Hello Welcome in the next presentation Where we've heard all about mass surveillance by big companies and the NSA, but there's something much more tangible happening now as well Which is body counts by the police The next talk will be by Ray Osenger who is a private privacy advocate for bits of freedom, which is a Dutch equivalent of the electronic frontier foundation this talk, however, will be from freedom Inc and It's about the pros and cons of body cams. I must warn you there will be shocking videos in this presentation I just watch it is like whoa, holy shit So please welcome give a warm welcome for Ray Osenger Thank you, and thanks for having me here I propose we have bad weather next time because then there will be a lot more people here. I think so I'm gonna talk about the use of body cams by the police and how in a way the body cams are blinding the police I think I'm a Ray Osenger and I work for bits of freedom the leading Dutch digital civil rights organization And although I do like working at bits of freedom It has a fairly narrow focus So there is so much more that care to care about but falls outside of the scope of bits of freedom and that's why I do in my spare time work for freedom Inc and You may have heard from freedom Inc before because I was able to show that the Dutch police is using military drones Almost every third evening in the Netherlands somewhere at some point in time Right now. I'm mostly focused on the use of body cams by the Dutch police and One of the first times I realized the power of a video recording of the police behavior was with the Rodney King beatings in 1991 That's not a body cam. By the way, it was shot by a bystander from a balcony and soon after the footage was published It sparked a really a big debate. It raised public concern over the way the police was treating minorities This footage has been very significant even long after the footage made it into popular culture Like for example the movie three Kings that was released eight years later with ice cube in it and where it played an important prominent role here's a clip of it So the acquittal of the four police officers that were doing that were taking part in this beating led to what is known the LA burning riots and which set the City a light these riots resulted in 53 deaths and over 2,000 people were injured and another 12,000 were arrested This is what some powerful footage can trigger and of course the footage is only a means of raising attention of some bigger and less visible societal issues but by now Attaching bodycams to the uniforms of the police officers is very popular and there's a lot of footage available on YouTube Here's an example of the arrest of the Florida Department of Law Enforcement So if real action is shown this is what you see lots of shaking movements lots of yelling and possibly lots of aggression I'll get back to this video at the end of my talk So for most activists their position on the body cam use by the police is fairly binary Or they are in favor because of the accountability and then they prefer to have the camera always on so no incident will be missed Or they are on the other end of the spectrum And they see bodycams as just another means of a powerful surveillance, but me I'm somewhere in the middle. I think there's merit to both positions and it all depends on the goals and policies that are applied I'll explain this in this talk. Here's the outline first I will shortly describe the use of bodycams by the Dutch police until today and Then I will focus on the risks of the use of bodycams for the police for the individual police officers But also for the police organization then I will Have a lengthy discussion about the issues arising from the use of bodycams so the consequences that has for the Policies of governing their use now and with short quiz where you can judge the footage yourself So the Dutch police has a long history of experimenting with the use of bodycams It is what I would call a perpetual experiment with no real beginning and definitely no ending Here's the announcement of the Dutch government of 2008 in which they announced a large the start of a large project around technological tools for the police The one million euros were meant to decrease the violence against the police And one of those technology technological tools for the police Would was the body cam its goal preventing violence Towards the police is noteworthy as bodycams in other countries are often used as means to curb down the violence of the of the police so from the police and Because the cameras are in this pilot were expected to work the other way around The research results from abroad cannot be translated to the situation in the Netherlands one to one So that was nine years ago The truth is the police started experimenting nearly 20 years ago in 1997 Two years before Three Kings was released This year is a short article from a newspaper from the time and it says amongst other things In 1997 we ran experiments with mini cameras stripped onto the helmets of the mounted police Unfortunately, there are no photos next to this article. We can only guess how this must have looked However images do exist of race drivers and football players outfitted with cameras Here's Steve McQueen Here's Steve McQueen a race car driver with a camera attached to his helmet Probably the cameras of the police were a little bit smaller because this image I think this photo was taken I think like a decade before But these race car drivers didn't use the cameras during the races because they were too clunky What I did is they were using them in the training and then use the footage that was shot during the training in the actual race Football players in the US were also outfitted with cameras during their games and that was Reverted fairly quickly because interestingly it turns out that the football players were very very competitive and during the game there was lots of swearing and obnoxious language and of course Broadcasters didn't like to hurt the sensitive souls of the people at home watching the game The news article goes on to say that the trials were promising But unfortunately the article doesn't explain the goal of the pilot. So it's rather hard to tell It's rather hard to interpret it this comment And also worth noting the article says that the images were sent to the commanding officer That suggests more or less real-time transmission of the footage It implies that one of the goals was to improve strategic decisions of the police operations It is for these days back then surprisingly advanced technology I'd say and this announcement doesn't come as a surprise one of the first Announcements the police did this year was we're going to start a pilot with bodycams This announcement is I expect the biggest so the start of the biggest rollout of bodycams among the Dutch police And how ironic the bodycams should improve your view of the world But on a meta level the police has failed to do exactly that For some part I think the industry is to blame and of course in combination with a lack of critical questions from the police In the next video you will see Rick Smith He is the founder of Exxon and Exxon Maybe that name doesn't ring any bells, but they're the same company that also produced the taser Early this year he also had an announcement to make and here's a short clip from that Help with these challenges today We are proud to announce a nationwide program Offering a free body camera to every police officer complete with all the software storage and training There for the future of law enforcement Developed far more than just body cameras next these cameras securely passive storage servers in the cloud necessary software to process analyze and share this data Okay, that's to it. Let's try this one more time and otherwise. I'll just explain what he says Oh Help with these challenges today We are proud to announce