pistol cam coming

[hnk45acp]

PHOTO 'SHOOT'
PISTOL CAM URGED FOR NYPD COPS
By LEONARD GREENE


Cameras On Guns

Police officers may have Big Brother review their actions through a mini-camera attached to their guns.

May 5, 2008 --
The makers of a small, digital camera that attaches to the barrel of a gun say the device would have ended any dispute about what happened in the Sean Bell shooting.

Now, a former Bronx homicide prosecutor who helped develop the Pistol Cam wants the NYPD to consider putting the audio and video gadget on its service weapons.

By using the mini-cams to review their actions, "hopefully, [officers] will make better decisions under the most stressful circumstances," ex-Assistant District Attorney Bill DeProspo said.
Although a judge last month cleared three police officers of any crimes in Bell's death, the training and procedures that the cops followed face almost certain review.
If the cameras had been used in that case, they would have given investigators instant video from several perspectives and provided audio to show whether the officers identified themselves before they unloaded 50 bullets.
DeProspo said the device could even be used to try to prevent such deadly shootings. Its footage could be made part of NYPD training to better show what to do - and not to do.
Bell was unarmed when he was shot dead by the cops in Queens 18 months ago. He and his friends were leaving his bachelor party at a Jamaica strip club at the time.
Cops who followed Bell and his friends to his car said they thought one of them had a weapon, although no gun was ever recovered.
Instead of relying solely on eyewitness testimony in such cases, investigators would have crucial footage if the gun-mounted cameras were used. The device is turned on by a magnetic switch as soon as the firearm is pulled from its holster, DeProspo said.
Encrypted software would keep unauthorized officers from tampering with the data, which can instantly be uploaded to a laptop via a USB connection, he said.
DeProspo said the cost of the cameras - $600 a piece - would be offset by money the city could save in lawsuits if armed with such devices.
DeProspo is no stranger to cop-shooting controversies.
He served in the Bronx District Attorney's Office in 1984, when an elderly, knife-wielding grandmother, Eleanor Bumpers, was shot dead by cops during a chaotic eviction.
Union officials for patrol officers and detectives, and the NYPD all declined to comment.
The Orange County Sheriff's Department is field-testing the camera.
Additional reporting by Christina Carrega

now instantaneous reactions can be monday morning quarterbacked.

 

[Rachen]

Good. This should do something to discourage cops from becoming SS Geheimstaatspolizei killing squads in areas where citizens have been disarmed and people are used by power hungry politicans as pawns.

 

[ilbob]

The makers of a small, digital camera that attaches to the barrel of a gun say the device would have ended any dispute about what happened in the Sean Bell shooting.

Unless the recording gets into the hands of independent investigators, the end result will just be the same thing that frequently happens to recordings from squad car cameras when there is questionable police action.

 

[The Lone Haranguer]

Finally, a use for those knife-like grooved edges and saw teeth on handgun frames.

 

[Henry Bowman]

By using the mini-cams to review their actions, "hopefully, [officers] will make better decisions under the most stressful circumstances," ex-Assistant District Attorney Bill DeProspo said.

If the presence of the cam is a factor in an LEO's decision of whether to shoot, it is most likely to manifest as a hesitation that ends up getting them killed.

 

[Claude Clay]

camera would have to be built like a 'black box' seeing how often its going to be dropped after the shooting stops..............

 

[misANTHrope]

Outside of the tactical issue already mentioned here, I don't for a second buy the assertion that these cameras would cut down on lawsuits. If there's one thing I've learned from years of reading the news, it's that there are no bad guys. Little Johnny just wasn't the kind of person who would rob a liquor store and shoot the clerk.

In other words, I assert that the families who are going to sue over otherwise good shoots are going to do it anyway, regardless of eyewitness testimony, satellite imagery, or whatever. In their eyes, their precious underprivileged son was gunned down unmercifully by the racist, classist, sexist pigs.

Call me cynical, but I don't see that changing any time soon.

 

[sacp81170a]

This should do something to discourage cops from becoming SS Geheimstaatspolizei killing squads in areas where citizens have been disarmed and people are used by power hungry politicans as pawns.

And perhaps if we required it on all guns then it would discourage you non-LEO's from becoming raving homicidal maniacs and gunning down innocent women, children and puppy dogs. See? It's a double edged sword. Careful you don't cut your own nose off to spite your face.

A big problem I can see with this is that many shootings take place in no or low light situations. I would distrust this on a working pistol as much as I distrust most electronic whizbang gimcrackery. Where do the batteries go? Will they decide it should disable the gun if the camera's not working? A number of questions come to mind. Another step down the slippery slope to the "safe" gun. After all, if the police use it, why shouldn't everyone else be forced to?

