Minnesota bill would keep body cam footage private

Last-12-Exit

Kind of defeats the purpose doesn't it?

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2015/01/31/minnesota-bill-would-keep-body-camera-footage-private/

dignin

Yeah, pretty stupid.

No surprise that it's former cops sponsoring the bill.

rgambs

I dunno, they will have to protect the footage just like any information they have has to be protected. Thos was pretty vague, I can't decide if it makes sense or not on so little info. Not just anybody should be able to access footage of an incident, but immediate family/persons involved should have quock, eady access. FOIA should be bypassed, a quicker route to the footage needs to be made.

Jason P

It should be kept private if you want a fair trial. Otherwise the juror pool will be reduced.

PJfanwillneverleave1

No I don't think so.
If anything police need to show at times what they are up against in the public private eye.
To be fair I would rather not have video footage of me acting like an ass to be public without a charge.

Bodycams are great, it is for the safety of both patron and police.

mikepegg44

dignin wrote: »

Yeah, pretty stupid.

No surprise that it's former cops sponsoring the bill.

If I am a police officer and I walk into a hospital with a recording device and record someone outside of my scope of investigation, you believe that this information should be public record? Or do we tamper with the video so exclude those things, fueling rampant conspiracy theories in the process of redacting the video?

it isn't saying that it is private to the police, it is saying it is private to those involved/recorded, and any and all information not involved in a criminal investigation is destroyed after 90 days. Sounds reasonable to me.

The change to force police officers to wear body cameras is a GREAT one, but it isn't like it should be a live damn feed on the internet..there have to be limits of who can view it and when.

Last-12-Exit

mikepegg44 wrote: »

dignin wrote: »

Yeah, pretty stupid.

No surprise that it's former cops sponsoring the bill.

If I am a police officer and I walk into a hospital with a recording device and record someone outside of my scope of investigation, you believe that this information should be public record? Or do we tamper with the video so exclude those things, fueling rampant conspiracy theories in the process of redacting the video?

it isn't saying that it is private to the police, it is saying it is private to those involved/recorded, and any and all information not involved in a criminal investigation is destroyed after 90 days. Sounds reasonable to me.

The change to force police officers to wear body cameras is a GREAT one, but it isn't like it should be a live damn feed on the internet..there have to be limits of who can view it and when.

No I don't think everything should have to be made public. But who gets to decide what's relevant to an investigation?

mikepegg44

The amount of work in wiping all of this data and keeping those files that are necessary would probably fall under a new department. honestly, it is an extremely large amount of data we are talking about and I imagine that an algorithm will probably be in charge of most of the data clearing.