a nationwide program Offering a free body camera to every police officer complete with all the software storage and training Okay, just let me then explain what he says. So maybe you've understood already Exxon announced that they were planning to provide every police officer in the US with a free body cam And they were saying, okay, we will provide all the The infrastructure around it you need to use those cameras And he is also talking about intelligent network massive storage and sharing across Thousands of agencies that scares me a bit Or as I had to think of opera everyone gets free stuff The rest of accents announcement Dramatizes the hard work of police officers the lack of support of policymakers and the lack of good tools It's hard to resist such an offer I think and it makes the industry dictate how the police thinks about storage and the use of this footage and I can foretell The police departments that fall for this seemingly generous offer will have a hard time to scale back when they decide to stop using these body cams In the Netherlands the situation is not much different Although industry may not be as pushy as in the US and that of course is because the Netherlands is only a very small market compared to the US Nevertheless, the Dutch police is adopting body cams on an increasingly large scale without knowing exactly why The Dutch police commissioned a literature study last year doing a meta evaluation of all internationally available research on the use of body cams The researcher who did the study was able to compile an overview of 22 Evaluations from all over the world only nine of them Qualified for scientific minimum standards and still many of the questions remain unanswered so One of the Canadian police forces named some of the common issues with Research on body cam used by the police and these are some of the complicating factors in many of the evaluations Technology is rapidly evolving Usually, there's a small number of participants with even less participation in the feedback process Participation is often on a voluntary basis. There's a lack of relevant and reliable baseline statistics and Research is often done by professional evaluators with little knowledge of policing or the other way around police officers with limited research experience and many other duties to perform in other words There is still very little solid evidence to support or refute most of the claims made about body cams another also interesting Conclusion, although most articles include pros and cons the majority of the main headlines promote the idea of inevitability Again in the Netherlands situation is no different The meta evaluation also considers the evaluations of the Dutch police and to date there have been only four Evaluations and the most recent one dates back to 2011 None of these evaluations were done in a way that is scientifically solid So the researcher of the meta evaluation concludes none of the research allows for conclusions about the casualty about the effect effects of the body cams and Dutch police themselves also arrived at a similar conclusion at present There's no clear image of whether body cams are effective or not and whether there are any undesirable side effects And how to mitigate those that's the conclusion after 20 years of experimenting with body cams That solid proof of body cams use is how these work is important It's because it will have a huge impact on the policies you will Governing the use you will draft. So for example, there is There's some research that is Showing that the use of violence by the police is decreasing whether body cams are used However, none of the research tells us why that is is it because Pyre standards are behaving better when the police officer wears a body cam or is it because the police officer Tend to be more reluctant to step into a hazy hazy conditions Which can happen if the police officer is afraid that the footage can be used against him Of course the letter is probably something as we as a society find undesirable Additionally solid research allows for solid policies and technical specifications. So we need to have that research, I think So while there's still no hard evidence for much of the claims around body cams The police is really blinded by those body cams. They want to use them What whatever happens and that comes with a risk for citizens because it may lead to unbalanced policies For example, the police may be allowed to make any recording of you at any time While the other way around you are not allowed to access that footage that was made of you But I think the use of body cams can also be damaging to the police themselves Both on an individual level as well as on an organizational level Here's a dash cam video of the death of Philando Castillo Which was which made the video made headlines not this one But a related video made headlines because his girlfriend sitting next to him was streaming much of what has had what happened to Facebook live You have a fire arm So Castillo was stopped because if I recall correctly a broken tail light, that's all the footage is hard to analyze That's a problem with body cam footage often Due to amongst other things the angle the quality and the fact that the view through the windshield is obstructed Apparently Castillo was showing no aggression. He immediately tells the fire the officer that he has a firearm on him You hear him saying that at the beginning of the video The officer Tells him repeatedly not to pull the gun, but nevertheless Castillo reached into his pocket It is being said afterwards that he tried that he wanted to pick his drive license but the police officer then has to decide in a split second and The thing is After all this happens The his supervisor or the prosecutor Will review this footage as well But the supervisor or the prosecutor may rewind this video 30 times and may reach to a different conclusion Than the police officer did in a split second so I Think that in that case the police officer may have a hard time explaining his decision of that moment Even when he did no wrong So the point is I'm not sure whether a police officer should be happy with recordings like this because it puts him in a problematic position and I value Privacy including the police officers so now consider a police a policy where the police officer is required to have the camera running all the time I'm pretty sure police officers are humans and like an act like such So a police officer is gossiping in at the bagel joint about the about their Supervisors or at the latest policy change in the department or Consider a officer that is returning from an accident where a small kid was killed by a drunken driver I would expect the police officer to need to let off some steam and may he may do that in a questionable language All of that should be no problem at all, but it may become a problem when all is recorded and may be used against the officer and The feeling that being watched and chilling effects of it for a police officer That's not my invention take the Boston Police Department for example after some racial incidents the Department's staff decided that the police officers should be outfitted with body cams Initially, they were made available to the police officers on a voluntary basis. However, as it turns out there were no takers The officers said it's not in our contract and the officers felt like being monitored all the time So then the supervisors started to point volunteers And that's a and the police union didn't like that and they went to court By the way, they lost that case The same is in Netherlands true Here's a partial page of a I had the police make public after a freedom of information act request It's the LVL evaluation of a pilot of the use of body cams by the police in Amsterdam and it says that some police officers felt watched when required to use a body cam and That did not even