never up to me. The executive corps of the NYPD calls the shots. Don't blame the cops for a slow rollout. I would have no problem wearing it. It would in fact make my life as a patrol officer much easier. No false claims, no he said/she said. But I would be concerned about what video would be released in court. The person who tells me the guy around the corner has a gun and doesn't want to get involved, now the defendant gets to see who that person is? Who would want to give me any info if a defense attorney would make it part of a Rosario hearing.
As for seeing what a cop deals with in terms of the public another positive. Release the video of the domestic fight you had with your wife, or other family members. Do you want your neighbors seeing that. Of course there can be policy to prevent that. Until a judge rules to release it. Do you want your boss seeing you drunk and disorderly at home? Abusive to your kids?
The cameras are going to happen in NYC they will. But what will the public expect as to their right to privacy?
All the anti-police comments are off base. The vast, vast majority of cops have nothing to fear having cameras on them and could care less. In fact, the public may get to enjoy the circus I got paid to watch everyday. They might see the reality of policing and what and who cops deal with on a daily basis.
As for seeing what a cop deals with in terms of the public another positive. Release the video of the domestic fight you had with your wife, or other family members. Do you want your neighbors seeing that. Of course there can be policy to prevent that. Until a judge rules to release it. Do you want your boss seeing you drunk and disorderly at home? Abusive to your kids?
The cameras are going to happen in NYC they will. But what will the public expect as to their right to privacy?
All the anti-police comments are off base. The vast, vast majority of cops have nothing to fear having cameras on them and could care less. In fact, the public may get to enjoy the circus I got paid to watch everyday. They might see the reality of policing and what and who cops deal with on a daily basis.
15
"Apparently it is not "politically correct" to even mention the fact that young, black, males (who constitute less than 7% of the US population) are responsible for 50+% of all crimes."
correct. nyt times readers are also politically correct since in 1 hr. you have received exactly one upvote, mine.
correct. nyt times readers are also politically correct since in 1 hr. you have received exactly one upvote, mine.
5
5000 in 5 years, for a 35,000 strong force. What a farce.
1
These cameras should be the law. Their content should clearly be written as law as the property of the public. Not the police themselves to decide if they want to 'release' them or not. If our taxes can be used to pay billions of dollars across the country for freaking privately owned sports stadiums; then we can pay for these cameras which are obviously needed for transparency. But the police don't want transparency.
1
Google street view is required to pixel out the faces of random pedestrians. What about police cameras? Just because I happen to cross paths with a police officer doesn't mean that I want my face and actions recorded in some police database forever. What's next? A law requiring us to carry national ID cards?
I get that these shootings are an (avoidable) tragedy. But I am not prepared to give up even more of my personal rights.
I get that these shootings are an (avoidable) tragedy. But I am not prepared to give up even more of my personal rights.
5
These body cameras should be a two way street. Keeping officers accountable AND allow for lawsuits against people who make false accusations against police.
3
The NYPD is sophisticated enough to want to make doubly sure cops know and fully comprehend its acceptable use of force & other relevant policies before they go live.
1
First, please remember that the judge that ruled on the constitutionality of 'stop and frisk' was removed because of her impartiality.
Recall that when street thugs feared being caught 'carrying' shootings and murders dropped from 2,262 at it's peak, to 352 last year.
As for camera's, why would our cops be against a means of proving the overwhelming number of encounters to be lawful and proper, while also showing the public, people, places and other objects that impact effective public relations.
Recall that when street thugs feared being caught 'carrying' shootings and murders dropped from 2,262 at it's peak, to 352 last year.
As for camera's, why would our cops be against a means of proving the overwhelming number of encounters to be lawful and proper, while also showing the public, people, places and other objects that impact effective public relations.
2
I think criminals and Donald should wear body cameras (24/7).
1
The intrinsically corrupt culture of the NYPD goes back centuries, so of course they are dragging their heels on accepting accountability or any substantive means to engender accountable, such as cameras.
Don't expect NYPD to change until we someday have a mayor who decides it's time for change. In the meantime, we're merely rearranging deckchairs on the Titanic...
Don't expect NYPD to change until we someday have a mayor who decides it's time for change. In the meantime, we're merely rearranging deckchairs on the Titanic...
5
For years no one had good pictures of the Loch Ness Monster or Bigfoot or UFOs. "If I only had a camera..." was the common excuse. Well, now there are a billion plus cameras in the hands of everyday people, and after ten years of so many cameras - no more pictures of them. We can safely conclude there is no compelling evidence of them. We have the opposite situation in the case of aggressive / abusive police behavior. We were told for decades there was little if any of it going on. Now, in the past ten years of ubiquitous cameras, we are seeing a lethal case involving questionable (at least) tactics on average every week. In the case of those who would continue to deflect the evidence of a subset of LEOs that are part of the problem, the answer seems to be "Who you gonna believe - me or your own lyin' eyes?"
15
Of course not that cost money and Mayor Bill has to save money for his tax breaks and giveaways to his developer buddies!
3
DeBlasio does not want some of his constituents filmed breaking the law.
2
Mayor Bill also likes breaking the law himself!
