[jeffehobbs]

Better than nothing, however?

[sergiosgc]

Not really. The article states two huge downsides:

1) Privileged footage access by the police results in selective publication of parts of the video, creating false or distorted narratives;

2) Police cameras are cameras, so this results in increased surveillance.

[jasonkostempski]

I dont get number 2. There's already a police officer where the camera is, they themselves are surveillance. Id much prefer the camera. Especially if I did something wrong so it can be seen exactly what I did instead of the report being blown out of proportion to ensure the charges stick.

[mattmanser]

Well, no, because they cost money. Every $1 spent on buying and maintaining useless cameras is $1 not spent on actual policing.

[ryanlol]

>Every $1 spent on buying and maintaining useless cameras is $1 not spent on actual policing.

So, much better than nothing?