Not sure how I feel about that....

I've wanted a weapon mounted video camera for years.

I think it is a great idea, once one accepts that cameras are expected everywhere.

Sometimes shit goes south real quick, and no other cameras are activated. BTDT. Would have been glad to have one of these. I expect they will become common eventually.

I'm not sure I like the light coming on automatically.

Not only the light coming on but should not the camera be pointed in a safe direction until the last possible moment? So, you are going to have cops pointing this lighted camera all over the place?

I'm sure many of you will blast me, but I don't think a light should be on a gun let alone a camera.

It's not a new concept, it has been a topic of discussion since the 70's at least but the technology was not small enough or reliable enough until recently. Some Tasers already have cameras. The idea of course is to document the few seconds just before the weapon is fired. I foresee that kind of video clip will lend itself to multiple interpretations. This will not in a practical sense replace body cams and dash cams that should in theory record the whole story.

There are just so many critical details missed by attention, memory and focus. Questions and circumstances change as investigations proceed and accusations and defenses created. In my business I have been saved by what the camera recorded but no one noticed until the question arose.

quote:

Originally posted by Blume9mm:

..... I don't think a light should be on a gun let alone a camera.

I strongly disagree with you. In a home defense situation, In darkness, when something goes thump in the night, a WML is useful for determining "friend or foe" in those last few seconds where it counts.

You may want to consult with some of the other experts on this board before you discount the WML.

quote:

Originally posted by radioman:

quote:

Originally posted by Blume9mm:

..... I don't think a light should be on a gun let alone a camera.

I strongly disagree with you. In a home defense situation, In darkness, when something goes thump in the night, a WML is useful for determining "friend or foe" in those last few seconds where it counts.

You may want to consult with some of the other experts on this board before you discount the WML.

My ‘bump in the night’ flashlight just happens to have a pistol attached to it. In order to perform IFF duties, the light, and therefore the gun, don’t have to be pointed directly at the object/organism that is being identified.
Plus, a light/gun combo leaves a hand free for other duties, opening doors, flipping light switches, holding a phone, petting the dog that alerted you in the first place....
If the “never point at what you don’t want to destroy” rule is a hangup, Bear in mind you should also be utilizing the “keep your finger off the trigger til ready to fire” rule WHILE you are determining the “be sure of your target and what is behind it” rule.
But it does come down to opinion, preference, and ‘druthers.

Sorry for the thread drift...
I couldn’t find a video of what the footage looks like with movement, smoke and recoil. But it will offer a better view, IMO, of the situation right up to rounds being fired. Could very well be a boon for LEO.

quote:

Originally posted by Blume9mm:
but I don't think a light should be on a gun let alone a camera.

You don’t need to point the flashlight directly at the object to illuminate it sufficiently enough to see what it is, the pistol can still be held at a low ready position, available to be brought up to aim, if need be.

That sounds like a horrible idea, and would rule out a good WML. Why not a pressure switch attached/built into the holster that would activate a chest cam when the holster is empty?

quote:

Originally posted by Blume9mm:
Not only the light coming on but should not the camera be pointed in a safe direction until the last possible moment? So, you are going to have cops pointing this lighted camera all over the place?

Theoretically yes, but not in practice.

quote:

Originally posted by cas:

quote:

Originally posted by Blume9mm:
Not only the light coming on but should not the camera be pointed in a safe direction until the last possible moment? So, you are going to have cops pointing this lighted camera all over the place?

Theoretically yes, but not in practice.

Youtube is awash with videos of pistols being pointed at suspects for long periods of time before the situation resolves itself, one way or another.

The basic idea is a good one, but two things I’d object to:

First and worst is the light’s coming on automatically when the gun is drawn. There are countless conceivable situations in which I would want gun drawn, but without advertising my location and possibly lighting up partners at that moment. (No, “lighting up” doesn’t mean pointing the gun at them and shining the beam directly on them.)

Second is how good/bad is the light? I’m picky about such things and it’s unlikely to suit my preference exactly.

Cameras never seem to work out for those who demand them the most.

Not a single media narrative has been changed by video.

Didn't Wolfenstein have a Kill Cam?

I have absolutely no problem with a camera that activates as the gun is drawn. Like body mounted cameras, they have done way more to exonerate officers, despite the lefts insistence that the police were acting recklessly, acting racist, or being heavy handed in use of force. If Darren Wilson had had a camera on his weapon, Ferguson might have turned out very differently.

As to the light, it should no more self activate than a belt mounted light should when drawn. There are a lot of times an officer will draw and not want to give away their position. The light function needs to be able to be deactivated before I'll agree it's a good idea.

Video only captures some of what goes on. Again a techinical solution proposed to a complex human problem. I will be interested when the technology is developed to measure human intent. I doubt that will ever happen.

In my opinion it is a clumsy approach to change the narrative of what actually happened. As JJones points out it does not seem to work out well for those pushing hard to adopt these solutions.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by gearhounds:
If Darren Wilson had had a camera on his weapon, Ferguson might have turned out very differently./QUOTE]

No it wouldn't have. Police Shooting investigations have drastically changed since then. The protocol then was to do an investigation, not release any information UNTIL the investigation was done. As soon as "hands up, don't shoot" went viral, nothing including releasing any body cam could have stopped that. The BLM crowd started with the Zimmerman shooting and they were looking for the just right perfect storm to get their agenda across. As recent incidents show, they will deny the body cam shows the entire incident or it has been edited.

The protocol now is as soon as the shot suspect is identified, the computer nerds do social media searches (face book etc), make copies of what they posted and get search warrants to the relative companies to maintain evidence. Now there are briefings to TRY and stay ahead of the false narratives put out. A recent Officer Involved Shooting, they put out the suspect was shot three times from the front yet the next day, protestors were still telling the media that the "victim" was shot six times int he back and the last shoot was to his head as he laid on the ground. Some of the media did not question their statement, did not even include the official statement that suspect was shot three times in front in their "news" story.

Like Biden said, facts don't matter as long as they have the "truth" on their side.