 

[coloradokevin]

Good. This should do something to discourage cops from becoming SS Geheimstaatspolizei killing squads in areas where citizens have been disarmed and people are used by power hungry politicans as pawns.

Give me a break, and keep dreaming up the conspiracy theories.

If the presence of the cam is a factor in an LEO's decision of whether to shoot, it is most likely to manifest as a hesitation that ends up getting them killed.

Henry, I think you are exactly right on this one.

Some departments currently have requirements that officers complete a use of force report whenever their weapon leaves the holster (be it a building clearance, etc). Historically, these departments have tended to see situations where officers didn't act with sufficient force when they should have, either due to the fear of department politics, or because of their desire not to spend a couple of hours working on a "use of force" report.

Taser International has already released a variation of the X-26 Taser that has a camera built in. I've seen a few videos from these cameras, and some would have been quite helpful to the officer. Unfortunately, a weapon mounted camera only has the ability to record a few seconds worth of video (when the weapon/less lethal is drawn). As such, important details leading to the decision to deploy such a tool could be missed, and thereby leave the officers under fire for legitimate uses of force!


For sake of example, watch how two different video angles on the same incident can give you an entirely different opinon on the shooting:

Here's what many (even on this site, or especially on this site -- I'm not so sure anymore) would have called a "police execution":

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6939996563727581398&q=police+shoot+dash+cameras&ei=0k0fSNXuEJTCqAPGkvSqAQ&hl=en


Here's an obviously good shoot of an armed suspect:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gc1hdOTEbPU

Same bad guy, same cops, same situation. Video #1 essentially shows what looks like a bunch of cops shooting a guy in the back for walking away. In video #2 you can see the subject struggle with an officer, point a gun presumably towards another officer, walk away, and turn the gun on an officer again ALL before the officers fire on the suspect. They easily would have been justified in shooting the suspect within the first couple of seconds on the first video, when the subject initially pointed the gun at another officer/bystander/etc.

 

[LawBot5000]

People said the same things about dash cams and those worked out pretty well for all involved. We already record the hell out of every vehicle mounted gun in the military.

We can fit several hours of decent resolution video on a chicklet sized 4gb sd card so I don't see any reason why we can't have the camera record from the second it leaves the holster to the second it is put back. Why not have it record sound as well?

Just like the dash cams, this will help the honest cops against false accusations and help catch the bad seeds.

The more cameras on scene, the more likely you get the true story.

 

[Tribal]

I'd be more in favor of requiring that police officers wear a portable camera while on duty. This would take the emphasis off the gun and onto the police, where it belongs*.


*This is not to bash the police, but to say that in a free society we should have the expectation that we may examine the actions of those we entrust to enforce the law. It's the same reason we require transcripts to be taken of court proceedings.

 

[sacp81170a]

I'd be more in favor of requiring that police officers wear a portable camera while on duty. This would take the emphasis off the gun and onto the police, where it belongs*.

Actually, I'd agree with that. We're already wearing body mikes, so a camera wouldn't add that much. Not adding unnecessary encumbrances to critical equipment is a good thing.

This is not to bash the police, but to say that in a free society we should have the expectation that we may examine the actions of those we entrust to enforce the law. It's the same reason we require transcripts to be taken of court proceedings.

Agreed. We can turn the dash cam to capture video to the side, as in walking up to a residence, but it's all too easy to forget to do so. A body cam, like a body mike, would follow you everywhere.

 

[CWL]

This should do something to discourage cops from becoming SS Geheimstaatspolizei killing squads

The "SS" and "Gestapo" were entirely different organizations.

You sure love to post inaccurate information don't you?

I don't have any love for NAZIs but I get upset when people throw around uneducated comments about our LEOs.

 

[Rachen]

The "SS" and "Gestapo" were entirely different organizations.

Same a**hole, different colored s***, thats all. Notice the reversal of that old quote.

Anyway, I don't mean to bash LEOs or anything, but sometimes, bad things happen, especially in NY, where the pace of life is so quick, and so many different ideologies, well, you name it.

I support the camera thing for LEOs, especially in large municipalities.

Oh, also, when have I posted any inaccurate historical information here before?
Just curious.

 

[romeo212000]

I am opposed to it. Sounds like a good way to cause hesitation and get an officer killed. It happens all too often now anyways. Too many officers cannot doo their jobs because of the fear of a law suit.

 

[John828]

Maybe I'm naive, but when you can't trust the police, who can you trust? I know they are human and there are good ones and there are bad ones, but cameras on the guns? One day we won't be able to even piss without it being weighed, analyzed and recorded.

Thoughts:

How big would it be and how will it affect performance?

What if the LEO hesitates two seconds wondering if it is a good shoot and the hesitation gets the LEO killed?

