Patrol Car Cameras And Political Footballs
By Greg L | 20 April 2008 | Prince William County | 56 Comments
Prince William County Police Chief Deane has told the Board of Supervisors that his police officers can’t do their job without running afoul of claims of racial profiling unless he gets the chance to install video cameras in all police cruisers and hire additional personnel to review all of the tapes at the end of each shift. The three million dollar cost of the cameras, plus the additional personnel costs for reviewing and managing these tapes comes at a time when budgets are tight, and Deane has linked the need for these cameras with the implementation of the Rule of Law Resolution, saying these will help defend officers from charges of racial profiling. Before we actually spend this kind of money, and attribute this expense to the Rule of Law Resolution, it might make sense to see if Deane’s request holds any water.
Video cameras in police cars is hardly anything new. Plenty of departments have had these for years, and footage from these is regularly featured on various television shows, which gives the public an idea of what the footage from one of these is likely to yield. These cameras are fixed to provide a view from the windshield, and can provide documentary evidence of an officer’s interaction with a suspect if that interaction happens within the field of view of the camera. Some camera systems also include audio, provided by a wireless microphone that the officer would wear. The video component is useful to document “action”, such as the behavior of a suspect while they’re driving and being followed by an officer, their performance on a field sobriety test, or should a physical confrontation happen within the field of view of the camera.
All the information I can find (and for some curious reason there is very little information available about how effective these are, outside of testimonials on manufacturers websites) indicates that there’s value to these systems. The video evidence of a sobriety test or someone recklessly driving can sometimes make it unnecessary for a court to actually hear a case. Video documenting a high-speed chase would be very valuable in a courtroom. This is the type of footage that often shows up on television shows, because some crimes lend themselves to the collection of video evidence. But when was the last time you saw video footage about a probable cause question show up on television?
The determination of probable cause, which is the standard used by the Prince William County Police Department to determine whether someone would be questioned about their legal status under the Rule of Law Resolution, isn’t something that actually lends itself to video documentation. Illegal aliens rarely sport tattoos on their foreheads that indicate their legal status that are large enough to be captured on video. Nor do police officers typically hold up signs for a camera that say “now I will question the suspect about their legal status because they speak funny” after pulling over a car. Looking at the back of a car pulled over for a traffic stop just isn’t something that’s going to document whether a police officer has sufficient probable cause to determine that a suspect may be an illegal alien. As a means of collecting evidence to prevent wrongful claims of racially-based policing, video cameras aren’t terribly useful. Audio would likely be useful since capturing the discussion is what actually provides relevant evidence, and pocket voice recorders would be far cheaper that the $5,000 per-car cost quoted for this video system.
There clearly is a case to be made for the utility of installing video systems in the patrol cars of the Prince William County Police Department. It’s just impossible to relate that effort specifically to the Rule of Law Resolution, which is what has been done here. Considering this as a separate line item in the Department’s budget request would be a more responsible choice, and I believe such a budget request would likely be approved on its own merits, especially if the installation happened over more than a single budget cycle given revenue challenges this year. Tacking this on to the politically popular Rule of Law Resolution smells of political posturing given that the usefulness of this system is far more connected to the requirements of police operations in general rather than the implementation of the Rule of Law Resolution specifically. If this is the right thing to do, and it likely is, this budget request should be able to stand on its own.
Deane seems to be playing games here. If his interest was in getting these cameras for the Department, not only has he had plenty of opportunities to do so in the past which he never took advantage of, but he could have made that request this year as a stand-alone initiative and likely got this started, at the very least. Instead, we get these tacked on to the Rule of Law Resolution, adding six million dollars in costs to the program which can’t be realistically attributed to it, which turns this into a political football. I have to wonder what are the real motivations at work here, because none of this makes sense based solely on what has been made public.
The opinions expressed here are solely the views of the author, and not representative of the position of any organization, political party, doughnut shop, knitting guild, or waste recycling facility, but may be correctly attributed to the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy. If anything in the above article has offended you, please click here to receive an immediate apology.
You can follow the discussion through the Comments feed. You can also pingback or trackback from your own site.
56 Comments
Views: 1340
Loading ...