1
NYPD resisted softer wood night sticks in the 1880's and then bicycles in the 1890's and radios in the 1920's and then tracking devices in the 1960's and computers in the 1990's. every advance was met with claims that 'this is a victory for the criminals' Today the department is top heavy with bureaucrats, lawyers and closed minded management. Progress comes at a snail's pace. Body cameras won't end violence nor will they enlighten anyone, what they will do is cause a moments hesitation and a chance for an officer to think! Maybe.
3
Yes, cause an officer to hesitate and probably end up dead. I just love all you monday morning quarterbacks who all know how the job should and shouldn't be done. Call your local police firing range and ask them to let you try out the live scenario simulation training, then tell us how easy it is.
4
Too often officers act impulsively because they treat every incident as the same. To assume anything especially when arriving at a crime scene can be a disaster! Recent events captured on video show officers acting in a way that comes from dogmatic thinking and with dangerous hostility that escalates a situation rather than calm everyone down. There is a very real hostility toward police right now, and it won't go away unless police think and think again and develop non lethal methods to solve confrontations.
1
It sounds like the NYPD is completely dragging their feet. I believe it will always be better if a citizen is able to record police misconduct because police departments are not going to want to release videos. So a citizen can just upload it to Youtube,Instagram, and Twitter.
When you look at the Keith Scott body camera footage, it is not very clear and you can't even see whats in his hand. They need to work on having better quality video and if it costs more, so be it. Why does it take 30 seconds before the audio starts on the body camera? Also, it would be better if dash cameras in police cars could record more of a 360 view instead of just straight forward recording.
When you look at the Keith Scott body camera footage, it is not very clear and you can't even see whats in his hand. They need to work on having better quality video and if it costs more, so be it. Why does it take 30 seconds before the audio starts on the body camera? Also, it would be better if dash cameras in police cars could record more of a 360 view instead of just straight forward recording.
1
NYPD body cams will be a huge mistake. We will end up with an even more passive NYPD than deBlasio has given us. Lets say a New Yorker witnesses a robbery, assault or burglary. They call 911 and the cops show up and their conversation with the cops is recorded. A suspect is arrested and put on trial. You know that somewhere down the line some judge is going have that video released to the defendant's lawyer and the public thus putting the 911 caller's life at risk.
3
Why would an Audio Video be more dangerous than the Right to confront your accuser,...Access to discovery?
A would be perp would say, "Well since I have no audio and video, forget it."?
Oh and why would a Witnesses actions make a Cop's duty more Passive?
A would be perp would say, "Well since I have no audio and video, forget it."?
Oh and why would a Witnesses actions make a Cop's duty more Passive?
2
I was mildly offended when I started to volunteer with special needs children at my church because a security and background check was required along with an extensive application. Annually you have a new security check. It was a little annoying until the director of the program stated that this was actually for the volunteers protection as well as for the protection of the children. This would be the same for the body cameras--they serve a duel purpose--they protect police from false accusations--and they protect people from unlawful policing. I am in favor of mandatory body cameras every hour that a police person is on duty--not as a punishment to our officers--but as a protection for our officers.
2
There are no reasons not to have a body camera on the police. One, it is a defense tool in the event a person falsely accuses the police. Two, it will capture a video of the crime and make it easy to prosecute criminals. There will be no more testimony that can be created, manipulated, or changed.
There is no downside for honest police people and for a truly public service police departments.
The only fear will be from the ones that will be afraid they will be caught abusing citizen rights, or those that know they won't be able to lie and make up evidence anymore.
There is no downside for honest police people and for a truly public service police departments.
The only fear will be from the ones that will be afraid they will be caught abusing citizen rights, or those that know they won't be able to lie and make up evidence anymore.
4
This article has touched on what I believe is the real and complex issue of why police officers are killing citizens under circumstances that demand a better understanding of the justification, motivation and ultimate culpability for these terrible and frightening acts, regardless of justification.
Body cameras are critical components of an effort to better understand the killings as well as how these public servants can better carry out their critical mission to serve and protect the citizenry and our civil rights as Americans.
Body cameras are critical components of an effort to better understand the killings as well as how these public servants can better carry out their critical mission to serve and protect the citizenry and our civil rights as Americans.
6
Good point but many of our loudest citizens have no desire to "understand the killings" but, rather, are more interested in advancing their own political agendas.
If the past is prologue, the cameras won't work and the cost will be excessive.
1
The fact that the reporter begins the article citing the trial judge but fails to mention that the Appeals Court took the unprecedented move of removing and admonishing her, placing a permanent blemish on her professional career, speaks volumes of Goldstein's objectivity and the political posture of the Times vis-a-vie this issue, the issue of street crime, public safety, police - community relations and the demographics of the majority of offenders. "Only frank discussion will drive progress." MLK
13
Factually, the reporter is correct because what you are talking about is completely irrelevant. If we want to talk facts, which your post is remarkably light on considering you are leveling accusations of bias, the judge's ruling was vacated due to the potential appearance of impartiality on the basis of an interview she gave prior to the case. Not that was was guilty of an ethics charge or impartiality bias.
She was not removed. In fact, she retired earlier this year. The reason why the claim that the practice was considered "unconstitutional" is fair, because no court has ever re-reviewed the case. The Democratic administration chose not to challenge the ruling, so nothing has really changed other than the fact that the NYPD does not have to execute the court demanded changes to the program. It just ended altogether instead, which was separate, but related, to the ruling.