As far as lawsuits go, a good lawyer can use the video in the wrongful death suit to sway the jury? Give them a "bullet's eye view" of the BG getting blown away.

A camera on the body would probably be better if it rolled continuously because like ColoradoKevin said there is much that happens before the draw usually.

Personally, I probably give too much trust to the police. I have never had a bad experience with them and I've even been arrested. I broke the law and they caught me. I wouldn't want to do their job, but I am thankful they do.

 

[Tribal]

when you can't trust the police, who can you trust?

It's basically idealism vs. realism, I guess. You and I both would rather have Sheriff Andy Taylor who can do his job simply by being the face of the law and shaming criminals into doing what's right. Realistically, it's how most of us react when someone catches us doing something wrong (or we think that they might) : we don't do it.

A government of the people has delegated the police power, including law enforcement and the use of force in support of it, to groups whom we (clever people that we are) call the police. In support of the rule of law, ordinary citizens have ceded the use of force when we are not directly threatened to the police (this means that we can defend ourselves from a robber, but we can't form a posse and go after him if the police are willing to do it). We have the right to expect an accounting to show that our delegation of our right is being used properly. Phone calls to 911 are recorded, government keeps extensive records (including, as I mentioned, transcripts of court proceedings -and the failure of the court to properly record the proceedings is grounds for reversal and new trial on appeal), and so on. Requiring cops to wear video cameras is a good way to keep them honest; most already are and so this will be a good way of vindicating them from charges of brutality or whatever.

The downsides to the use of a "pistol cam" are numerous. Among other things, it focuses attention on the gun rather than on the officer and thus serves as a bridge to requiring further restrictions on firearms. Secondly, it is unlikely that the camera will show more than the actual shooting and the escalation immediately preceding it (and how does muzzle flash fit into this?).

Having the police recorded is an idea worth considering; having it be through gun cams is not the way to do it.

 

[Sans Authoritas]

The Lone Haranguer wrote:

Finally, a use for those knife-like grooved edges and saw teeth on handgun frames.

Hilarious, and so true. : )

-Sans Authoritas

 

[Sans Authoritas]

I'd like to see some gun cameras on 12 gauge, 37mm and 40mm launchers, first.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?d...+dash+cameras&ei=0k0fSNXuEJTCqAPGkvSqAQ&hl=en

Then the people could see first hand what these 150 black-clad thugs thought was so "funny" about shooting an unarmed, non-threatening civilian.


-Sans Authoritas

 

[Indifferent]

Yes, in this society Police should be monitered.

If it takes police and Civilians only having guns that have a camera on them and it actually keeps our constitutional rights to protect ourselves, I have no issue with that.

And why is that, because some civilians and some HighRoaders and some Government officials are total scum who are smart enough to fabricate, and plant.

This camera is not going to get anyone killed by hesitating, reasonable suspiscian (sp) for your life is good enough to shoot, when the guy is just an unarmed civilian who is upset, and doesn't want to cooperate or is someone you just don't like, that is not reason to shoot.

I have worked for a City before and I have heard the stories, seen the payouts and seen the errors and seen the cover ups and seen the lies, I think its perfectly fine, to make people have a visual report of what went down, rather than, "Your honor, I thought he was going to shoot us, so I opened fire" and the prosecutor or who ever else "So no weapons were found, the deceased doesn't even own guns, witnesses claim his back was to you with his hands above his head, all the exit wounds are in the chest area, and the entrance wounds are in the back, and you thought he was going to shoot?" And the Judge says "The Officers testimony is more credible than witnesses, ruling for the defendant, case dismissed." Ahhhh. Long live America.

 

[TAB]

If I was a cop I'd want one.

 

[The Lone Haranguer]

The "lapel cam" - if he is going to have such a camera at all - makes more sense than one mounted on the handgun itself. If he shoots, how is it going to maintain the image under recoil as the muzzle flips up?

 

[Robert Hairless]

I hope that police departments will at least consider sending their officers to a good film school. Quality production values are important in any video endeavor.

 

[Cannonball888]

Never bring a pistol cam to a rifle cam fight.

 

[hankdatank1362]

I'd like to see some gun cameras on 12 gauge, 37mm and 40mm launchers, first.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...PGkvSqAQ&hl=en

Then the people could see first hand what these 150 black-clad thugs thought was so "funny" about shooting an unarmed, non-threatening civilian.


-Sans Authoritas

I think you meant to post a different video. This video is one angle of a dynamic incident which appears to be police shooting an unarmed man. The other angle, which is videotaped as well, shows what really happened, that the "civilian" pointed a weapon at the officers, and brough the shooting upon himself. It was already posted earlier in the thread.

And congratulations Rachen for proving Godwin right in the first reply to the OP.