You dont believe your police chief?
I suggest you give him what he wants, because they will not comply with the law without the tools to do it.
You are not a cop. dont try to think like one.
They will not comply with the law?? Are you suggesting that our police would break the law if they are not given cameras which they have never had before?
Wow, going after the police chief.
Smart political move.
I wonder what kind of stories about this are in police trade and professional magazines. I wonder if and how strongly they believe the Resolution will make their jobs more difficult, and how much more difficult. What are our police saying about this off duty and out of earshot?
Anon 11:25 —
Questioning the way a county employee asks for taxpayer funds in the budget is somehow a personal attack?
Besides, I think you have it all turned around. It is the police chief who doesn’t fully understand the political environment in Prince William County right now.
Cameras with the audio will in fact capture the probable cause in two ways.
First, it will capture the violation for which the individual was pulled over for, thereby eliminating the claim of racial profiling. It will be on tape for all the lawyers to watch.
Second, when the officer asks the driver for their license and registration, if the driver cannot provide a valid license or any other valid identification, then that is the probable cause to ask further questions which could lead to questioning of immigration status. All of which again, would be captured on audio and video for all of the lawyers to see and hear.
So yes, probable cause CAN be captured with this equipment.
How is this not valuable information to protect both the officer and the County? It completely takes away any claim of bias with evidence.
The resolution put the officers in this position, so lets pay up where necessary.
I see this as a “straw that breaks the camel’s back” kind of argument. The camer5as for the police cars are very important. In this case, the “Rule of Law” Resolution just makes them doubly (triply? tenply?) important. However, the benefits will apply to all kinds of law enforcement applications, not just this particular case. It’s like product R&D expenses that are often charged to one particular effort, but yield benefits to several “spinoffs.”
By the way, those “wild police videos” are pretty addictive to watch.
I seem to recall great promises being made last summer and last fall about getting the Chief the tools needed to do the job. Heretofore, Chief Deane has always asked for personnel to make the job safer for his officers.
Things change. Resolutions are passed. It is time to make good on promises and get the Chief and his officers the tools they need to do the job they have been charged to do. If the Chief says they need cameras, they need cameras. He is the expert in the field.
The BOCS should be looking for a Chief willing to do his job without demanding bells and whistles. Next thing, the Chief will be asking for reimbursement for dry cleaning and shoe shining so his troops will look spiffy for the cameras.
“I seem to recall great promises being made last summer and last fall about getting the Chief the tools needed to do the job. Heretofore, Chief Deane has always asked for personnel to make the job safer for his officers.”
Dolph, that’s not the issue at all. As a matter of fact, I don’t think anyone really disputes the need for the cameras (I’m surprised that they hadn’t at least STARTED installing them in patrol cars already). What is actually under debate is Chief Deane’s motive in specifically adding it as a line item in the cost of the 287g initiative when, in fact, it should be a stand alone or added to traffic enforcement (far more appropriate). I also question the wisdom in this, as well as why the Chief hadn’t pursued it before, but I understand that police departments can get grant money for this kind of equipment and adding it specifically for the 287g program could well reclassify that equipment so that it wouldn’t qualify. That’s really not prudent.
I fully agree AWC…
Certainly the cameras would be extremely valuable for general police-work.
I’m not a police officer, of course, but watching the programs on TV, it is clear that the cameras are extremely valuable in some circumstances. Remember that video that came out a couple months ago that showed the Nevada cop using his taser on a guy for what appeared to be no legitimate reason? So, the cameras can serve to document good as well as bad behavior of the citizen.
Why aren’t the cameras included as a new initiative to improve general police patrol work — they could just have easily been justified as a part of the county’s effort to crack-down on DUI drivers or to defend patrol officers against accusations of police brutality.
It certainly causes me to question the motivation (and as AWC pointed out, the prudence) behind linking the cameras to the “rule of law” implementation.