go fully away when the participants when the participation was done Voluntary on a voluntary basis or when the police officers themselves could decide when the camera was was activated So these are all kinds of reasons why I think that the police officers should be reluctant to use a body cam as well But also there's the obligatory oops potentially damaging the trust in police in general The Netherlands has a long history of lost recordings of important events We're still looking for the missing photo film documenting the role of the Dutch Army in Sherebrinita's downfall We're still wondering why an important call of the deputy deputy minister wasn't recorded while being wire tapped and In recent years at least three ministers and deputy ministers had to step down over lost recording of a deal with a criminal Body cams are no different. I tell you just consider the camera was turned off The battery was empty. There was a disc failure The hand was in front of the camera The recording was accidentally removed the recording was not accidentally removed Someone thought it was a good idea to To make a compilation of all the important pieces of a footage and by doing so invalidating the forensic value of the footage so If the Dutch police will is using body cams on large scale I can promise there will be a PR disaster with the and a undesirable result of decreasing trust in the Dutch police So when drafting policies for body cam for body cam used by the police There are many issues to consider and I'll walk you through some of them. I'll just only only some of them The obvious question of course and the most easy way to explain all the difficulties Surrounding the use of body cams by the police is when should it be on and when should it be off? When it's not always on you will potentially miss the recording of some behavior of the police officer But it's when it's always on there are many privacy related issues that come into play And then there are also secondary issues If you have always on policy then a lot is recorded and there's a lot to store And there's a lot to process and which may impact the operation of the police just as well Here's the current Dutch policy on the use of body cams It's just one single piece of paper Keep in mind also that although the police has started to introduce the body cams on a larger scale than ever before There is no finalized policy. Just this is just a temporary policy I find that kind of worrying that the police starting to use tools without having given enough thought to the policies That's surrounding the use of these tools So the temporary policy says that the police officer is expected to exercise Discretion and activate when deemed appropriate In other words when a situation escalates Turn activate the camera turn it on, but that's not good enough for me One of the reasons for using body cams in the Netherlands is to prevent what has been dubbed racial profiling Where some people are stopped overly frequent Now imagine you are stopped for the third time this week just because of your skin color and the car you're driving in You behave nicely, but after a couple of minutes of half-baked questions by the police officer You start to respond annoyed and agitated if the situation escalates only then the camera will be turned on and The result is that is that all the context is missing and you will have a hard time to defend yourself So what is the best policy? Maybe the best policy is just always off, but unfortunately I fear inevitability as well The police will use body cams That's more or less effect and we have to deal with that So if the police officer decides the risks are clear always on I'm not very well, I'm not particularly worried about the Edit surveillance capacity of the of the police, but there's a bigger worry a camera that is running all the time May also make some people reluctant to talk to the police when they know their Conversation is being recorded think about someone who is a witness of a murder or maybe a victim of rape I can imagine those people want to talk to the police, but not when a camera is just right in front of the nose So here is where I'm standing right now The camera must record any interaction with a citizen when the interaction is taking place on the initiative of the police That includes situations where the police response to a call for help and is dispatched from the control room to an incident In other cases the police may not record the interaction unless explicitly requested by the citizen And to make it a little bit more complex in any case this guideline may be waived when strictly necessary For example when a conversation is initiated by the citizen But out of the blue the citizen draws a knife you want to have that recorded of course So here's another issue Who has access when and which safeguards to apply? So there are many situations where access to the to the recordings may be useful like for example as evidence in a court case It's important that all parties have access to the raw footage And even when it is not used in an as evidence if the recordings are available the recordings should still be available to the For access to the defendant because it may show that the defendant was nowhere near the knife that was used in a stabbing and Even if there's no case at all you have to write to access your personal data That is all held by the police and the police has on you so and then there are many other ways on how the Or you can footage can can access for example in the US with the freedom of information act or maybe as in the Netherlands The police uses it as a kind of propaganda They want to give insight on the daily job of the police officer in any case when talking about access to this footage You're also talking about limitations such as privacy protection. Here's an example So the police is clearly struggling with the protection of privacy of some of the people involved here You see a suspect whose head not just his face, by the way has been blurred at the same time He's wearing some fairly recognizable pants and they're no longer longer visible, but they were And you also may recognize his bike in other parts of this video The voice of the suspect is clearly audible The face of some police officers Are blurred while others are not so clearly some dimensions decisions have been made But the question is of course, is that enough? Privacy is the occurrence you of the pilot That's a quote from a document from the same police department And it's evaluating the publication of videos like the one you've just seen The same document says the requirements put forward by the public prosecutor The facade of a house may not be recognizable That was 2014 Now let's have a look at a fragment of a video that the same police department published last year So two years later and I'll start with the control room dispatching a unit to some address There's a woman in her house having troubles breathing and the police is dispatched to that house Here's the video So you hear the control room saying start and landscape beep impen That's the address of the house while beeping the house number in all of the Netherlands There's only one street named start and landscape and that's in impen A place that falls under the supervision of the department releasing the video so that narrows it down very very quickly Here you can see one of the officers approaching the house So the police took the effort of blurring the house number and the number plate of the car The facade of the house however is clearly recognizable contradicting the prosecutors requirements They even left the name of the house clearly visible And of course there are many other identifying details like the large flower pot the architecture the bending of the road But not that you would need those I think it doesn't take too much effort to determine the exact house number of Of this house, we all