To quote you:
"Only frank discussion will drive progress." MLK
Perhaps you'll take that instruction to heart next time.
She was not removed. In fact, she retired earlier this year. The reason why the claim that the practice was considered "unconstitutional" is fair, because no court has ever re-reviewed the case. The Democratic administration chose not to challenge the ruling, so nothing has really changed other than the fact that the NYPD does not have to execute the court demanded changes to the program. It just ended altogether instead, which was separate, but related, to the ruling.
To quote you:
"Only frank discussion will drive progress." MLK
Perhaps you'll take that instruction to heart next time.
1
" the political posture of the Times vis-a-vie this issue, the issue of street crime, public safety, police - community relations and the demographics of the majority of offenders."
Apparently it is not "politically correct" to even mention the fact that young, black, males (who constitute less than 7% of the US population) are responsible for 50+% of all crimes.
Apparently it is not "politically correct" to even mention the fact that young, black, males (who constitute less than 7% of the US population) are responsible for 50+% of all crimes.
2
Her professional career wasn't permanently blemished. But the exaggerations and misinformation exists that she did. The Center for Constitutional Rights won the big battle in fed court: https://ccrjustice.org/home/what-we-do/our-cases/floyd-et-al-v-city-new-...
The police union in New York does not want body cameras and will do anything to prevent it...it's that simple. New Yorks "finest" palace guards should have the ability to continue to get away with murder and brutality. Body cams will make that a little harder.
12
NYPD..."New York's Finest". This is a myth that has run its course.
11
They seemed to perform reasonably well during the last bomb threat. Or should that be forgotten in service of a political agenda?
1
After watching Occupy Wall Street protests my opinion definitely changed regarding the NYPD.
1
NYPD don't want to be held accountable for their actions?? And stuff like this is why the relations between the police and minorities, especially African Americans, are strained, perhaps past the breaking point.
7
Meantime the man who videotaped the Eric GardenerMURDER is facing jail time because he was relentlessly harrassed and investigated after the incident. Perhaps he was involved in drugs or whatever, the charges against him, but he did the right thing videotaping the exchange between Mr. Gardner and the police and now this father of three will not be home to support his children just as Eric Gardener, also a father will not be there for them. Meantime Mr. Gardner's killer is on desk duty and has gotten a few raises since he killed a man. Yeah, the cops don't want no body cameras on them, and that's why they don't have them. And they don' want any other camera's on them, and when they do they make sure those cameramen are charged with 'something.'
14
Ramsey Orta is nothing more than a career street thug. He's terrorized the north shore of SI for years and 4 years in the joint will do him good.
2
the vdeographer is now facing jail time for being harassed and investigated??what are you talking about? and how is it relevant?
1
What a surprise that the NYC procurement process is so arcane and byzantine that a three year contracting process doesn't appear to raise eyebrows at City Hall.
While I do think that the PD should be equipped with cameras, I think that too many people see them as a panacea and fail to address the issues raised in the article regarding privacy and court procedures. The public does have a right to see most of the footage but not necessarily immediately after a situation. There is often a legitimate reason to delay or limit some releases if it jeopardizes a potential prosecution until more information is gathered; the same thing happens in many other investigations, where some details are withheld until after an arrest or til trial.
It is also absurd to say "just turn them on and leave them on" - the public has no right to see/hear an officer using the toilet, or being on break making a phone call to their spouse, for example. The privacy of third parties, such as in private homes, is also an area that needs to be fleshed out as well.
While I do think that the PD should be equipped with cameras, I think that too many people see them as a panacea and fail to address the issues raised in the article regarding privacy and court procedures. The public does have a right to see most of the footage but not necessarily immediately after a situation. There is often a legitimate reason to delay or limit some releases if it jeopardizes a potential prosecution until more information is gathered; the same thing happens in many other investigations, where some details are withheld until after an arrest or til trial.
It is also absurd to say "just turn them on and leave them on" - the public has no right to see/hear an officer using the toilet, or being on break making a phone call to their spouse, for example. The privacy of third parties, such as in private homes, is also an area that needs to be fleshed out as well.
7
The privacy of third parties is a really big issue. And encounters with police often occur at bad times--as a victim of crime, as an ill person or with family members being ill, as a person in grief over a deaths, after a car accident, public transit accident, as someone getting a ticket etc. This is in addition to contact as a perpetrator or alleged perpetrator of a more serious crime or infraction.
How do other departments handle that? If the police came to my house and told me my child or spouse had died or was seriously injured, no telling how I would react.
We had a young relative commit suicide. What would have happened when police went to the home if they had a camera? Do we really need all that footage? What are the rules of retention and expunging?
That said, the NYPD should see if accelerated procurement can be used. Surely, the city and NYPD has some means to do this.
How do other departments handle that? If the police came to my house and told me my child or spouse had died or was seriously injured, no telling how I would react.
We had a young relative commit suicide. What would have happened when police went to the home if they had a camera? Do we really need all that footage? What are the rules of retention and expunging?
That said, the NYPD should see if accelerated procurement can be used. Surely, the city and NYPD has some means to do this.