Advocator said on 21 Apr 2008 at 10:15 am:
The BOCS should be looking for a Chief willing to do his job without demanding bells and whistles. Next thing, the Chief will be asking for reimbursement for dry cleaning and shoe shining so his troops will look spiffy for the cameras
Well maybe only the BOCS get special family rates on their dry cleaning rather then paying the inflated prices the public has to pay as the BOCS made sure the Korean Dry Cleaners Assoc got zoning passed to eliminate the Fixed Price dry cleaners. Would the police get special rates as well ?? Of course Advocator does not believe in free enterprise which is American. Stewart is once again showing he says one thing and does another but what would you expect from someone who lies to get elected. Why are not all the bonds being issued on the 800 million the public voted to issue? Oh that will raise taxes and Stewart told us it would not but then what does he know about finances? NOTHING !!!!!!!!!
Bob Wills: You don’t know what I believe in.
Advocator, there are lots of things Bob Wills doesn’t know, but shhhhhhhhh, he doesn’t know that either.
:)
Advocator said on 21 Apr 2008 at 11:34 am:
Bob Wills: You don’t know what I believe in
You certainly can complain about things so when you ignore a blatent disreguard for an American foundation of free enterprise you certainly must not be against it. when you ignore something that is costing the citizens of PWC hundreds of thousands of dollars each year to the benefit of a specail inteest group what is left to think you believe in? Are you afraid to speak out against this happening in PWC? Maybe you don’t care what it cost for people to live in PWC?
“When you ignore something that is costing the citizens of PWC hundreds of thousands of dollars each year to the benefit of a specail inteest group what is left to think you believe in?”
Mr. Willis, you are absolutely correct! How can you POSSIBLY ignore the hundreds of thousands of dollars (more like millions) spent each year by local taxpayers to benefit the illegal alien community (education, public safety, health care, welfare benefits), which is obviously a special interest group which doesn’t even belong here? It’s appalling!!
AWCheney said on 21 Apr 2008 at 1:52 pm:
“When you ignore something that is costing the citizens of PWC hundreds of thousands of dollars each year to the benefit of a specail inteest group what is left to think you believe in?”
Mr. Willis, you are absolutely correct! How can you POSSIBLY ignore the hundreds of thousands of dollars (more like millions) spent each year by local taxpayers to benefit the illegal alien community (education, public safety, health care, welfare benefits), which is obviously a special interest group which doesn’t even belong here? It’s appalling!!
Yes it appalling especily when the cost to the citizens of PWC was caused DIRECTLY by the BOCS who passes a zoning law that in effect prohibited Fixed Price dry cleaners from operating in retail zoned properties. I am not aware and maybe you can point out what law the BOCS passed to allow illegal aliens to live in PWC. One simple recending of the zoning law that prohibits dry cleamers to be limited to less then 3000 sq ft in retail zoned property will allow the oportunity to save the citizens of PWC hundreds of thousand of dollars each year.
I do not ignore the waste and cost to the public at all but we need a government to wants to solve problems and we have no leadership in Stewart nor any Supervisor that has any back bone to do what is legal and correct to sovle the problems of PWC.
Cameras to help document probable cause because departmental members are now stopping minorities.
When I look at the request for cameras in patrol vehicles, this is the basis of why taxpayers are asked to fund the equipment put into this resolution.
You could argue that the cameras are for documenting how an officer is determining probable cause. But when you really look at the heart of the argument, the request is being made due to the interaction of police officers with a certain minority group.
Police officers in PWC have been arresting minority citizens for years related to county codes, and special enforcement measures that have been initiated from group or individual requests for special enforcement.
The arresting officers then testified in court to the methods used to determine probable cause. The prosecutors & defense attorneys examined the police members, and the judge or jury determined a verdict. This has been occurring for years without any outcry from the public or law enforcement officials about the need to consider cameras in patrol vehicles because the credibility of PWC police officers has repeatedly come into question, or the evidence that was being presented needed video presentation, or lawsuits were suddenly starting to mount which required video documentation.
Surrounding jurisdictions installed cameras in patrol cars years ago. For the sole purpose to increase officer safety levels. I feel citizens have to ask why is it now absolutely necessary to have cameras to enforce the resolution? Are police officers in PWC just now starting to arrest minorities, or develop probable cause related to unique or everyday crimes?
