Cameras or more Social Workers?

As part of the renewed interest in the police and the obvious systemic injustices within our legal systems, one of the quick fixes that have been suggested is that all police wear cameras. The assumption is that the police if all of their actions were recorded, would be better behaved, less likely to do or say things that are inappropriate or just plain wrong. If something did happen that needed to be investigated - then we would no longer need to accept the word of the officer - we would just have to watch the movie.

Cameras are an easy and quick fix. But like all easy fixes, wearing a body camera will not address any of the real issues. The cost would be prohibitive and I suspect that the results with the inevitable technological failures would not be anywhere as useful as people think.

According to the CBC "Since 2000, there has been an average of 27 police gunshot deaths a year" (1). On the surface that seems like a remarkably small number especially as compared to the approximately 1000 individuals killed every year by police in the USA. But what is important is not how many were shot and killed, but rather who they were. Not surprisingly almost all who were killed were male and almost half were white. However, the number of indigenous and black people killed was disproportionate to the relatively small number of such individuals living in our communities. What is particularly alarming is that in BC, 34 % of the individuals were unarmed, 64% were in mental distress and 75% had discernible mental health or substance abuse issues

 The issue is not whether or not police wearing cameras would reduce the misuse of force, but rather are we sending out the wrong professionals? If the latter is true - then the question becomes - who is the right person to send out. An even better question should be what could we have done to prevent the individual from being in crisis? A corollary to the above question is - how much are we prepared to spend on such things as mental health or drug abuse prevention? Unfortunately, we do not have very good answers to any of the above questions.

 It has been argued that social workers or nurses might be the more appropriate professionals to deal with at least some of these critical situations. The assumption is that nurses or social workers are less likely to be racially biased may not be true - it is an assumption that has never been tested (consider all of the social workers who willingly participated in the 60s scoop of young indigenous children or continue to support the various foster care programs for such children).  Furthermore, not only have we demonstrated very little interest in developing strategies that are effective in dealing with mental health and substance abuse issues, taxpayers have clearly demanded that both they are kept safe and that they pay as few taxes as possible.

 On the other hand, the issues have been discussed and examined for far too long. It is time to be proactive. It is time for the government and the communities need to look at effective solutions that are implemental in the short term. There is not a single solution that will address everyone's concerns. What is needed in parts of Vancouver is profoundly different from what is needed in the more northern part of the province. Different skillsets, different professionals, different teams need to be considered on an area by area basis. We need to get rid of the rhetoric that is driven by the anger in the US and look for solutions in our towns and cities.

That will require those who control the law enforcement budget to meet with those who are living in those communities, to listen to them, and to allow a significant portion of that money to be allocated to at the very least, creating a different response system.

 (1) https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/police-related-deaths-canada-bc-vancouver-boyd-edey-database-1.4603820