2
"What a surprise that the NYC procurement process is so arcane and byzantine that a three year contracting process doesn't appear to raise eyebrows at City Hall."
It has been said that sheer bureaucratic inertia is the most powerful force in the universe, so it should not be surprising to see that if something can be done in a day the bureaucrats responsible will see that it takes a month or even better a year.
It has been said that sheer bureaucratic inertia is the most powerful force in the universe, so it should not be surprising to see that if something can be done in a day the bureaucrats responsible will see that it takes a month or even better a year.
2
I guess no one remembers the CityTime scandal where the people who got the $64 million contract where essentially crooks, some of whom went to jail. Ended up costing the City ten times that, $664million. Lot of folks here think the 35,000 member NYPD can just go down to the local geek squad store to get these things.
Bureaucracy resists transparency. We are seeing the same thing in Boston. That is why the public and elected officials need to push very hard for body cameras for police.
8
The NYPD is a great police department. The cameras are inevitable. It is a great error for the NYPD to allow itself to appear resistant to this inevitable practice. -Rudy
4
the number one complaint against police is verbal abuse. wouldn't you feel sorry for spouses of police officers if the police were curbed by cams and then they took it out their aggression and instate bullishness on their significant others?
3
Charles, NOTHING will diminish a (would be) Bully's opportunity to be just that,..a Bully.
4
So five years from now they'll finally have enough cameras to potentially outfit 1/7th of the current force, with no allowance for spares or extras? In other words, that's five years just to set up the pilot program that the court ordered three years ago. Why haven't they been held in contempt yet? Most people can't get away with taking eight years to comply with a court order. And if they take eight years just to set up a pilot program, how many decades will it take for them to implement a real program, if ever?
9
Your not telling the public that what is on the cameras can not be shown anyway unless a fortune is expended in legal fees and the "justice" department is not really interested in justice but getting the public into the system. What happens latter is you are found innocent and they get caught lying?
1
Well, this idea of body cams was never well thought out. You know, of course, that cameras have ON switches and OFF switches....If you were a policeman and were REQUIRED to wear a body cam, but were opposed to them, what position would your Cam Switch be in ? I am not, nor ever have been a policeman. Regardless of my job I think I would not want to wear such a device - it reeks of Big Brother societies. Would YOU want your boss knowing every move you made EVERY day? Since the advent of the body cams around the country, have the statistics changed? You know, are the cops doing better and more?????
2
This is a very expensive proposition and probably not worth the money as police officers are almost never convicted in any event. A more direct and and money saving strategy would be to disarm the police except for a small cadre of strike force officers held in reserve.
2
It is mysterious why so many times when someone is shot by cap a who is wearing a camera, the person shot doesn't have a weapon. But when they are shot by a cop not wearing a camera the person shot had been brandishing a gun or a knife.
21
can you please provide facts to support your statement. it is my opinion that you are just making up statements with no numbers to support them. i would like some proof please before i accept your statements as anything othr than rabble rousing.
2
Bored Critic: No one is obligated to research numbers and report back to you with proof! You being convinced is of no value! Why would anyone with even a scintilla of sense burden themself with the responsibility of remedying your willful blindness!? It's quite obviously a futile endeavor.
I don't think it takes a genius to figure out why the police is reluctant to adopt cameras. They have literally been getting away with murder for a very long time because juries give too much weight to their testimony. But video evidence is much harder to explain away, as has been seen in many cases in other states where the camera catches policemen lying about the circumstances of unjustified shootings.
They won't do it as long as the city's leadership keep dragging their feet, and De Blasio is too afraid of the police union at this point to push the issue.
They won't do it as long as the city's leadership keep dragging their feet, and De Blasio is too afraid of the police union at this point to push the issue.
11
do you live in ny? diblasio hates the nypd.
2
You can hate something and still be afraid of it.
I spent 22 years patrolling the streets of New York. I think body cameras are a great idea. The cops are wearing the cameras. The public are the ones being filmed. It would be a great tool in court and would cut down on false allegations against police. Cops, like most people, don't like change. This will be a good tool for them and be bad for criminals.
37
And I honestly believe the cameras will "Cover" them many, many,...more times than they would ever reflect on them negatively.
7
Thanks for speaking up when so many of your compadres lack the courage to do so.
2
One thing they're not lacking in is courage.
1
How many of us, in any job, would want our entire workday captured on video?
7
Fed Ex drivers have to account for every minute of their day - they are tracked by computers. Why not law enforcement?
17
Being tracked (i.e., having your physical location noted) is not the same as having your every word and action recorded.
4
How many of us have immediate authority to shoot men, women, kids, unarmed,..?
6
Many law enforcement officers do not want to be held accountable and their unions protect them from having to answer to us. They think they are a law unto themselves - the western sheriff mentality. They are public servants and WE pay them with our tax dollars. They must be accountable to US. It is time to break the blue wall and law enforcement unions and demand that law enforcemtn help create a more civil society - not a more violent one.
14
Break up the teachers unions! Their policies have protected terrible teachers and poorly performing schools from accountability - and in the process have sacrificed generations of poor and minority children to despair and poverty!
7
“...we needed better policy guidance and training for officers on body cameras." You gotta love that line. Mr. Donald, here is your policy guidance and training:
Step 1) affix camera to body; Step 2) turn camera on and keep on; Step 3) be professional at all times and never worry about what's being recorded.