What you are witnessing is a C.O.P. who doesn’t want to enforce this resolution (which has been publically stated) and is attempting to sink it by attaching a equipment request for tools that should have been available years ago. If for any other reason to protect street officers from false claims, or criminals who encounter officers who are without back-up attempting to flee (with or without force) in order to have their recorded identity obtained.
Decide for yourself………are you safer in PWC now than you were 20 years ago when Charlie Deane became your C.O.P. Why are we just now discussing the use of cameras in a police department that claims to be one of the most progressive in the state.
This whole issue is disturbing.
I’ve got to agree with you, GTC. It appears the citizenry’s efforts and desires are being sabotaged by one man. What do you think is the most effective way to deal with it? (Legally, of course)
GTC, I completely agree that it is an outrage that our officers have not had what has become standard issue equipment in so many other jurisdictions (many smaller and less well-off than PWC) and Chief Deane only finds a rationale for it now. Cameras in patrol cars serve a much broader need than simply defense against charges of racial profiling. How many police who have been injured by hit and run drivers or criminals who attack them at traffic stops have had their attackers tracked down thanks to the recordings made in their squad cars?
Cameras are a police officer’s best friend. GTC is right, Deane is stalling, doesn’t want to do the job he’s been tasked to do. Let’s help him along with that by replacing him with someone who will. Equipment will enhance the way that PWCPD enforces the law, but it seems that they’ve done fine without cameras for EVER. The residents have spoken, the BOCS has voted and the resolutions are working. Even the Post admits it. Deane is just in the way. What are the protocols for a dismissal of Deane? Who can fire him and how do we bring that about?
You don’t need extra bodies to review tapes unless a complaint is filed. There are plenty of Supervisors and Internal Affairs officers to second-guess the situation if warrented. As there should be.
“Yes it appalling especily when the cost to the citizens of PWC was caused DIRECTLY by the BOCS who passes a zoning law that in effect prohibited Fixed Price dry cleaners from operating in retail zoned properties.”
And this relates to illegal immigration how, Mr. Willis??
Chief Deane has shown he has the mettle to do what is right for the county. If there were grants out there, do you not think he would direct his staff to apply for at least one of them? He has said all along, if there is limited money, his officers would prefer another officer rather than cameras. With the new directive issued in the Resolution, much has changed.
Listen to your chief. He will not ask for what he does not need and he will ask for what he does need.
And yes, the point was and continues to be that Chief Deane was told he would have what he needs. I love how many people are now taking on the role of Chief Deane and deciding what is now best for the police department. I hear a disgruntled employee and a bunch of cop wannabes. Chief Deane has been targeted since I first came on this blog back in the June 2007. I see that has not changed. What a witch hunt.
Wait Dolph….the police will have what is required. However, why is it that the cameras required ONLY to support 287(g)?? Doesn’t that seem just a bit odd to you? Don’t you kinda wonder why the need for cameras has never surfaced before?
I believe in supporting officials and their needs, but not their personal biases….should they exist.
AWCheney said on 21 Apr 2008 at 3:55 pm:
“Yes it appalling especily when the cost to the citizens of PWC was caused DIRECTLY by the BOCS who passes a zoning law that in effect prohibited Fixed Price dry cleaners from operating in retail zoned properties.”
And this relates to illegal immigration how, Mr. Willis??
It has nothing to do with immigration but it has everything to do with what it cost to live in PWC. I doubt if you are of the opinion that saving money is not a good thing unless it has to do with immigration. Maybe you can only think is terms of immigration and not the broader concerns of all issues for the citizens of PWC. Haveing delt extensively with the Korean community in Annandale and knowing directly how little reguard they have for the laws there might be more of an immigration problem then you want to know.
Why do you want to ignore a situation that cost the citizens money caused by the actions of the BOCS?
It’s not a question of ignoring any issue, Mr. Willis…but it is definitely off-topic and doesn’t belong on this thread. It makes it difficult NOT to take comments out of context when they’re not relevant to the subject at hand. You might want to address your concern in the next Open Thread, or email Greg and ask that he address the issue, or offer to guest post on the blog…and of those would be far more suitable than posting it on this, and many other threads, that are irrelevant to your issue.
Correction: any of those
Do you really think watching those program on TV provide you with the actual insight that a thinking person needs to make these decisions? I would imagine that admitting to watching them would disqualify you from any decent police department.