have Google Street view open street maps And some official governmental registration databases at our disposal For convenience the police also includes some of the shots from the balcony You saw when the fire department is lifting the woman to the ground floor These shots give you a nice view of the surroundings for further identification should you need that And because all of these patches of ambulances and fire departments are Public with a full address. It's easy to do to determine the exact date and time of this incident But even if the police would have blurred the entire facade of the house Much of the interior of the house would still be recognizable for some people or by a smaller group Similarly for voice For true protection of privacy these the the voice needs to be deformed Which is difficult if more than one person is speaking at a given moment So maybe you would simply mute all audio So if you truly want to anonymize such footage, you would end up with a blank screen Here's an interesting approach of the same problem from the u.s In the u.s bodycam footage and dashcam footage falls under the freedom of information act in many states And in 2014 the seattle police department received a request to release all dashcam and bodycam footage That's a daunting task with 700 000 hours of dashcam video With someone working full-time so eight hours a day five days a week that would take 330 years of just watching all the video that excludes the redacting which would lead to some new definition of job security, I'd say So the police department, um, they organized a hackathon and here's the result So you see a high level of blurring and the removal of all audio It's enough to see roughly what's going on but hardly reveals any identifying information Here's another way to do the same possibly even better Because the color is removed So it allows the police department to release footage fairly quickly and automated And it allows the general public to search for and identify potentially interesting Um, uh situations If someone is interested in a particular scene they can file a request for that scene and the police then can spend Some more time on doing a more sophisticated form of reduction for that scene only And here's one more issue to consider It seems easy if you want to outfit your officers with a bodycam to just buy a couple of go pros Make the officers wear them and give them some guidelines Of course, there's so much more to do before a go pro makes you really a pro Having a look at these two clips and guess so have a look at these two clips and guess what is uh wrong here What what the two clips have in common So the lesson here obviously if you want, uh, if you want accountability for police violence Make sure the camera is not hiding behind the gun In each of the videos the suspect was was not clearly visible just because the Weapon the officer had drawn And what about the use of footage as evidence in court? One of those other lofty goals The canadian police did extensive research about the use of their bodycam footage in court The report was titled considering the evidence and one of the key findings of that report Many courtrooms are not equipped to view evidence of bodycam footage And many questions remain unanswered about how courts will handle issues such as Managing the volume of footage and the time and cost of viewing and presenting footage as evidence The report is by the way, just two years old So in other words, if you want to have bodycam footage to be used in court Make sure the court can handle that footage And of course the question that remains is what do you see? So this here is an article of a Of a last month where the police in the netherlands one police department in netherlands exclaims that they now really want to have bad Bodycams for each and every police officer the reasoning In the article a police officer says and I quote here the bodycams should provide counterweight to the growing number of Bystanders capturing an incident on their mobile phone because of that you often miss a part of the context and The bodycam tells you the whole truth Time for the quiz The quiz is based on work of law professor Seth Storten. I can highly recommend Check out all of his experiments. They're really cool. They're really insightful He made a couple of videos revealing what bodycams show or not Watch this video taken from a bodycam mounted on the chest of an officer There's no sound by the way so The question is how threatening was the situation the officer faced To keep it simple, I'll just ask you whether you're on the side of very or somewhat threatening Or little or not threatening at all. So hands up for everyone who thinks This was a very or somewhat threatening for the officer A Few like in five six people I think now hands up for Those who think it was just a little or not at all threatening for the That's a lot Well, according to the law professor most people agree that there is a serious serious threat To the law officer here. Now. Let's have a look at the same interaction, but from a different angle So that's not exactly a fight. That's some something of like dancing Um Because the camera is mounted on the chest the image goes everywhere as the camera is moving vigorously And because of that the image is accelerating what is going on and it quickly looks very very intense Uh, he calls this deceptive intensity He also comes to another conclusion. He says that if you tend to trust the police You are more likely to think that this was threatening So with this in mind now, let's watch the first body cam footage again I promise you they're not dancing by the way So here's the other angle Oh, no, there's no sound by the way So you have to admit there was a lot of violence here the situation was threatening But just not to the police officer. I think The suspect is clearly peacefully surrendering to the police and still gets beaten and body cam footage tells you a truth But it's just one of the truths Now you have seen this you should realize that this video tells us a lot more as well So interestingly one of the officers deactivates the camera right after the beating and why is unclear And when the beating is started you hear a police officer saying stop resisting repeatedly That is done Right away and it suggests the repeated Thing it suggests that this is some sort of a standard practice And the only goal I can imagine Purposely misdirecting the potential bystanders or whoever might review the body cam footage So this is just to realize what body cam footage is worth if you look at it So what's next? Um I think body cams on police officers are inevitable. Unfortunately. I'm I'm I'm afraid we cannot stop that from happening So if that's effect, then let's make the most of it We should allow the police only to get ahead with policies that are thought through and balanced In order to get there. We need to make sure we are heard. We need to explain the difficulties surrounding All of the decisions that are to be made when drafting policies We need to explain our rights that our rights are trampled if the if the policies are not balanced And we also need to make sure that no pilot starts as long as it is not also a research project that meets scientific standards If we don't we are in 20 years 20 more years exactly where we are right now Nowhere And you know My worry is that in two years time when most of these pilots Have been finished the police will keep on using body cams regardless of the outcomes of those pilots And therefore I'd like to do a proposal any body cam that is used in a pilot today will be thrown away at the end of the pilot If the police really thinks there's an added value in the body cams They can come up with a new proposal which justifies the purchase of new cameras Such a proposal of course is unacceptable if it doesn't come with good policies and doesn't recognize our rights And