I would bet that the camera deployment delays are actually coming from the city's legal department and police union so they can get their ducks in a row for when the inevitable malfeasance is recorded. I suppose that's reasonable but they should have figured that out already. Stop the foot-dragging and deploy the cameras.
Step 1) affix camera to body; Step 2) turn camera on and keep on; Step 3) be professional at all times and never worry about what's being recorded.
I would bet that the camera deployment delays are actually coming from the city's legal department and police union so they can get their ducks in a row for when the inevitable malfeasance is recorded. I suppose that's reasonable but they should have figured that out already. Stop the foot-dragging and deploy the cameras.
4
Maybe it's because the cameras might show how often so man officers are on their cellphone or chatting in a circle. Don't believe me, just step into Grand Central. You'll see a smattering of soldiers in camouflage paying attention, NY police officers, not.
4
I can still remember a time when unions were a force for good (although there has always been union corruption of one sort or another). Now, they just hold back progress because it's becoming harder and harder for them to justify their existence to members who are not likely to make any major gains compensation-wise. And the reason they need to justify their existence is to continue the high living of union bigwigs, who often shower themselves with luxury travel, lodging and dining as a way to spend the hard-earned dues of their members.
1
Were public sector unions ever a force for good? The origins of unions had nothing to do with civil service employees, who generally had far more protections and benefits than the average private sector worker. Only when union membership started a general decline did the union bosses, eager for revenue for their coffers, decide that the public sector like police and fire were ripe for the picking. Even FDR back in the day say the danger - and he was right.
4
"Were public sector unions ever a force for good?"
Unions, whether public or private, only care about the well being of their members. If a job can be performed by one person, a union will demand that it be done by at least two, or better yet three or four, union members.
Unions, whether public or private, only care about the well being of their members. If a job can be performed by one person, a union will demand that it be done by at least two, or better yet three or four, union members.
3
Why are we concerned about body cameras on police in New York, when more than 400 people have been shot in, our President's adopted hometown, Chicago so far this year, and more people have been killed there since the President took office than we lost in Iraq. Criminal gangs control their streets and the ALCU reviews every police stop. We have seriously screwed up priorities, and the elites including the NYT wonders why Trump has traction. Every weekend brings a new death toll in Chicago and the elites ignore it, while calling for more restrictions on police.
7
Comparing LEnforcement to Gangs really doesn't help the Police.
Would you compare Jerry Sandusky to Dr. Ruth?
Would you compare Jerry Sandusky to Dr. Ruth?
3
Because the very existence of our democracy depends on police officers doing their duty honestly and obeying the law. If the police can behave any way they want and get away with it, then we are not free. Why do you think the Constitution, which I'm sure you support, has so much to say about what police May Not Do? Criminals are criminals; police must be above reproach. And yes, when a police officer stops or searches someone without probable cause, lies on a report or uses unnecessary force he has become the worst kind of criminal. Police misconduct is FAR more important than gang violence, property crime, any of the things we hire them to prevent. Societies have crime and there will always be people who don't respect the law; but you can't have a free society when law enforcement is unaccountable.
2
Why not have them?
But more important would be altering the American police policy of when they draw a weapon it is to kill. Many police forces in the world have a different approach. Germany which has few shootings anyway, when the police are involved many of the suspects are wounded and captured.
Especially in these street encounters when they are not even sure the suspect has a weapon and is not shooting at them-why not? And of course, I suppose part of those US department policies are to keep shooting, even when there are multiple officicers.
One reason is American police are just not good shots. There was a study released on the accuracy of NYPD-it was stunningly low.
But more important would be altering the American police policy of when they draw a weapon it is to kill. Many police forces in the world have a different approach. Germany which has few shootings anyway, when the police are involved many of the suspects are wounded and captured.
Especially in these street encounters when they are not even sure the suspect has a weapon and is not shooting at them-why not? And of course, I suppose part of those US department policies are to keep shooting, even when there are multiple officicers.
One reason is American police are just not good shots. There was a study released on the accuracy of NYPD-it was stunningly low.
4
Ask any range master and he will tell you that invariably the worst shots are always cops, they seem to think that having a badge makes them all expert marksmen.
1
It would be my hope that in some laboratory somewhere there is someone hard at work devising a weapon that would immobilize without lethality and be more useful than the taser, which while sometimes helpful, has its own risks.
But I'm sure they all have iPhones in their pockets. Pay them each a few bucks to keep the cameras on them turned on all the time. Why does this have to be so difficult . . . unless it's because they don't want to do it.
3
With all the recent shootings, I've never seen a body cam recording that completely captured what transpired before, during and after a police shooting. They often leave more questions than they answer.
4
Yes, and many turn the cameras off before they shoot to kill.
3
I would like to see the actual evidence of that "fact" njglea, not just some internet claim.
5
Many? How many? What supports your claim that cameras are turned off to effectuate a kill shot?
3
For me the first solution comes with training. Only training can turn trigger-happy cowboys into law abiding technicians in charge of protecting the safety of citizens , stopping criminals without applying unnecessary force.
6
coming from germany, thank you very much.
