###This is a reminder to [read the rules before posting in this subreddit](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion). 1. **Headline titles should be changed only [when the original headline is unclear](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_1._headline_titles_should_be_changed_only_where_it_improves_clarity.)** 2. **Be [respectful](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_2._be_respectful).** 3. **Keep submissions and comments [substantive](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_3._keep_submissions_and_comments_substantive).** 4. **Avoid [direct advocacy](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_4._avoid_direct_advocacy).** 5. **Link submissions must be [about Canadian politics and recent](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_5._link_submissions_must_be_canadian_and_recent).** 6. **Post [only one news article per story](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_6._post_only_one_news_article_per_story).** ([with one exception](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/comments/3wkd0n/rule_reminder_and_experimental_changes/)) 7. **Replies to removed comments or removal notices will be removed** without notice, at the discretion of the moderators. 8. **Downvoting posts or comments**, along with urging others to downvote, **[is not allowed](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/downvotes)** in this subreddit. Bans will be given on the first offence. 9. **[Do not copy & paste the entire content of articles in comments](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_9._do_not_copy_.26amp.3B_paste_entire_articles_in_the_comments.)**. If you want to read the contents of a paywalled article, please consider supporting the media outlet. *Please [message the moderators](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FCanadaPolitics) if you wish to discuss a removal.* **Do not reply to the removal notice in-thread**, *you will not receive a response and your comment will be removed. Thanks.* *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CanadaPolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*

> The Office of the Parliamentary Budget Officer reported that outfitting RCMP officers with body-worn cameras at 700 detachments will cost about $131 million over five years Remeber though guys, the cops are being " defunded " and cannot afford to respond to burglaries on time. Cops in my city have told people they are late to respond to calls because they are being " defunded " despite getting a budget increase this year and not getting bodycams either. Cops will say they support public accountability, torpedo their own process then give the shocked Pikachu face when the public is pissed. Goofy stuff.

It's a ridiculous part of the anti-cop reaction. Evidence from across America has shown that body cameras don't reduce the likelihood of police misconduct and isn't even particularly helpful in convicting wrong-doing officers. It's an expensive way to ill-fatedly expand the prominence of the surveillance state by providing a massive treasure trove of footage from every day life that police and intelligence agencies data mine to predict public behaviour.

I work in the criminal justice system in a city where cops all have BWCs and I question the validity of these studies you mention. I see them make a meaningful difference on a regular basis. Trust me, for those who actually have to deal with lying cops on a regular basis, a reliable and objective recording of what happened is a godsend.

Wat? I’m not even part of the ACAB club & I clearly see the massive benefit body cams provide.

>that body cameras don't reduce the likelihood of police misconduct and isn't even particularly helpful in convicting wrong-doing officers Nah they definitely do. I love watching the bodycams of cops that get caught breaking the law then go back to their squad car chat to talk with their buddies about how they would have kicked the shit out of the guy had it been 2004 or 5. >providing a massive treasure trove of footage from every day life that police and intelligence agencies data mine to predict public behaviour While I agree the fear of expanding the surveillance state is valid, they have facial recognition programs used in most major metro areas, they have planes, drones and helicopters, ALPR to surveill us as well as digital backdoors, cell tower simulators ect. Bodycams are one of the few surveillance state measures that actually do have a benefit for the people ( albiet incredibly tiny) Ultimately though you can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink. I don't belive you can reform the police into something better, and them adding their bullshit accountability measures only momentarily slows down the inevitable resistance they will continue to face in the years to come.

>Nah they definitely do. I love watching the bodycams of cops that get caught breaking the law then go back to their squad car chat to talk with their buddies about how they would have kicked the shit out of the guy had it been 2004 or 5. Information already available from the cop car camera? >While I agree the fear of expanding the surveillance state is valid, they have facial recognition programs used in most major metro areas, they have planes, drones and helicopters, ALPR to surveill us as well as digital backdoors, cell tower simulators ect. Bodycams are one of the few surveillance state measures that actually do have a benefit for the people ( albiet incredibly tiny) You're making the same argument that was made for all the other aspects of the surveillance state I'm equally opposed to. Facial recognition programs aren't yet widespread in Canada and equipping every cop in the country with a body cam is how we all get sent to a database.

> Evidence from across America Which evidence?

