Very true. It is expensive to buy not just the actual cameras but there is all of the associated equipment like the chargers and docking stations that download the videos which also require expensive high tech storage systems and people to oversee and manage the data. Plus this is another instance where policies and laws haven't caught up to the available technology so some police agencies may be slow to implement them because they are being cautious. This isn't the case everywhere though, lots of places have them.
There's also the whole issue of how that footage gets released. You can either have it all publicly available, only available on request if you can prove you have a reason to see it and specify precisely which footage you want, or just have it only available to a courtroom. All of those have pros and cons and no one can really agree on which is best. Body cams infringe on the privacy of the people as well as the officer. (Still think they're a great idea and love the positive statistics in the places that are using them, but we've got some problems to solve before it gets implemented everywhere.)
One example: police arrive to stop a rape in progress. The girl has been stripped naked by her assailant and now the bodycam footage has her naked body on tape. Another example: police receive a tip that someone has a drug lab setup in their house. They investigate, and while they find out the tip was a hoax, their bodycams do pick up that the person has an embarrassingly elaborate shrine to One Direction in their bedroom. Another example: someone's going to attempt suicide by jumping off a bridge, but the police arrive and try to talk him out of it. Intimate, private details of precisely why he's been driven to the point of suicide are discussed, and now recorded by the bodycam.
All of those are either in a public place, or in in a place where the officer would need a warrant to enter. Assuming the officer had said warrants, nothing is infringed.
In my country we just put cameras (ojos de aguila) everywhere. Just last week there was an argument with a cop and a civilian. The camera recorded everything and it turned out the civilian started the whole thing up
I think this should be funded like camsites or twitch. City or State does the initial outlay for equipment but it's on for the entire shift. Then if you want to log on and watch what the camera sees you pay a small fee. Or you can subscribe. And the past shows are available for replay.
Head mounted cameras are more effective than the chest in several ways. Chest cameras only capture footage of the direction they're facing for example. So if an officer is standing in the middle of a situation and turns his head to look at something else, you only see what the body is turned towards, not necessarily what he's looking at. You also won't get to see anything but the steering wheel when he's driving.
A head mounted unit would have a lot more motion-blur to deal with, along with either not being attached well or having some ridiculous mounting bracket I wouldn't want. Also dash cams would be optimal anyway.
How so?
So? Public footage of a public place, or public footage of a warrant-entry. It's fine either way.