[bunderbunder]

Officers are humans, too, and should get intense protection of their privacy whenever they are off duty.

When they're on duty, though, they are acting in the service of the public, not as private citizens. We need to be very careful about letting them have much or any privacy while they're at work. There's just too much opportunity for abuse.

No, I don't think this is unfair. It's certainly no less unfair than when restaurants like Chipotle and Steak n Shake use open kitchens. Having employees do their work in full view of the customers is not very different from requiring police to use body cameras from a privacy-at-work perspective, and is done for much the same reason.

[brador]

How about always on recording but only a court can authorise viewing?

So if someone has a complaint the video is pulled out and watched, else it goes in a vault and is auto deleted after 60 days.

I'd happily pee while wearing one if that was the case.

[Eridrus]

If we start allowing any deletion, police will simply find a way to stall until the deadline is passed. This has happened several times in Seattle with dash cams

[RobertoG]

I certainly would hate to be watched all the time in my job, I don't see why officers should be.

It seems to me that a compromise can be reached.

Probably the rules already exist about reporting the headquarters when they are starting a police action, you just have to add the requirement to start the camera.

[leesalminen]

Are you provided a firearm, taser, mace, and baton as part of your job? Is your job funded by taxpayer money? Are you expected to be able to deal with stressful situations that could endanger your life daily?

If you answered yes to any of the above questions, I think it's an apple to oranges comparison.