The NYPD clearly doesn't want these body cameras. When it comes to putting up cameras to catch motorists running a red light - then the NYPD is Johnny-on-the-Spot.
Holding its own officers accountable in ways that they weren't accountable for before? Don't make me laugh.
Holding its own officers accountable in ways that they weren't accountable for before? Don't make me laugh.
25
“There are still things that have to be worked through,” Mayor Bill de Blasio said. “But I want to be very clear that they are coming."
Spoken like a true politician!
Spoken like a true politician!
9
For God's sake, it is THAT difficult to place a camera on the uniform?????????
In general, the people of NY don't want the abusive actions of the police to be recorded. Otherwise, the voters would have made them wear cameras, and fired the abusive cops long ago.
2
Since they haven't signed a contract or gotten the cameras yet, I say don't. Instead get the manufacturers to make a camera that attaches to the badge, and another on the gun barrel. For cops in vehicles, exiting the vehicle triggers the camera to start recording. For beat cops, perhaps some other automated on switch. Drawing the gun out of the holster should trigger recording and get the vantage point of seeing exactly what the officer is seeing that prompts him/her to discharge weapon.
10
The culture cannot be changed within the NYPD, so here's a suggestion.
Why not have all new (and future) NYPD academy recruits be issued a body camera and be accountable for their dept. issued camera just like their service revolver? This will not stop the officers who are inclined to violate the law from anything, but it will keep them from indoctrinating new officers into corruption or misconduct. It would also negate the costs of "retraining" veteran officers and provides a logical test group spread throughout the boroughs.
Why not have all new (and future) NYPD academy recruits be issued a body camera and be accountable for their dept. issued camera just like their service revolver? This will not stop the officers who are inclined to violate the law from anything, but it will keep them from indoctrinating new officers into corruption or misconduct. It would also negate the costs of "retraining" veteran officers and provides a logical test group spread throughout the boroughs.
6
I understand the dangers of poorly-controlled cops and the value (and limitations) of body cameras, but I must ask the question:
Who on earth would want this job once all police are required to wear cameras?
I was a paramedic in NYC (a job with many structural and social similarities) for seven years, just before the takeover, and I can tell you that that job would have been totally different, and likely intolerable, if we'd had to wear cameras.
I am interested to see how this experiment works, and I hope that the choices of equipment and rules are wise, but I suspect that once this plan is fully implemented, the NYPD will lose experienced officers, and will have trouble attracting quality new officers at current pay rates.
Who on earth would want this job once all police are required to wear cameras?
I was a paramedic in NYC (a job with many structural and social similarities) for seven years, just before the takeover, and I can tell you that that job would have been totally different, and likely intolerable, if we'd had to wear cameras.
I am interested to see how this experiment works, and I hope that the choices of equipment and rules are wise, but I suspect that once this plan is fully implemented, the NYPD will lose experienced officers, and will have trouble attracting quality new officers at current pay rates.
4
Why would your job as a paramedic have been any different if you were wearing a camera? Why comment without explaining your comment?
2
The article mentions the shooting in Tulsa, but fails to say that Tulsa received a $600,000 federal grant for body cameras over a year ago, and yet not one camera has even been field tested there.
9
I realize that good policing is hard, and a complex subject. I wish to propose that NYPD, and all police departments, consider training in the Japanese based art of self-defense called Aikido, which I studied for over 10 years.
This idea was reinforced by the video of the police officers who killed the large man in NYC who was selling CD's. He was unprofessionally wrestled to the ground with a joke hold, and then accidentally? joked to death.
Aikido was invented by a famous samurai, Ueshiba, a master of ju-jitisu, karate and weapons, who wanted to come up with techniques for an unarmed warrior to disarm an armed warrior and not maim or kill him. He developed a complex series of dance or blending moves to use the attackers momentum to remove his balance, take him to the ground, and then use ancient wrist and arm techniques to stabilize the attacker without causing any serious harm. Leverage looks like magic.
One of my favorite Aikido teachers once said that the greatest form of Aikido was purely mental. You were the greatest Aikidoist, when you could talk an engraged assailant into quitting an attack, by changing his mind about it. This technique is more for the mentally disturbed, but it teaches Aikidoists to consider changing the channel of the attackers mind, much the way good parents try to change the focus of a child having a tantrum.
Aikido is good exercise, that involves tumbling and judo throws and falls. It is terrific exercise and practice.
This idea was reinforced by the video of the police officers who killed the large man in NYC who was selling CD's. He was unprofessionally wrestled to the ground with a joke hold, and then accidentally? joked to death.
Aikido was invented by a famous samurai, Ueshiba, a master of ju-jitisu, karate and weapons, who wanted to come up with techniques for an unarmed warrior to disarm an armed warrior and not maim or kill him. He developed a complex series of dance or blending moves to use the attackers momentum to remove his balance, take him to the ground, and then use ancient wrist and arm techniques to stabilize the attacker without causing any serious harm. Leverage looks like magic.
One of my favorite Aikido teachers once said that the greatest form of Aikido was purely mental. You were the greatest Aikidoist, when you could talk an engraged assailant into quitting an attack, by changing his mind about it. This technique is more for the mentally disturbed, but it teaches Aikidoists to consider changing the channel of the attackers mind, much the way good parents try to change the focus of a child having a tantrum.