of course you may consider that as a waste of taxpayers money And maybe it is But I think it's the only way we can make we can assure that there's a public debate about the policies that are applied When the police is using body cams Without these rules the pilots will end the outcome doesn't matter and the body cams are silent to hear forever And one more thing We need to have the police do exactly what hackers do all the time Question everything. Thank you Thank you, reo Any questions for reo singer, please come to the microphones on the front or the back There must be more suggestions thoughts angers where ideas or policies are also welcome Yeah, okay Um, I know the dutch government has very strict rules about procuring any goods or services So also, uh, if the police buys a number of body cams, they should Adhere to those procurement rules, which means that there's probably a public publication about buying those cameras and the The conditions Under which they will be selected and probably used. Uh, is it something for for activists activists? to Jump in at the moment the police starts procuring those kinds of tools and probably other things as well Yep Well, that's a good question And I can tell you I've already saved you some work because um, I'm since the last one and a half years I'm almost constantly doing freedom of information Act requests to get these these documents public But unfortunately that only works if these documents are there if those documents aren't created or if they are thrown away, then of course, there's no record and I can tell you that the police does not keep a record of all the body cams they have Procured in the last couple of years Actually, if you ask them how many cameras you have they don't know the answer They are not willing to name a number because they are afraid that whatever number they gave the give it's the wrong number So based on my research, I can tell probably Dutch police has at least like in 1000 one and a half thousand cameras lying around Um, half of them are probably in use the other half is just lying around collecting dust um And I also found another document which suggests that they are not following the rules when buying those cameras so one of the if the I'm not sure we're using the right terms here, but if the procurement has a certain level of Money involved they need to follow specific procedures because it needs to be a European unbestaining and I don't know what the English term for that is And um, I have some written document which says that they are exempted from that From those rules so Yes, of course there should be documents From buying those cameras, but they're not around so probably if you If you have proof of the police not following their own rules Maybe we could write to members of parliament Have them start inquiries would probably be the best best way into Getting a hold on this situation. Yeah That's a good suggestion. There are two comments to this. I think first of all Or maybe three. So first of all, um at this time the Dutch We don't have a government which makes the parliament also a little bit in a like in a sort of standby motors operate Yeah, but um, there's no pressure for doing things right now. So that's one problem. The other thing is, um If you found a problem that doesn't guarantee attention in parliament. So Um, that's an ongoing struggle with many topics. Um, I'm working on Um So yes, I think that's a good good suggestion, but it takes some time before we are there Okay, thank you the gentleman in the back, please You had a suggestion for policy to fellow like, uh, switch it on if the citizen asks for it Um, I'm not a citizen and so I'm not a dutch citizen And I think that's okay as I have less rights here than you as a dutch citizen Totally okay, but I think in this context that shouldn't be the citizen has to write If you're not a citizen, he also had should have the same rights. So maybe you should Replace another word in that suggestion Yeah, good comment. So that would be like in if a human asks or maybe not even human or whatever. Yeah I get it. Thank you The gentleman in the front Yeah, I wonder if you have any insight from your past research on What the culture of the police how they Would have did with them to be surveilled continuously because usually it's the other way around where you know powerful people surveil others and Now they've come into close proximity with this concept of what it's like to be surveilled all the time Did that change their culture or do you any feedback on that? So that's an interesting thing It's one of the reasons why I like to work why I like to research this body cam used by the police because Like you were saying it works also the other way around it's also impacting the privacy of the police officers and What you see I think there are Different perspectives to that depending on where you are within your organization. So as I've Discussed You see that In in some departments there is lots of pushback because people are afraid police officers are afraid to being Surveilled all the time and I don't want to they don't want that. They're mostly afraid of being of having the Recordings used against them. So there's some opposition, but at the same time The higher you are in the organization I have the feeling that they just want to simply rule out liabilities. So for example Um, one of the things I've seen in those documents is the bring your own device culture so there are police officers that bought a GoPro themselves and we're using it in their day-to-day job and of course There's no facility for you for processing these images at the police station So I presume those images are being Processed at home at the same computer where the 10 year old kid also does play games so of course that's something that is unwanted and The staff of police recognizes that problem. So what they are saying is we need bodycams Officially because then we can eat more easily deny the police officers from bringing their own Um cameras, so there the higher you are in your organization. There is less consideration of the Privacy impact on the police officer unless there's there's legislation like in you have a Under naming Serrat, I'm not sure sorry workers council. Thank you So then they have to think about it, but other than that, uh, no Thank you Next You have to put in the front. Please speak in the into the microphone Um, I'm not sure if you've heard the news reports about the Recent drug bust in baltimore where the police body cam showed the officer planting Uh, this is sort for the people who don't know, uh, the officer basically planted Some drugs and then 30 seconds later came back into the premises with the body cam active and showed him Somehow finding this shit which yeah, okay, so Um, this happened because the bodycams which were used Uh from what I've read Have passive, um recording and when the officers then Actively click okay start recording. It uh recalls the previous 30 seconds. So do you think bodycams like this would? Would actually help the situation you were saying about context or do you think that caused more harm than good? Two things about it. First of all, I'm not sure whether the 30 seconds are enough So I can imagine that in some situations even those 30 seconds are too short to really understand the context of a situation That's one thing. And the other thing is that in this particular case So a police officer didn't realize that the 30 seconds before he was switching it on, uh, that was also recorded That's catching only the dumb police officers He he will do that only once, uh, he will make the mistake only once next time He will take care of the 30 seconds as well. So specifically for that it doesn't help at all Gentleman back, please Yes, thank you. Uh, I was wondering if the information you shared with us today Is there a link with the ministry of safety and justice? whereby You