@honozooloo: Both rights are important. When officers take on the "risks" of the job, it's expected that the risks are from criminal, not from bad protocol or equipment.

I am of the opinion that "bad cops" are in the minority for the majority of the country. You don't hear about "good cops" because "good" is bad news.

As I said, it's not the camera on the gun idea that I object to (aside from a slighty "big brother" fear that lingers in the back of my head,) it has fantastic possibities for trial evidence, as well as a way to protect the public from Bad cops, when they act - it's the technology of the camera pictured. If the device being tested in OC right now is the same as pictured, It's my opinion that the technology is not ready for this purpose, the risk of rendering an officer less effective in an emergency situation is too great. In such situations, less than a second is long enough to make a difference. I understand that many will disagree with me intheir desire to see this technology implemented, but I would give it another few years until a better design is avalible.

Sean

@honozooloo: I'm a cadet in a police academy.

As far as I am concerned I do not mind having additional equipment looking at me during my responses as long as it does not interfere with said response or my safety.

We do choose to be cops... and many of us see it as a calling to serve society. Please think of us as well because many of the situations we face (and I will soon face) are unimaginable.

i4ni

@Sean: The rules of engagement for police are almost always to their disadvantage anyway. They are peace keepers, not sheriffs in the wild west. If police policy was "shoot first, as questions later" this country would be a whole lot more dangerous to live in.

Yes, this device may inhibit an officers ability to draw their weapon but it will increase the safety of the public they are sworn to protect. It will protect the rights of citizens who are victims of police brutality. Why not implement it, to protect the innocent people who are shot due to bad judgment calls on the part of law enforement?

Remember, the cops chose to be cops, and accepted the risks of being peace keepers. The innocent people who are "accidentally" fired upon in so many police "incidents" around this country every year did not volunteer for any part of what happened to them.

I guess the question is, whose rights are more important?

honozooloo

So that's 3 guns a cop has to tote around now. 1 that's got the big brother camera, 1 to plant on suspects that got shot and whose gun got lost in all of the confusion, and 1 for making people dance.

OldSchoolGadgetLover

@mpriorfan22: @mpriorfan22: For the purposes of self preservation, officers are trained never to aim for an arm or leg, but the torso as i understand. If an officer is in a position where they geniuenly need to use their gun (such as, being fired upon by a suspect) they can't afford to play games like that.

Sean

I think they need these on the end of the damn Tazers that seem to pull out and use on anyone who has a big mouth.
I think the camera at the end of a gun will not give the right prospective, especially if its drawn and fired in less than 2 seconds.
Now the camera would be cool on the end of M-16 in Iraq.

Razta

@Mike from Boston: They would fight it tooth and nail using that argument because it's a very valid argumant. One of my best friends recently joined the San Diego Police force, and he told me about his training and some of the things he learned, among them was how difficult it already is for an officer to draw his gun - the holster is designed specifically so it can only be removed by pulling it directly straight up, in the most basic model. In the "safer" models, one must press a button first, or in the "safest" models, multiple buttons at once, while drawing the firearm. A two or three buttom model ( I can't remember which ) is known as "The Widowmaker," because an alarming high perecent of officers who use this model die from being unable to draw fast enough. I've worn his holster and tried it with his dummy/training gun. I'm not surprised that hours upon hours are spent practicing this manuver during training and firing practice, it's hard.

I don't entierly disagree with this idea, but if the attachment in the photograph we are talking about, I can't support it yet. It needs to be smaller, more form fit, add as little bulk to the arm as possible, and as lightweight as possible. The Device in the photograph is larger than the front of the gun itself, and that'll cause too many problems. Police Officers are at enough risk as is, I won't support putting them in any further danger.

Sean

this may also make them more tentative to use their weapons in actual threatening situations. i say just aim for the shins.

mpriorfan22

@Sean:

I bet the number of police fatalities based on your assumption would be insignificant compared to the number of unnecessary deaths it would prevent.

That being said, law enforcement will surely fight this implementation tooth and nail using exactly your argument.

Mike from Boston

@DaKidJordan: Watching bullets in flight isn't hard. Go to a long range pistol silhouette match sometime. It's fascinating to watch a bullet from a .44 mag arc into a target 200 meters away, to see the impact and note the way the bullet disintegrates. Really fascinating stuff. I've been doing it for almost 30 years and it never gets old.
@Sean: The bulk of the device isn't a problem. Lights attached to the accessory rail as shown in the picture have been around for a long time. Holster solutions have been worked out. The pistol becomes a bit bulkier and clumsier but only to a degree. It's just not a serious problem.

benenglish

I guarantee you the number of black people that get shot will decrease dramatically with the implementation of this device. Just make sure its at least 720p otherwise you won't see shit.

daftrok

anyone want to take bets on how long it'll be before a cop dies because he coulden't get his gun out of the holster as a result of the new bulky gun-cam attachment?

Sean

ive seen this before... in like 1938!!!

