There are few issues that state and local governments are grappling with that are as complicated as police body cameras. The tragedies over the last year has created a rush to get cameras on every officer in the country. And now state and local governments are rushing to catch up.
Proponents say the cameras protect both the officer and the public. Officers have a “witness” to protect them against false claims. The public has a “witness” to back up claims that might not otherwise seem credible. Police Departments and state agencies can use the footage to review and train officers on how to better handle situations or model those successful interactions for other officers. Many argue it is the public’s right to know how well their public servants are doing their jobs. Finally, most people (even my nine-year old) behave better when someone, even if it some unknown “Big Brother,” is watching.
Opponents argue issues ranging from cost to privacy to the actual need for wearable cameras in the first place. Critics argue that states need need to pass new legislation and regulations that protect the public’s privacy and protect the police officer’s ability to do their job before even considering implementing body cam programs. Many talk about the cost, which is being pushed on already struggling state and local governments. Others say its an invasion of privacy, asking “What is the government going to do with all that data?” Still others say that the body camera issue is a dangerous over reaction to recent police brutality cases. And, let’s face it, cameras are still not perfect witnesses as they don’t always tell the whole story.
Body cam legislation is not a pure right and left issue. These bills are supported (often even pushed) by community and police reform groups, transparency advocates, some police unions and also those companies, from tech startups to major corporations, that sell camera equipment and storage solutions and services to state and local governments.
So it is no surprise that states and local governments have taken many different approaches to manage the implementation of this new technology. And its implementation does seem to be inevitable given all the media attention on the issue.
Solutions range from Seattle Police Department creating a YouTube channel for the public to view redacted footage (Seattle’s Police Department Has a YouTube Channel For Its Body Camera Footage) to the sixteen police departments in Minnesota calling for body cam footage to restrict public access, at least until there is a comprehensive state-wide plan is adopted. (Minnesota Want Body Cam Footage to Remain Private)
And states are answering that call. State legislatures and agencies are introducing legislation and writing rules around this new technology.
As state and local governments across the country look to equip their police officers officers and other employees (Police Aren’t The Only Public Workers Wearing Cameras) with body cameras, many are struggling to strike a balance between the public’s right to know and privacy protections. From the map you can see how many states introduced legislation on body-worn cameras, body cameras or bodycams. California led all states with eleven bills. (See the full list of bodycam-related legislation here)
So far this year, twelve states — Arizona, California, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Maryland, North Carolina, North Dakota, South Carolina, Texas and Utah — passed laws concerning public access to the footage. The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press has a great interactive map showing how states are dealing with who can request body cam footage, with links to a number of local ordinances as well.
BT50.Widget({ backImage: 'flat', billSheet: '2a4febe3-f8d2-413f-8ab6-e66a6dba6a26', borderColor: '#9C9C9C', fontFamily: 'Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif', height: 400, rows: '25', stateFilter: 'AK,AL,AR,AZ,CA,CO,CT,DC,DE,FL,GA,HI,IA,ID,IL,IN,KS,KY,LA,MA,MD,ME,MI,MN,MO,MS,MT,NC,ND,NE,NH,NJ,NM,NV,NY,OH,OK,OR,PA,RI,SC,SD,TN,TX,US,UT,VA,VT,WA,WI,WV,WY', sortBy: '3', sortDir: 'asc', tBackground: '#CCCCCC', tForeground: '#444444', title: 'Police Body Cameras', width: '800' });
The South Carolina law exempts footage recorded by the cameras from public disclosure under the state’s Freedom of Information Act. A Georgia law that took effect in July limits who can request the videos and pending legislation would deem the videos “records of law enforcement” and not subject to disclosure under that state’s public records law. (credit model legislation to help state and local governments with the decisions on what video they should be required to retain and release. These videos cover those instances that show the use of force