Body-worn Technology
Create a blog post subtitle that summarizes your post in a few short, punchy sentences and entices your audience to continue reading.
For better or for worse, the events of the past several years have put law enforcement under a microscope. Calls for improved safety and accountability within the law enforcement community have been widespread, and technologies like body-worn cameras have been endorsed—and in some cases even mandated—by many state and local governments.
This shift comes hand-in-hand with the continuing movement within many cities to embrace smart city technologies designed to improve safety and security, but police departments across the country have sometimes struggled to integrate this new technology into their lives and operating budgets. Manufacturers and integrators should be aware of both the operational and budgetary constraints within the law enforcement community, and be prepared to offer solutions.
Today’s Cities Face Financial, Social, and Other Challenges
In many cities, battles over social and political issues have spilled out into the streets. These demonstrations have stressed city infrastructure and placed increased attention and pressure on law enforcement. Smart city resources such as IP surveillance cameras, body-worn devices, facial recognition technology and others have been used to maintain order, identify wrongdoers, investigate police misconduct, and even vindicate officers falsely accused of improper behavior.
In many ways, these new technologies play an important role in helping a community take meaningful steps toward becoming a “safe city”—a necessary and integral component of the larger journey toward becoming a “smart city.”
Body-worn devices have become an important piece of safe city architecture, and as cities look for new ways to improve life for residents, businesses, and guests, understanding how best to support the law enforcement community has become increasingly critical. Like most of today’s smart sensors, body-worn devices can have a positive impact on both police departments and the communities they protect—but it is important to understand the challenges associated with embracing any new technology, especially in the current climate.
Cost Is a Problem—but a Solvable One
In many areas of the country, body-worn cameras are not just a “nice to have” technology anymore—they are a mandate, with officers now required to wear them to provide additional transparency to the communities they protect. While there have been many arguments over the pros and cons of body-worn technology, fewer conversations have centered on funding it. There is more to a body-worn camera solution than simply purchasing the devices themselves. Issues like storage, maintenance and scalability can introduce additional costs into the equation.
It is critical for departments to be aware of the funding resources available to them. For example, a department providing resource officers for local school districts may be able to use education funding to equip those officers. There are also government programs available: the Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA) allows criminal justice organizations to apply for body-worn camera grants, and they are not alone.
Manufacturers and integrators should be prepared to make end-users aware of these options, as this type of funding assistance is an unfortunate necessity. While many states have publicly embraced body-worn cameras, the actual money committed to those programs often remains insufficient.
Another way to defray the cost of body-worn devices is through the embrace of open-architecture solutions, which can help users avoid becoming locked into a single manufacturer’s product offerings. This allows departments to evaluate all available solutions to identify those that meet their needs and budget, but it also has implications that go beyond body-worn technology.
Today’s safe city infrastructure features a broad range of cameras, sensors, and other tools used by law enforcement. Open-architecture technology makes it easier for those devices to talk to each other, all while ensuring that departments won’t become dependent on a discontinued product line, or worse—a defunct manufacturer or supplier.
Comments