for example give a presentation in-house to have You know the judges that are going to be confronted with evidence from body camps, etc, etc Are informed about the latest news about this Um, I'm not sure whether uh, the Responsible people within the ministry are fully aware of all the issues surrounding, uh, police body camps um, there is So the involvement of the security and justice, uh, ministry is Mostly, I'd say because something else they have a project named sensing Sensing an interception. I think it's a full name and that is mostly about, um Having sensors all All around us. So whether it's your phone or whether it's an ampur camera or so a license plate scanner or whether it is, uh A microphone somewhere or or body cams, for example So they want to, um Get as much of that data process that and, um Get as close to predictive policing as possible um So the ministry is involved in a pilot light like they are doing right now, but only from that perspective. So only from The information or intelligence perspective. They are not involved. Um, so maybe if if politically politically Like in 2008 which I showed at the beginning if politically it's interesting to say something about violence against police officers Then they're in but other than that not at all So there's not a direct concern for the ministry concerning the privacy or the protection of rights Not to my knowledge. No the reason why I ask that is because the the the other fellow before this said how how should we You know be be activist or you know help make sure people, uh Are aware about these developments is and and the same thing is that I I'm wondering is how this knowledge is shared with the ministry so that they can act upon this and know what they're dealing with So one more comment on that. So one of the things I'm trying to do is to um, I don't Try to be To I try to explain to the to the government as well So someone else was just talking about the parliament But at the same time I'm also trying to talk to people from the ministry and explain them the issues surrounding body cam body cams by used by the police and um, I have been talking with people who are responsible for this pilot for example But I'm not sure whether they are Listening so At least they don't really they do not really give a sign of listening They they say, uh, thank you, and then they go on with whatever they were doing. Anyways, so um Yeah, I'm trying but it but it's hard Yep Okay microphone on the front please Last week on twitter there was a suggestion in the United States that as soon as you are approached by an officer You should call 911 Well, you can laugh but they they In the Netherlands, they have uh in the control room Continues the recording of everything that comes in and all the discussions, etc. Maybe also video because it is it is locked for supervision of the police people That was not mentioned anywhere There police people are supervised by by other police departments or ministerial departments to look if they are doing the job right and it it has to be by law Recorded and and sent to a place where it can be kept for a number of years Because they want to increase the quality of their work. Yeah, so it is supervised And you can if you call them 911 it will automatically be locked Yes, so but how does that relate to body cams? I'm not sure Just guessing I assume that body cam Videos will also be Locked and Placed. Yeah, so it is not the police themself Who should be? But the researchers people have to look at what they're doing Well, as far as body cam video goes the registration is fairly limited. So It depends a bit on on the kind of use You can use body cams to prevent something from happening you can use body cams to Have someone else look with you and you can use it after this evidence So in the the second case where you have someone also looking it's live streaming So then it's the control room which can Look at the images in real time and they can assess the situation and change the tactics if needed In that case the body cam stream is sent to the police station directly in all other cases it's It is or is not But it is recorded then at the end of the shift of the police offer it's taken From the camera onto a computer where it is supposed to be safely Assorted that is of course a registration that is of course locked but the Data retention of those body cam streams. I did not talk about it, but it's also an interesting angle That is limited to a couple of weeks. So it it's not recording like in for many Years one small suggestion, please maybe maybe we can make a ruling that the control room Can turn on the body cam. Yes, that's also an interesting thing. Some of the cases where they have real time streaming Sometimes they can enable the activate the recording from the from the control room because they Sometimes the police officer ends up in a fight the fight is Very intense very suddenly and they doesn't have the time to switch it on then the control room can do that However one important one interesting note from one of the documents I I got was that they were saying if the control room enables activates the camera from the control room They need to inform the police officer as quickly as possible because of the chilling effects The gentleman in the back, please Yeah, you were saying about the problem with continuous recording You know when they're leaving a scene or getting their lunch or whatever what happens there Have they has there been any trials where They've got the actual officer. They record an entire shift and then say Watch the entire video back and tell us what you think So so you're talking about situations where they were just watch their entire shift back Well, they can see for themselves. I'm not sure whether there are any cases, but I I am aware of situations where the Where the police Afterwards look at the footage mostly to learn from it and I'm not sure how much of the video then they will see But that's something that is happening and one of the documents I Had made public Is that they are saying we even don't want that because we don't want to be confronted with our own behavior The lady in the front, please Hi, thank you. I have a question I know one of the arguments that is being used in this case is that The people they use their phones when they interact with the police So you would have video documentation from the human being or being perspective And so the police needs to have a body cams to to to have the other perspective.  No really I would say that the police needs to have the tools to do its work good And that doesn't that the fact that someone else is filming them Is a bad or is a horrible Really don't understand it is a horrible argument for Giving cameras to the police as well That should not be the reason why you give the police the camera There are other reasons which are which which are a lot more valid and maybe there are none I don't know maybe maybe there are But that that would be the reason why you give a police officer a camera not just because the bystander also records Would you please take that to parliament as well? Yes, thank you. Sure Okay, can I ask one more? Sorry, can I ask can I ask a question? So one of the things I'm really trying hard, but which I'm failing miserably all the time is getting recorded by a body cam Every time I see a police officer with a body cam. They are really busy doing some Work where they need to need where they where they should not be distracted Um, but I'm looking for people who are recorded by body cams of the police and which would help me doing a We just want to test how it works with getting access to your own foot to your the footage where you've been recorded yourself um If someone has been recorded by a police body cam, please get in touch with me and um, we have a nice project going on Okay, thank you. Good idea. Uh, can I have a applause for reo singer, please?