Aikido is good exercise, that involves tumbling and judo throws and falls. It is terrific exercise and practice.
12
Excellent post and a terrific idea. Some police officers enjoy lifting weights and getting big & strong, though, so it would take an effort to promote this terrific idea and get the officers off the weights and onto the mat. I, too, studied Aikido for a time, and found it a fantastic way to get into shape and learn a useful, non-lethal way to protect myself AND the assailant.
I hope many people read your post and share it with police officers.
I hope many people read your post and share it with police officers.
1
And the Police would still have to wear the cameras so that their bosses were sure that the exercise is done right and proper.... Then there would have to be an additional 4 or 5 thousand police and/or clerks to monitor the cops and the cameras. And then more to store, maintain and repair/renovate the equipment.......and....and....and...........
1
The government worshiping progressives can never have too much government or too many useless, parasitic, government bureaucrats. In their ideal world, everyone would work for their great god government, just like in the old Soviet Union.
1
De Blasio as the former NYC public advocate ran on a platform of reform of city government including the police. So where is the reform? All I see is tactics designed to stall and cover up.
10
I'm guessing the lawsuits that result from these body cams will make the 9/11 Saudi suits seem like small change.
8
The real problem is police vigilantism, which reflects a failure of leadership. No amount of body cameras can compensate for leadership failure.
20
Would it matter? They choked Eric Garner to death on camera and the cop that did it walked. Clearly, the City of New York, the DA's office, and the PBA have no interest in holding police to the same laws they've been tasked with enforcing.
58
John Oliver did a brilliant analysis this weekend on how body cameras helped drop the reports of abuse and misconduct. NYC of all places should have these and not just because of the above mentioned, but due to the fact we are on such high preparedness for another attack, this could also help in surveillance if let's say a bomb should go off in an area that the police are patrolling and get a look of those that were in the area.
Instead laws are being passed around the nation that make it illegal to film cops doing the wrong thing. We can still support the work of the police, but with that should come common sense solutions.
Instead laws are being passed around the nation that make it illegal to film cops doing the wrong thing. We can still support the work of the police, but with that should come common sense solutions.
15
The police union stalled it
What's good for the public isn't necessarily what's best for the union.
Lots of liabilities may result from this program. I'm sure the city is excited and concerned about the pros and cons
What's good for the public isn't necessarily what's best for the union.
Lots of liabilities may result from this program. I'm sure the city is excited and concerned about the pros and cons
4
monetary liabilities are not a concern of the police unions. by law its members do not have personal liability to those they abuse.
2
Surveillance cannot substitute for trust and professional integrity. Yet surveillance has the virtue of immediately satisfying media pressure and earning points for self-serving politicians.
Body cams might undermine the blue wall of silence and reveal the truth, and the NYPD doesn't want that...just as they turned their backs on a mayor who would dare to speak the truth.
34
Two things strike me.
I doubt the policeman's union and the police brass want them: too much accountability. It would show up their lack of training, judgement and supervision at all levels - right up to the commissioner.
Second, I'll wager the final terms of the sweetheart deal to enrich some long time supporter of someone important in city or state government need to be ironed out.
Sad to say that this is indicative of my trust in city and state government - no matter which party of kleptocrats is in charge. Goes for the Feds, too.
I doubt the policeman's union and the police brass want them: too much accountability. It would show up their lack of training, judgement and supervision at all levels - right up to the commissioner.
Second, I'll wager the final terms of the sweetheart deal to enrich some long time supporter of someone important in city or state government need to be ironed out.
Sad to say that this is indicative of my trust in city and state government - no matter which party of kleptocrats is in charge. Goes for the Feds, too.
28
the same arguments more or less are used by the police to refuse filming of all police interrogations. they know that all rights violation will then be caught.
31
If YOU were a COP, what would you prefer???
Carrying a gun should be linked to wearing a camera.
Police should absolutely have the choice not to wear a camera. That is their option. But no camera, no gun.
Police should absolutely have the choice not to wear a camera. That is their option. But no camera, no gun.
69
Why not also have cameras in every public school classroom so parents can monitor the instruction of their children in real time? Would the teachers union be in favor of that?
8
Teachers don't have guns, and don't presume that my children are guilty of crimes as the police seem to do. Police seem to view all of us as guilty-until-proven-innocent.
3
So this article about police body cams is just an opportunity for you to grind your conservative ax about teachers' unions. You guys are so tiresome.
3
According to history, SOMEBODY is taking guns to school............and did I not read recently that some states and other jurisdictions have permitted Open Carry in schools?
1
If the NYPD were to be the first to implement, I could understand the delay. Given that many other departments have already done so, I can only attribute this to ineptitude. The majority of cops will be shown to be professional and subject to incredible abuse fairly often. The minority of cops who abuse power will be shown to be what they are. Even acknowledging that the size of the NYPD is far greater than the departments that have already implemented body camera programs, a pilot program of several thousand cameras could already have been started in one borough.
31
FH--No, it's because NYPD will have to completely repopulate the department with cops who can pass a psych test. That would be very expensive, and revealing.
1
majority of cops proven to be professional is an insufficient number.