Didn’t you all just get slapped down for criticizing the guy a few weeks ago?
Notice none of you naysayers chose to take on LuckyDuck - who seems to know what he/she is talking about.
Sheesh.
AWCheney said on 21 Apr 2008 at 5:33 pm:
It’s not a question of ignoring any issue, Mr. Willis…but it is definitely off-topic and doesn’t belong on this thread. It makes it difficult NOT to take comments out of context when they’re not relevant to the subject at hand. You might want to address your concern in the next Open Thread, or email Greg and ask that he address the issue, or offer to guest post on the blog…and of those would be far more suitable than posting it on this, and many other threads, that are irrelevant to your issue.
I accept your opinion but it is not off topic for there are many different ways the illegal immigration issues we are having in PWC and others is not just limited to overcrowding in houses be it by Latino’s or other nationalities but it is also in other aspects of our lives. Other groups do it with less obvious acts such as the parking and loud music but never the less are violating our laws and causing us economic harm. Maybe Greg does not want to confront all the different problems and that would be a shame to me for he has started something that in my opinon could help the citizens of PWC for there is more then one note in a song so to speak.
The problem with that, Mr. Willis, is that you did not specify what group of illegal aliens is responsible for the problem you are addressing…or if it is, in fact, illegal aliens who are the cause of the problem you are so passionate about. We are well aware that illegal aliens are not limited to Hispanics. Until the AntiBVBL crowd and other enablers started addressing the problem only in terms of the Hispanic community, I never addressed the problem in terms of ANY ethnic group…only as “illegal aliens,” or in terms of illegal immigration (generic). That seems to have changed, and not because of us.
Thank you Benton, I wanted to point out that the police and the county are fully expecting to be sued and have said so in many a public forum. So, if we expect them to be on the leading edge of ALL local law enforcement, then why not protect them and by extension, all of us, by getting them what they ask for (as we promised) to do their jobs.
Cameras WILL help in the two ways I pointed out up above.
Freedom,
It doesn’t seem odd to me at all because our police are being asked to do an entirely different job. Already several officers have had their veracity questioned over immigration issues.
Having cameras in the squad cars just strikes me as smart. An ounce of prevention prevents a pound of cure. And I seriously wonder what motivation Chief Deane would possibly have for asking for cameras if he didn’t feel they were needed. That doesn’t even make sense.
I feel that the county is going back on its word, at this point, if the cameras aren’t purchased for every car. Who wants to be the officer without the camera?
Since the PD has never been sued for racial profiling I guess that’s why they’ve never needed them or been ordered by a court to buy them as in PG County, NJ State Police. Montgomery might have had a lawsuit that resulted in that requirement as well. As a taxpayer, I would rather not pay for all this lovely equipment to help attorney’s try to get their DUI clients off. That is all they would have been used for to date.
Now that the county is facing a larger chance of profiling they are a good precaution.
Now, if the PD never really needed them except DUI’s, shouldn’t we be praising them for not wasting our tax dollars??? Shouldn’t we be delighted to have such police force that has more than tripled in size under this Chief while population has almost quadrupled and there has NEVER been a lawsuit for racial profiling? Am I the only one that thinks this is a good thing? Shouldn’t we thank them for using available grant funds to support 800 radios and MDT’s? Shouldn’t we thank them for getting grants to pay for 20 police officers.
Perhaps you are not seeking the truth here, just looking to blame someone for your unhappiness. I would suggest finding another target. I think the PD is here to stay as is the current Chief. Mr. Stewart has called him wonderful. Unless you now think Mr. Stewart is incorrect.
I do find the ‘logic’ here hard to navigate.
Benton, I think it is a very good thing that the police department has used available grant money for equipment. Too bad much of that grant money has dried up.
We have an extremely professional police department here in Prince William County. Even the officer who gave me a ticket was couteous and professional.
I hear a lot of ’suggestions’ that just seem to be picking at the department and at Chief Deane. He sure isn’t known for kowtowing to various political factions. That might be what is the source of such great irritation.
Perhaps a lot of those people have gotten tickets also. Let’s face it, some folks just don’t like cops.