Good morning everyone, welcome. It's a pleasure to be here today to launch a new community firearm safety program called Project Child Safe Columbia and also to discuss the importance of firearm safety and secure storage. My name is Joe Bartosi, I'm the president and CEO of the National Shooting Sports Foundation and I'm also the chairman of the Project Child Safe Foundation. I'm honored to be here today with Columbia Mayor Daniel Rickenman, we have Captain Kelly Yates of the Columbia Police Department along with a host of community organizations that have all joined us to support this initiative. The organizations that are here today include Representative Congressman Joe Wilson's office, the Richland County Sheriff's Department, the Columbia Police Department, the West Columbia Police Department, the South Carolina Department of Natural Resources, the South Carolina Department of Veterans Affairs, the Kershaw County Chapter of Armed Women of America, Sand Hill Shooting Sports, Put Down the Gun Now Young People Organization, the St. Paul Baptist Church here in Columbia, as well as FN, one of our member companies and they have a factory here with over 400 jobs right here in South Carolina so we're very happy to have them to show support of the industry for this initiative and this program would not be possible without these groups support and we're grateful to have them involved. Now for those of you that may be unfamiliar with Project Child Safe, it's a national firearm safety program that was founded in 1999 by the National Shooting Sports Foundation. The program promotes safe firearm handling and responsible gun ownership with a focus on securely storing guns when they're not in use. To date the program has distributed more than 40 million free gun locks through partnership with more than 15,000 law enforcement agencies and community partners across all 50 states and five U.S. territories. Here in Columbia we will provide thousands of free cable-style gun locks to gun owners through partnerships with the organization standing alongside me today. We're also offering free resources on firearm safety and suicide prevention. These locks and materials are available now to anyone who wants them, no questions asked, and they'll be available in the community moving forward. We also want to point out that keeping a gun on a nightstand on a shelf in a closet on top of the refrigerator etc. is not safe storage. That's why we're reminding gun owners to make sure their firearms are securely stored using one of the many available storage devices that best suits their lifestyle. We also know secure storage in the home and in vehicles can help play an important role in preventing thefts of guns and keep firearms out of the hands of criminals. We're doing all of this because secure and responsible gun storage and ownership works. It's a real solution for safer communities and we know that firearm accidents are preventable. It's our hope that what begins here in Columbia will spread across the entire state of South Carolina to raise awareness of how gun owners can practice firearm safety in the home. We cannot stress enough that the success of Project Childsafe communities depends on the commitment and involvement of the community leaders and organizations. So again we thank them for their support and we encourage all interested parties to reach out to us to learn more about how you can become one of our community supporters and help spread the important message of firearm safety. So once again thank you very much for being here today. It's my pleasure to introduce Columbia Mayor Daniel Rickinman. Mr. Mayor. Thank you Joe. I'm very pleased to welcome NSF and Project Childsafe to our city. I want to thank all of our community partners all those folks and groups that are listed obviously our support from Congressman Clyvern's office, Congressman Wilson's office and all the agencies that are here today we appreciate it. It's a privilege to see everybody coming together and taking part in this. Obviously as we all know child safety is a big issue for us especially when it comes to guns and having an opportunity for us to have secure storage using gun locks is a number one way to prevent firearm accidents. Project Childsafe exists to help gun owners that take steps to secure storage and spread the important message of their family, friends and community. We had done here at the city several months ago a first step into this by creating that with our officers and pushing the cable locks out there. Here we have an opportunity to join a program with national attention really to infiltrate our communities and share an opportunity for people to have storage responsible use and gun safety that protects all citizens in every neighborhood no matter where you live. As part of this child city-wide initiative our law enforcement local law enforcement community leaders will help share educational materials around the storage the distribution of these these cable locks. Our law enforcement has been partnership with Childsafe for several years and I also like to take a moment to recognize Jack Logan the founder put your guns down now. Where's Jack? Jack thank you very much for what you do and being part of our community and being an outspoken individual in our community to really push the issue forward. As you know in our community gun violence has increased roughly Chief, tell me if I'm wrong 18 percent over the last year. So for us this hits home very hard and we want to make sure that we do everything we can to support any option to reduce any accidents any potential accidents or gun violence moving forward. I want to thank Project Childsafe for the hundreds of free gun locks that have already been distributed across the city and I like to thank the citizens of Columbia for obtaining locks putting them to use and educating their families and neighborhood neighbors about firearm safety. We want as many Columbia residents as possible to know that these resources are available right now and so that gun owners can take action to keep them their families and their community safe. We look forward to working together the community to promote the practice of firearm safety not just here in Columbia but across our entire state. I hope that Columbia as the capital city will be the beacon to bring this issue forward and get more and more communities no matter if they're they're large small rural urban to come together and bring this issue forth and work together to put a lock on every gun that's out there. Ultimately the importance of firearm safety is an issue to everyone we can agree on but if you understand this better than our law enforcement community with that I'd love for y'all to give a warm welcome to my chief our chief the capital city police chief William Holbrook. Thank you mayor I'm going to speak off script a little bit I could I could not think of a more important program for for our city it certainly enhances some of the fantastic work we do we know we've got a an incredibly challenging problem with with gun crime in our city I know the mayor acknowledged mr. Logan is a he's a great example of the the grassroots action that's underway in our city and across our state with promoting gun safety you know we know we are a a gun-friendly state and we certainly applied and recognized responsible gun ownership and and that's why this program really just goes hand in glove with that we every day every week we touch hundreds of neighborhoods in our city and our our department is based on community policing that's our foundation and when we visit these these neighborhoods and participate in these community meetings having a gunlock on our tool belt is really important and every meeting we go to we travel with with gunlocks we we too have experience tragedy with young people getting a hold of a gun and harming themselves it goes much beyond the injury or the fatality of a young adult or a child it has everlasting effect on families moms and dads and in neighborhoods where these children live this is an incredible partnership an important partnership it's the right thing to do and we're we're so happy to be a part of this it the timing can be better as the mayor stood up his office of gun violence prevention our councilwoman dr oddity bustles has been instrumental on pushing child's child gunlock safety and so i think it's the it's the timing's perfect and this gives us greater capacity to reach people in our city with this preventive program and and again i thank you for helping us um we've got to drive down our our gun violence but we also got to promote responsible gun ownership and security and safety and so we thank you very much for that thank you very much chief holbrook and thank you all again for being here as we launch project child's safe columbia to continue to make communities across america safer i invite any media and attendants to speak with me along with mayor rickamant and chief holbrook at your convenience i think we have a couple of interviews lined up but i'll be happy to take those uh you know off off off stage so to speak but again thank you all for being here really appreciate what you do you know spreading the message about secure storage and safe firearms handling is is one of my passions and our industry is fully behind it and we're very proud to be be a part of this event so again thank you hi everyone councilwoman oddity bustles here at a local gunlock giveaway as the person who launched lock it up columbia it means a lot to see our community getting engaged about safe gun storage and really continuing to promote efforts to reduce gun violence in our communities it's also great to see our community partner with cpd with the sheriff's office and with so many other key stakeholders because it really does take a village to ensure that every child lives a life free from violence


So you've poured your resin and now you're ready for it to cure. If you've seen our videos before you know that we always recommend a warm dry environment to let your resin cure in. So you'd think by a window would be a perfect spot but actually it's not and let me tell you why. The first 24 hours of cure is critical. Warm and dry is good but the most important thing to remember is temperature stability. You want to keep it somewhere where the temperature is not going to drop so it's great right now. It's really hot here by the window but tonight when the sun goes down the temperature is really going to drop and you could end up with what's known as the orange peel effect. And basically that means you're going to get wavy resin but you're not going to get that perfect smooth level even resin finish. So a warm dry temperature stable environment is what you want to remember when you're curing your resin piece. Hope that was helpful. Video Friday with Art Resin. Ah thank god that's over.