[blog.modernmechanix.com]

now go invent something new

swartz

haha word i would love that they could zoom in on the bullet and watch it hit that would be awesome in slow mo good stuff i live near newburgh greatttt

DaKidJordan

I can't wait for the Fox Network to come out with a new show called SHOOTOUT, which consists entirely of pistol cam footage!!!!

jetexas

@Sean: if this was such a problem they would issue pop-out devices like those used in poker games in old westerns :^) (and in Red Heat, a very decent movie, considering how unfunny Jim Belushi can be)

as for this idea - a step in a very good direction. cops, being servants of the tax payers, should be on audio/visual recording ALL the time whilst on duty. This would eliminate bad cops entirely, and be very useful in court as well.

banmojo

@Sean: the holsters you describe are for the officers' safety - so that nare-do-wells don't try to grab the officers' guns. It's not to make them think hard about whether they want to draw it.

I'm a long-time advocate for measures preventing police misconduct, but I agree with concerns about officers being impeded from drawing their guns. This has got to be field tested to make sure that it doesn't slow down response time at all. That's the only way that it will be adopted, and the only way I'd feel comfortable on insisting on it. Officers should be well trained and the highest expectations of professionalism placed on them, but they do guard our safety on a daily basis and they should not be asked to put themselves in more jeopardy.

Ultimately this, like cameras in cars, is likely to be more helpful to police than hurtful. For the most part officers use their guns in a responsible manner and the cameras will show that in a vast majority of shooting cases.

weatherman

Trial evidence is right! This will be like the TaserCam - almost all TaserCam footage vindicates the officer as being justified in deploying the Taser. The jury usually gets a real education when they see the cam footage - watching how "poor little Johnny" was roughed up while trying to pound the crap out of the officer after he just held up the liquor store.

Holsters: The level III 'Widowmakers' retention holsters are VERY unpopular - I have one and it's sitting in my closet. And that's where it's going to stay.

And 'Servants of the taxpayers' is the phrase I always hear from the person I'm giving a citation to for going wildly over the speed limit. Yeah, right. Guess what? Your taxes pay a miniscule amount of police budgets - businesses pay the bulk.

Bad cops? Yeah, they're out there. Just like bad people. We usually end up weeding them out ourselves, because as much as we hate bad guys, we hate bad cops even more.

MountainCop

Cops would have to be frequently and randomly subjected to searches themselves or every cop would simply carry personal cameraless guns in addition to the standard issue.

fogponics

@Sean: you obviously have zero experience with custom holsters

fogponics

The Brits have something similar, though they don't quiet have the camera on the gun (After all, Brits don't neeeeeed guns). Anyway, a bobby goes around with a camera on his head and makes sure to get video evidence where ever he/she goes. I'm all for it, it should fill the void until we get Robocop into the mix.

bbfreak

@MountainCop: your last paragraph is quite refreshing, you obviously do not work in SoCals Inland Empire

fogponics

This'll make for some interesting Youtube footage.

Jesse in Japan

@fogponics:
And if they use that personal, cameraless gun to shoot anyone, or even shoot at anyone, they'll be in serious trouble.

Darkest Daze

"Your taxes pay a miniscule amount of police budgets - businesses pay the bulk."

Well, that explains a lot.

cbdsteve

@bbfreak:
The Brits DO need guns, in fact, the number of "Firearms Officers" in the UK has increased dramatically since 9/11 and more so since the London metro bombings. Not seeing the guns is still the norm with a great deal of the Firearms Officers in plain clothes and the others in vehicles with guns locked in gun safes on-board the vehicle, but they are there and more abundant than you would guess.

inspectorgadget420

@fogponics:

You're right - nor would I ever work there. I only go to SoCal when I absolutely have to.

MountainCop

Still waiting for the bullet-cam!

kevjohn

@i4ni: That Lassard can be a real dick. Keep your head up and tell motor mouth I said hi!

highfloydelity

@daftrok:

I guarantee you the number of black people that get shot will decrease dramatically with the implementation of this device. Just make sure its at least 720p otherwise you won't see shit.

This racist is right, no one was able to see anything before 720p. Why, back in the low def days we just imagined what the pictures should be like by listening to TV shows.

king_of_fools

This thing shouts "Hey criminals! Kick my ass! I can't really use this thing I'm pointing at you, because I'll get fired after the video of it hits the evening news!" Why not just take the guns away and issue those silly little sticks like they have in Britain - "Stop! or I'll ... say stop again!"

scotth0

seen this before, just lighter, smaller and cheaper.Made for a rifle or LNL.
www.advancedtaccam.com. What is it with people that want to sell to the military and LE at huge prices?
And to make a level two or three holster to fit this rig would be HUGE. Type in pistol cam on goggle and see how stupid the midea is, whight is listed from 1.5oz to 5 oz, and it travels from Orange cty NY to Orange cty CA in a blink of an eye, lazy media!

swtim255