Legislators are considering a state bill that would require every police officer to wear a visible body camera, with advocates saying the increased accountability is long overdue and Boston Police worrying that the legislation is too much, too soon.

The dual bills (H 2170 / S 1257) step into a fraught discussion about the excessive use of police force, often perpetrated against people of color. Police departments have expressed concern regarding body camera privacy, process, and potential conflict with the community policing model on which local departments, like Boston, pride themselves.

Digital Fourth, a volunteer group focused on government search and seizure of electronic data, referenced a host of high-profile officer-involved shootings in pushing for the legislation. The group noted in a statement that two shootings – Michael Brown in Ferguson, Mo. in 2014 and Denis Reynoso in Lynn in 2013 – were not documented on video. “But what if there had been?” Digital Fourth posed.

State Sen. Jamie Eldridge (D-Acton) and State Rep. Denise Provost (D-Somerville) filed the partner bills in January, which were devised by the Digital Fourth group and based on similar legislation that passed in South Carolina.

The legislation provides for a blue-ribbon state commission tasked with gathering and reviewing police data from pedestrian stops, traffic stops, body-worn cameras and mass surveillance technologies. Police officers statewide would be equipped with an audio-visual camera, which must be in plain view of those being recorded. It establishes protocols for the subject declining to be videotaped, as well as exceptions for undercover officers.

“I just think that requiring all police officers to is just good for the police officer, good for the community, and good for the public interest in making sure there are safe interactions between the public and police,” Eldridge said.

He called the bill “part of the solution” toward excessive use of force by law enforcement.

A conversation surrounding the legislation is a necessary step, Eldridge said, and he is open to changes in the bill’s text. Activists have suggested management of the recorded video by a separate entity, some doubtful that video footage would even have a real impact on systemic violence.

But “something needs to change,” Digital Fourth said in a statement. The Belmont-based group cited over 1,100 Americans shot by police in 2015 and a police shooting rate in Massachusetts 16 times that of Germany.

A hearing on the legislation took place on Feb. 4 at the Committee on Public Safety and Homeland Security, buttressed by bills seeking to refine standards of police behavior in the Commonwealth.

The Boston Police Department in late 2015 approved plans for a body camera pilot program, expected to begin in late spring of this year. Slated to last six months, the pilot would then cease and move into an evaluation period, according to a Boston police statement.

With respect to the considered legislation, “The BPD feels that an unfunded mandate at this point would interfere with the planned pilot program and force larger municipalities like Boston with over 2,000 officers, to fund programs that have not been proven beneficial to their intended purpose.”

Eldridge said that the Boston Police Department is reasonable in wanting to consider a pilot program given the size of the force, as are other local departments.

“What I would say is, certainly there are police departments across the state that are taking a look a instating body cameras,” Eldridge said. “But there really should be a statewide standard, because I don’t think it would be productive for all the cities forces to have different policies.”

Newly installed District 4 City Councillor Andrea Campbell is monitoring the body camera discussion in her capacity as chair of the Public Safety and Criminal Justice Committee. Her predecessor, Charles Yancey, was a dogged advocate for police accountability.

“I’m very supportive of the pilot program for the cameras,” Campbell said. “I know the Boston Police Department, Commissioner [William] Evans, the task force are sorting how they roll that out. I look forward to seeing a robust community process related to that.”

Campbell said she is meeting with community and social justice activists, as well as having conversations of the State House side of the discussion. She hopes to ensure that, in her capacity as Public Safety chair, “the council is also addressing what’s happening. But if we want to do a pilot program, it’s really important that residents have a say in or are part of the decision making that will go into that roll-out.”