Welcome folks, this is Tom O'Brien of TFNN. We go five days a week, we go seven hours a day, we go 24 hours a day on the internet at TFNN.com. Always remember folks, whatever you think about, you bring about whatever you focus on grows. Hope everyone's having a great day, safe day. Kick off December, gotta love it. Futures contracts folks, they're rolling out until 2020. Check it out. Always do your best, express your own divinity. You don't need the acceptance of others, you don't need knowledge or great philosophy concepts. You have the right to be you and express your own divinity by being alive. Loving yourself and loving others. Market-wise, let's take a look at it out here. We have the Dow Industries down 218, NASDAQ is off 88, S&P's down 25, gold contract down $3.40 straight and at $14.62 an ounce. We have silver down 12 cents, $16.84 an ounce. Lights we crude, up 86 cents, $56.03 a barrel, notes and bonds. You get the 10 year down 12 six, 128.31, 30 year off for full point, plus 12 six, 157 to 20 and King dollar. King dollar down 446 straight and at 97.833. The euros at $1.10, the yen is at 108 and the pound is at 129 to one U.S. dollar. Our phone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>. Give us a call, folks. Want to know what's going on in your world and the world of the S&P's. Let's take a look at them. What do you have? Okay, so we make all-time highs last Wednesday before Thanksgiving holiday. Bottom line, we make that all-time high and the spy with the 44 million shares. We all were going up for quite some time with the volume contract and bottom line is that you're up there. What do we have today?  Bottom line, we'll see whether you get any follow-through. You know, this run here, this has been a non-stop run, folks, since October 3rd. We are 284 October 3rd. The only time that you actually did, and this is the heads up, actually. We had made an all-time high on November 19th with 67 million. You sold down with 79. Okay, pretty dramatic sell-down. Not on price, but you had large operators pushing product out. We'll see whether we get any follow-through on this one here. Bottom line, right now you do have a contraction on price and you get an expansion on volume. And to the NDX 100, we have the same setup inside the NDX. NDX 100 right now is trading at 202, the Q's rather 202.95. Same type of setup, we made a high last Wednesday. Out here at 17 million, you get 22 million on the way down. Small caps. Small caps, they have topped, they topped out July of 2018. That being said, they made a nice little run for themselves. Bottom line is that they got over the consolidation that they've been trading in for, I believe, yeah, since October of 2018. The top of that consolidation, 160.110, and guess what, they just gave it up in spades. We're at 160.08 inside the IWM, and that brings you inside the lower range. Again, that means that the lower range is gained once again down to 144. So you get a lot of moving parts out here. Gold contract, what do we have with the gold contract? Gold contract right now, rejected lower price out here today. We pushed forward last week after we rejected lower price. So the way that the gold metals, physical metals set up, it looks to me like we want higher price. The equities have already started moving, okay?  Leveraged product, you'll see that thing already moved from last week from $25 to $27.76, and it has volume behind the move. So the equities were moving first. Now what we have is that on Friday, we basically, we did 272,000 contracts, big contract volume.  And it's gonna be all about the U.S. Dollars. No two ways about this. And when we take a look at the U.S. Dollar, now we don't have volume on the dollar folks, okay? This is the dollar, I use the dollar spot index. And the reason, volume is not consistent in currencies because there's so many different platforms too, by the way, that's how that really, that's how that does work. That being said, this is wide price spread out here today. You know, we went from 98, 376 to 97, 811. That sets up the bottom of the consolidation, which is 97, 141. You break that bottom of the consolidation and what you could, well, we break that consolidation and then you would be down into the 95, 96 area, which we haven't been in quite some time. And I suspect what that, most of that was about is that you had Trump come out this morning and tweet that the, well, did not tweet. Lighthouse put tariffs on Brazilian, Argentinian, and in Argentina, steel as well as aluminum. And that wasn't what I would say hit the dollar. What hit the dollar is that that was wrapped inside basically an attack on the Federal Reserve, our Federal Reserve, saying that bottom line that rates are still too high, number one, and that he felt that the reason the tariffs are going on is that they are basically letting their currency depreciate and that's hurting our farmers. Bottom line, folks, okay, strong dollar hurts farmers, period. There's no doubt about that. The real question is gonna be, is this gonna be a currency war that's coming up next? And we'll see.   It's just, that's how wars go in general, right? Currency war, that's a whole different animal, man. That's a whole different animal. Why? Because so many large corporations depend on stable currencies, stable, you know, and most of the time what does happen is this, is that when currencies move, folks, they do move for long periods of time in a trending aspect. There's no two ways about that. So if we go over and I was talking about the real last week, I was talking about the real because, and this might take us, that this doesn't have to do with, they didn't do this on purpose, believe me, the rail has been getting devalued for a long period of time. When we brought this up, we're at $420 to one U.S. dollar, you know, you go back to 2018, you're at 350, you know. Big, big number, no doubt about that.  Stay right there, folks, come back with our mammoth and a Mazda head of products at Direction Shares, come on back.


Hi, I'm Jango Crandall from Dumbest of All Worlds. Today I'd like to personally thank each and every one of you for helping us get to 1,000 subscribers. Especially our new sponsor, Subway, for being our 1,000th subscriber. In honor of this achievement, show this video at any participating Subway location for a free sub sandwich. Eat first.