Posted on 02/07/2019 10:11:19 AM PST by Jeff Chandler
The Phoenix City Council on Wednesday voted in favor of a $5.7 million expansion of the local police department’s body-worn camera program.
The 7-to-1 vote approves a contract to purchase 2,000 body-worn cameras for Phoenix police officers. As part of a pilot program, the Phoenix Police Department currently deploys 300 body cameras on officers around the city.
The vote also approves 21 new positions in the police department and city prosecutor’s office to help administer the program. The new positions will cost an estimated $1.6 million.
Council member Jim Waring, who has previously raised questions about the costs of buying cameras versus hiring new officers, was the sole “no” vote. Before the vote, activists spoke in favor of body cameras, while demanding strict policies for the transparency program.
[snip]
City Manager Ed Zuercher confirmed during the meeting that PLEA has asked for 5 percent raises for any officers wearing cameras during ongoing union negotiations.
Several of the public speakers at Wednesday’s meeting were affiliated with Poder in Action, a community group that has been critical of Phoenix police officers’ use of force. The Phoenix Police Department made national headlines last year for having the highest rate of police shootings among large cities in the United States.
The new cameras will come from Axon, a law enforcement hardware company best known for making Tasers. According to Police Chief Jeri Williams, the cameras will come with auto-activation capabilities to help ensure that critical moments are caught on video.
(Excerpt) Read more at phoenixnewtimes.com ...
Good. Body cameras should (should) keep good cops from bad folks and keep good citizens safe from bad cops.
Or at least provide evidence of both sides’ activities.
Good. Body cameras should (should) keep good cops from bad folks and keep good citizens safe from bad cops.
Or at least provide evidence of both sides’ activities.
$2,000 per camera?
Why is it every time a government does something, they spend money like it isn’t theirs?
>
Good. Body cameras should (should) keep good cops from bad folks and keep good citizens safe from bad cops.
Or at least provide evidence of both sides’ activities.
>
Oh, I’ve already seen how ‘well’ govt handles records.
How fast is the firing/prosecuting of those that ‘lose’, delete or...when it comes to ‘one of their own’??
Though I cannot provide the actual clips, I have read of cases were cops were fired from their jobs because of a questionable event and they’re *not* having their body cams on at the point in question.
Also, there has been at least one conviction of a cop that did not chose to have his body cam on and someone was busted up badly.
What’s just as good are the times cops have been able to put out footage to correct when someone has lied about their behavior.
It’s all about a timeline. Nothing changes overnight.
Body cams are a good start.
While I agree that governments have a talent for wasting money, I think there’s a little more to it than that.
While the line item may speak to a “camera” the cost is a bundle per line item. It includes licensing, Software as a Service, redaction utilities, and most importantly the unfathomable amount of storage that is required to store all the data. The storage is also redundant across multiple data centers and has to meet stringent federal CJIS policies which a limited number of cloud services provides can meet.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.