OK NYPD, here is a good pilot program, put the body camera on all your police, and have serious penalties for officers who turn them off. It is time for an iota of law enforcement for the enforcers.
42
Absolutely! ALL police ! ALL ranks! ALL duty locations ! 24/7. What is good for a Private is good for a Captain........
1
DeBlasio seems like the police department is running him as opposed to him running the department. No cameras. Panteleo is still collecting checks. There aren't any numbers for property seized during arrest.
What's going on? Hakeem Jefferies is starting to look very good.
What's going on? Hakeem Jefferies is starting to look very good.
11
So much easier to stop and frisk and commit crimes with no accountability…all in the name of "protect and serve"…of course…
31
Don't worry, Cops, we will be filming you.
64
Then when they arrest you for some vague criminal act that they dreamed up on the spot, they will confiscate your camera, throw you in the paddy wagon, take you to lockup, isolate you in a cell, and beat you until you apologize for not trusting them to do their job…
6
That's a good thing. No one should have to wear a body camera to perform their job. If Police are required than why not teachers or fireman or sanitation workers? Trust the police to do their job and get out of the way.
3
Let's talk when teachers, firefighters and sanitation workers are armed on the job.
35
Cops should wear cameras because they're the ones who routinely kill people.
40
Teachers, fire fighter and sanitation workers aren't killing citizens. And since Johnny Law is so holier than thou, he shouldn't have any problem with it.
Only people who don't want to reveal the bad behavior committed by law enforcement don't want body cameras.
Only people who don't want the disparate behavior of cops to be exposed are against body cameras.
Only people who don't want to reveal the bad behavior committed by law enforcement don't want body cameras.
Only people who don't want the disparate behavior of cops to be exposed are against body cameras.
10
The idea of having to "get it right" berofe proceeding may be wrong. It may be necessary to iterate on an idea to reach the right solution.
3
Slow to adopt audiovisual surveillance of themselves, on purpose? Nothing to hide, right? It may be a matter of money, or the bureaucracy at work, or the will to proceed, a form of supervision no one seems comfortable with. And yet, may change a culture of abuse of power (which we see in Banking, Wall Street, and any other structure where power is there for the taking. Tough issue.
3
NYPD slow to adopt body cameras. Of course they are.
In one city when the police started using body cameras the reports of Police misconduct dropped by 88% (source John Oliver, Last Week Tonight)
Why would the NYPD want that? How else an they get away with being above the law?
I'm sure the union leader is telling everyone how unsafe the cops will be with body cameras and of course that is a lie.
In one city when the police started using body cameras the reports of Police misconduct dropped by 88% (source John Oliver, Last Week Tonight)
Why would the NYPD want that? How else an they get away with being above the law?
I'm sure the union leader is telling everyone how unsafe the cops will be with body cameras and of course that is a lie.
94
Body cameras are a brilliant idea and any cost will be more than offset by the millions of dollars its saves the city in defensing frivolous lawsuits about improper police conduct. The facts are that 99% of police encounters with civilians are by the book stops, be it the reasonable suspicion needed for a stop and frisk, a traffic stop, or a full blown probable cause search incident to a lawful arrest. These days there are cameras everywhere and for law abiding citizens cameras are always welcome. The civil libertarian, long haired, pot smoking, ACLU types will always cry foul with any perceived invasion of "privacy." These people should educate themselves on privacy law. There can be no reasonable expectation of privacy when you are out in public, walking the streets, driving a car, shopping in a store, or talking to a cop. The more cameras everywhere the better and safer we will all be. Put them in every intersection, on top of every store front, in every gas station, bodega, church and school and make them high definition. The potential treasure trove of information will put perps on notice and save countless lives. The only people that could reasonably find this objectionable are the criminals whose nefarious deeds will be subject to exposure at the click of a rewind button.
14
Because there's no way a government could possibly abuse surveillance at that level?
But please. Continue to lump together everyone concerned about an unchecked surveillance state as "long haired pot smokers". That really strengthens your point. /sarcasm
But please. Continue to lump together everyone concerned about an unchecked surveillance state as "long haired pot smokers". That really strengthens your point. /sarcasm
6
One word comes to mind.
Despicable
Despicable
35
After reading the article I see no plausible reason why Police in NYC shouldn't all be wearing body cams.
If you don't switch it on before engaging an individual, suspension.
If you have it on and turn it off before engaging an individual, suspension.
It is a deplorable but accurate admission to say that this may be the only way to hold officers individually accountable for their actions. This is why almost all of them are against it, they don't care one lick about invading your privacy, please, they want their continued safety in numbers.
If you don't switch it on before engaging an individual, suspension.
If you have it on and turn it off before engaging an individual, suspension.
It is a deplorable but accurate admission to say that this may be the only way to hold officers individually accountable for their actions. This is why almost all of them are against it, they don't care one lick about invading your privacy, please, they want their continued safety in numbers.
76
Not suspension, Writer. Fire them.
The NYPD continues to fail to inspire trust and confidence with the public.
72
The New York department conducted a pilot program involving 54 officers that ended in March. J. Peter Donald, a spokesman for the agency, said one of the lessons was that “we needed better policy guidance and training for officers on body cameras.”
In what ways I wonder? Technical operation and deployment or modified behaviors?
https://www.flppr.org/