Rexrode said body cameras help officers accurately record interactions with the public, resolve complaints and improve department performance.

The Virginia Senate passed a bill Monday exempting law enforcement officers from mandatory disclosure under Freedom of Information Act requirements. The bill provides an exemption of disclosure of names and training records all local and state police officers and sheriff deputies, including officers from the Alcoholic Beverage Control.

Sen. John Cosgrove, R-Chesapeake, proposed the bill in order to protect law enforcement officers from being targeted.

The bill came about in response to recent events including a November court ruling which allowed The Virginian-Pilot newspaper access to private information concerning Virginia police officers including names, agencies and employment dates.

Cosgrove has also referenced a Texas newspaper which also recently threatened to publish the names and addresses of officers following a fatal shooting by a police officer in the community.

Stephen Upman, Charlottesville Police Department lieutenant and police information officer, said law enforcement officers often have concerns for their families when it comes to private information.

“I think it'll be good in the sense that it brings some comfort to the officers to know that some of those records are not necessarily readily available to anybody that asks for them,” Upman said.

Some who oppose the bill, including Sen. Chap Petersen, D-Fairfax, are concerned it will allow for more corruption in the law enforcement community. Others are demanding transparency from those in public service occupations.

“I think it’s a bad thing seeing that they're public servants,” fourth-year College student Sam Freeman said. “Since they’re government and state employees they need to be transparent.”

Upman said he believes the bill will not lead to corruption due to the “stringent” hiring process applicants have to go through before obtaining a law enforcement position which includes thorough background checks, interviews, physical testing, polygraphs and drug screening.

“I don’t think it was intended as a type of legislation where officers’ identities are trying to be hidden,” Upman said. “It’s more intended to limit access to that information for the correct purposes.”

Fourth-year College student Thatcher Whitacre said he believes some level of regulation anonymity does not pose a threat.

“As long as the police department keeps tabs on those people the anonymity should be fine,” Whitacre said. “As soon as they stop taking care of it people abuse it like they always do.”

The bill is now heading to the House of Delegates for further consideration.