Well, that is likely true, but I thought Mr. Stewart was keyed into this group and he has publicly stated that Deane is doing a stellar job and always has. Now this is back up again.
How much is a video camera system for a police car? If its not much more expensive than my home video recording system (about $800.00 for the camera and DVR recording unit), then I’ll personally buy the Chief, the first squad car camera. If it’s much more than that someone is buying camera systems that are too expensive. Even the security cameras we buy at my work place cost less than $500.00 on average, and not more than $1000.00 for really expensive day/night systems.
How many squad cars are there? If each citizen bought one, then the butt head chief could get on with the business of enforceing the law, which is by the way his “only” job. His “job” is not to be a mexican embassy liason for the US government, nor to be a political “toad in the road” for effective law enforcement based on his personal “illegal alien” beliefs. If he can’t do his job, he needs to be fired and a new police chief appointed (or elected whichever it is).
Butthead chief???? Awwwwwwwww….Michael. Did you get a ticket? What is that you feel Chief Deane has not done that is his job?
Lucky Duck or Benton, I saw wearable cameras for police officers on TV. Do you know anything about those? They might have more coverage than a dash mounted camera.
I keep going back to that promise I heard the supervisors make about getting the equipment and personnel that was needed to get the job done.
This entire subject would be moot (if not “mute”) had the Resolution been passed the way it was originallly drafted, i.e., that EVERYONE stopped by police would be required to show evidence of legal residence.
But would requiring everyone to show evidence of legal residence passed Constitutional muster? I guess only the Supremes can answer that one.
Dolph:
The issue would arise as a challenge to a patrolman’s determination that probable cause (PC) exists. That’s why Deane wants the cameras, to show in a later court hearing that the patrolman’s determination was reasonable, and not based on racial profiling. If the policy was to ask everyone to show evidence of legal residence, the patrolmen would not have be making a PC determination.
I’ve never heard any rational explanation for making the change.
Advocator,
How about those folks not driving a car? I think that might be where the problem might exist. Walkers, riders, those kinds of folks.
Sorry Advocator, that is Dolph again. I am having major issues today getting my name on things correctly. Now I know it does this, but do I remember to type my name…oh Hell NO.
Oh my, oh my….cameras in patrol cars….
I don’t think anyone has really questioned that they are needed; they ARE needed, but they are needed for soooooooo many more things than as a defense against the charge of the day, “racial profiling.”
We all know that the cameras would be extremely useful in any charges of officer impropriety, DUI, resisting arrest, assault on a police officer etc. …and furthermore, those cameras just might be what it takes to ensure that the officers DO conduct themselves properly and with due respect. Yet, the cameras are justified in the budget as a requirement “to support this here new “rule of law” thing you guys want done.” I don’t appreciate gamesmanship in budget preparation. Of course, the PD will get the cameras, and they should, but they should have, even if it were NOT for 287(g). Come on, let’s stop “loading the deck” when it comes to budget preparation.
The $6M+ Line of Duty Death initiative is another example. It is tragic that we lost a firefighter in the line of duty, but just look, “NOW, we can justify more personnel and more training and more….” If all that money is required now that we lost a fire fighter, I’d rather hire someone smart enough to recognize need BEFORE we lose another firefighter.
Freedom, that was a cheap shot about losing a firefighter and connecting it to a bloated budge request. If you know so much, get off your a** and join up. I am not a firefighter nor do I know much about that profession, but I did learn at a public hearing that the department has response standards based upon smaller houses that were built in PW years ago. The larger houses recently built require more staffing to respond. It is hardly loading up for more personnel and training etc as you claim. Our fire department has been understaffed for years…by the way, so has our police department. So speak what you know of, not what you do not. Or lets see you limber up a hose and head into a fire with not enough staffing with you or for that matter, respond to a violent fight alone without a back up officer.
Hi Dolph. With regards to body cameras for the officers. Yes, I’ve seen them. They tend to be very expensive, more so than mounted cameras. Also, if you purchase cameras for the vehicles, you maybe able to cut cost as there are less vehicles than officers. Also, they are more liable to be damaged by the nature of the officer’s job.