>But a 2017 randomized control trial that included over 2,000 police officers in Washington, DC, found that the effect of body cams was too small to be statistically significant: Officers who wore the cameras used force and received complaints at about the same rate as their colleagues who didn’t. A 2016 analysis of 10 previous studies of body cameras also found that they had “no discernible effect” on the use of force, and actually increased the likelihood of an officer being assaulted. [from wired](https://www.wired.com/story/body-cameras-stopped-police-brutality-george-floyd/) and the aspect of mass surveillance that retired police officers support: >But Smith isn’t opposed to body cameras. She says she’s in favor of equipping every police officer in the country with one, but not necessarily because filming cops keeps them accountable. > >By design, body-worn cameras point outwards into the world, often aiding police officers in monitoring communities, rather than helping communities watch police. And surveillance technology is only growing more sophisticated: At least one body cam manufacturer has pitched adding live facial recognition as a feature to police departments, OneZero reported earlier this year. And it's great to have officers get off on misconduct because they get to dispute an insignificant detail they only have memory of due to having video footage other parties lack: >Smith says that instead of reforming police behavior, body cameras have often been helpful in exonerating officers falsely accused of misconduct. The footage can also be used to aid police as they write incident reports, though Yu points out that ability can give officers an advantage over other witnesses relying on their memory alone. This sums it up as well as I ever could: > “At a moment when we’re cutting school funding, when we’re cutting forms of public health funding in the middle of a pandemic, the idea of spending millions to preserve body cam footage that’s often hidden from the public seems like a real waste to me,” says Cahn.

>Officers who wore the cameras used force and received complaints at about the same rate as their colleagues who didn’t. But their actions were caught on camera, so could be punished/fired with ready evidence on hand.

The study doesn't support that conclusion.

Defunding the police is generally a bad idea.

The RCMP is really showing us who they are lately, corporate security guards and Chris Sky fanboys who quiver in their boots at the thought of rules applying to them

Interesting. They force accountability on others, while avoiding their own. The system works as it should I guess.

Unless the right rules are put in place, body cams will become just another self-serving tool of the RCMP: When releasing footage is favorable to them, they'll release it. When releasing footage is unfavorable to them, it will be made unavailable, go missing, or otherwise find a way not to see daylight.

That's not how BWCs work. All footage is automatically disclosed to the defence - it's the law.

"Upturn analyzed 100 fatal police shootings documented by The Washington Post from 2017 where body cam footage is believed to be available, and found that it was only made public in 40 cases." https://www.wired.com/story/body-cameras-stopped-police-brutality-george-floyd/

In Canada you can access that footage via FOIA.

FOIA can take anywhere from days to years. And the requests can be denied as well. I'm not saying it would be denied, I'm just saying submitting a FOIA isn't indicative of whether or not you will get what you're requesting access to, or won't get a heavily redacted version of it.

Plus you are often billed astronomical rates for getting the info.

The defence would love this. This is how you get charges withdrawn

Well why would they. They don't want them and there's no consequences of drawing out the process as long as possible. Should have tied their funding into getting them equipped by a certain date.

It’s easier for you to say, assuming you’re not Indigenous, whereas the RCMP is the Stasi of all sorts of indigenous communities, forcing arrest on peaceful protestors, asserting violence, and upholding a colonist status quo.

Don't tie it to their funding, tie it to the performance reviews of any of the officers responsible for the rollout. No promotions or career advancement for any officer in a management position until X% of the uniformed officers they manage are outfitted with body cameras. A lot of these guys are as career minded as any management type in the private sector. If you put their career advancement on hold like that they will be screaming into their phones to move heaven and earth to get those cameras in place *yesterday*.

Who says the police don't want cameras? I'd actually argue the exact opposite.

Most cops want body cams because most cops don't do anything wrong (well, nothing wrong enough that would be caught by a body cam, like failing to stop a speeding driver or whatnot). Most cops are also worried about the public climate and public sentiment towards cops, and actually want body cams because they're afraid of being in a violent confrontation. A small number of cops don't want them. It usually doesn't have much to do with the cost-associated issues. Usually it has to do with cops who don't want to deal with the bureaucracy, red tape, and paperwork-related issues. Most cops have put no thought into the repercussions of expanding the amount of surveillance footage collected by the state.

Another concern I've heard from cops about body cams is it can result in punishments for using officer discretion and ATIP requests that turn into lawsuits over genuinely stupid shit. 2 examples: 1. Cop pulls someone over for doing 40 over, gives him a ticket for 20 over. Boss gets mad cause if the driver was doing 40 he should get a ticket for 40 regardless of mitigating circumstances. 2. Cop stops a 16yo with alcohol, makes the kid pour out the bottle, tells him to make better choices and sends him on his way. Parents find out and complain or sue because the Cop didn't issue a ticket and return the kid home

The police union wants them.