The issue with cameras in cars is that they cannot be off the shelf products. For example, the laptops in the PWC cars are Panasonic toughbook computers - not off the shelf items.
Cameras in police vehicles would have to be waterproof (it does rain and they are in/out of the cars) and shock proof (encased in metal to withstand collisions or you may lose any evidence of any other crime) as well as to withstand damage from suspects who maybe placed in the vehicle. They must be “sealed” so defense attorney’s cannot claim they have been tampered with by the department. Finally, they must be reliable and when you combine the other listed needs, you get what you pay for.
Freedom - as two not three firefighters are lugging 550 lbs of fire house into your house, you may realize that the issues raised are old issues that should have been addressed many many years ago…. Three is the standard for a 2,000 square foot home. Another issue is additional commanders on scene. At Marsh Overlook there was one commander taking information from 15 units. The trucks arrived at 6:09 and the Mayday went out at 6:19. You should have more facts before you make statements like you did.
Doesn’t matter anyway, the BOCS set $1 as the advertised tax rate, three definitely don’t want to go that high (Covington due to commercial). It simply doesn’t all fit. I vote for the LODD for ALL of us over the cameras. I have faith in our PD not to profile. Although, they may need the cameras more as protection from the naysayers than the illegals.
“What is that you feel Chief Deane has not done that is his job?”
I think it’s more like what Chief Deane has done that is NOT his job.
Everyone else has shared facts and data, MP. Care to follow the lead?
Luckyduck,
I think the information you just put out there is living proof that there is no free lunch. I don’t think we can compare LEO industry standard equipment to camera equipment used on the family vacation or at the kids’ birthday parties as some folks here want to do.
I am just sucking air over the fire and rescue remarks. I don’t think that many of us remember the horror of the events surrounding the tragic death of Firefighter Kyle Wilson because it happened right about the time of the VA Tech massacre, if I am not mistaken. Too much horror to absorb, perhaps. I also do not think that this year is the first time I have heard a request for increased funding for fire and rescue.
Our volunteer and paid fire and rescue personnel are about as fine a people as you would ever want to meet. Each and every time I have had dealings with them, regardless of which fire house I dealt with, I saw a high degree of professionalism.
Perhaps readers would like to see a snapshot of where their money was spent last year.
http://www.co.prince-william.va.us/default.aspx?topic=040026
In addition to trusting the Chief of Police to ask for what he needs to protect his officers and residents of the county, I trust our fire chief to ask for what he needs to protect his firefighters, rescue workers, and county residents.
I heard big promises last fall. I see steady back-pedaling today. Those with the biggest mouths seem to be moving the fastest in reverse gear.
Juturna,
I have faith in our officers not to profile. I do not have faith in what they deal with not to press false charges against them. That lack of faith involves our homegrown citizens also. Some readers will know exactly what I mean.
Here is an extensive study made by IACP re patrol car cameras and their value. There are grants available to police departments for these cameras.
http://www.usatcorp.com/images/products/panasonic/IACP-%20Impact%20of%20Video%20Evidence%20on%20Modern%20Policing.pdf
“There are grants available to police departments for these cameras.”
As I pointed out earlier in the thread…thank you for confirming that Vigilant1. Including these cameras as a line item in the expense column for the cost of the “Resolution” is purely the political maneuver of someone who simply does not want to enforce it. It’s as simple as that.
Luckyduck said: “The larger houses recently built require more staffing to respond. It is hardly loading up for more personnel and training etc as you claim. Our fire department has been understaffed for years…”
You make my point exactly. I don’t question that more firefighters are needed — I don’t know. What I DO question though is not having the foresight to increase staffing, training, equipment or whatever is required rather than wait until we lose one. Unfortunately, “good decisions” can’t be included as a line-item in the budget.
Cheap shot? Nope, don’t think so…the cheap shot is for our public safety leaders not looking forward and planning before we lose one, then, using the loss as justification. Do we need yet another study to determine what we need so we won’t lose yet another?
“Everyone else has shared facts and data, MP. Care to follow the lead?”
Meeting with foreign government officials is not Chief Deane’s job.
Sounds like a pretty good “fact” to me, MP Resident….