Franklin County was one that was affected by a officer involved shooting. The Franklin County was under a lot of heat due to the fact that the videos that were released didn’t benefit the officers. Additionally, the videos that were recorded in Pasco only show one side of the story. We don’t know what the officers saw in the moments leading up to the shooting. However, if the officers were wearing body cameras, people would probably understand why those actions were taken. Franklin County should implement body cameras for their officers so that next time there’s a situation like this the police officers and the community will be protected.
Antonio Zambrano-Montes was the man shot and killed by Franklin County police. Antonio was throwing rocks
…show more content…
In 2015 there were approximately 965 police involved shootings nationwide. Police involved shooting was an issue for a while, but ever since Ferguson it’s gotten worse. In 2014 Michael Brown was shot by Ferguson police, which led to a long riot and a nationwide protest of the use of force by police (Kindy et al, par.1, 4).
A way to deal with this problem seems to be body cameras. According to Jay Stanley, writer of “Police Body-Mounted Cameras: With Right Policies in Place, a Win For All” states that body cameras are “small, pager-sized cameras that clip on to an officer 's uniform or are worn as a headset, and record audio and video of the officer 's interactions with the public.”. However, having these new cameras come with privacy and money issues. With 25% of all agencies in the nation already using them and 80% looking into them (pg. 1). So, the two main issues with body cameras have to be addressed before moving
…show more content…
According to Timothy Williams writer of “Downside of Police Body Cameras” said Chief Strachan of Bremerton will not invest in the cameras because anyone can walk in and request for the footage. They were being asked for anything and everything and the departments just couldn’t handle the large amount of demands that were being requested (par. 1). When dealing with a serious situation like a domestic violence call the camera has to be on. However, the footage captured should never be released to the public due to the fact that it’s a private issue. So far there is no law in place to prevent someone from walking in and watching the
There are topics brought up about the incident in Ferguson and other police shootings that did or did not have body cams. There have been talks in communities about trying to reduce the police misconducts in the communities and the workplace. It is proven that officers who didn’t wear body cams had 2 times the illegal use of force incidents. This article will help me prove further that body cameras being worn will help reduce so many incidents, not saying all incidents
One of the sources used to disprove that body camera isn’t the answer includes Jamelle Bouie article, Keeping the Police honest. Mr. Bouie is the chief political correspondent at Slate who graduated from the University of Virginia with a political and social thought degree (Tumblr.com). His work consists of issues relating to national politics, public policies and racial inequality. His work has also been published in Slate online magazine, the New Yorker, the Washington Post and TIME Magazine (Tumblr.com). Slate is an online magazine that post about the news, politics, business, technology and culture (slate.com). In Jamelle article, Keeping the Police honest he talks about incidents where police officers were being recorded and took excessive
Police officers with their body cameras: a history and back ground paper to answer the question if should all police officers wear body cameras, it is important to first look at the history and back ground of the topic. According to article of Journal of quantitative criminology, writers Ariel, Farrar, Sutherland, Body cameras have been given a new eye opener to people about the excessive use of force against their community members. Arial, Farrar, and Sutherland in the article state “The effect of police body warn cameras on use of force and citizens’ complaints against the police: A randomize controlled trial” describe their observation as:
“… if not for bystander Feidin Santana’s video casting doubt on office Michael Slagers version of events, he may not have quickly been charged with murder…” Imagine if this man would have been set free only to think getting away with murder is easy. Seeming that a person is an employee of the law, jurors’ do not expect them to lie. All they need to say is that they felt in danger or claim they were put in a tough situation. “when the cop story first came out, he said he was in a tussle,” said Virgil Delestine…”but the video told what really happened.” With body cameras at the scene this will help increase honesty in policemen because they know they are being recorded. In addition, I feel it would be very effective in building community trust if the police force would broadcast the tapes. By keeping everyone up to date, this will encourage people that law enforcements are not being sneaky and are putting reinforcement in place cops who do wrong.
There have been lots of modern technologies introduced in the United States of America to assist law enforcement agencies with crime prevention. But the use of body-worn cameras by police personnel brings about many unanswered questions and debate. Rising questions about the use of body cam are from concern citizens and law enforcement personnel. In this present day America, the use body cameras by all law enforcement personnel and agencies are one of the controversial topics being discussed on a daily base. Body worn cameras were adopted due to the alleged police brutality cases: for instance, the case of Michael Brown, an African-American who was shot and killed by a police officer in Ferguson, Missouri, on August 2014, Eric Garner died as a result of being put in a chokehold by a New York police officer, and John Crawford, shot and killed by a police officer at a Walmart in Beavercreek, Ohio.
Policeone.com reports that there is a “spillover effect” in departments where only some officers wear cameras as “citizen complaints declined both when cameras were in use and when they weren’t” and that it “may reflect a conscious effort by officers without cameras during a given shift to competitively improve their behavior to favorably match that of fellow officers who had the ‘advantage’ of wearing a body cam.” Logically, if the spillover effect is true, it would not be necessary for every officer in the department to have a body camera for a clear benefit to be visible. Those who believe that even minor use of body worn cameras (BWCs) as such is an unconstitutional violation of rights have been proven wrong time and time again through many levels of case law like People v. Lucero, 190 Cal. App. 3d 1065 where the case effectively explains that “a person has no expectation of privacy when they are engaged in an interaction with police.” (Ramirez, pg. 5) While some may also make the argument that “user licenses, storage
Police officers should be required to wear body cameras because it will build a trust between law enforcement and the community, it will decrease the amount of complaints against police officers, and lastly it will decrease the amount of police abuse of authority. In addition, an officer is also more likely to behave in a more appropriate manner that follows standard operating procedures when encountering a civilian. “A 2013 report by the Department of Justice found that officers and civilians acted in a more positive manner when they were aware that a camera was present” (Griggs, Brandon). Critics claim that the use of body cameras is invasive of the officers and civilians privacy.
Many numerous police officers have been given body cameras over the last few months. Due to this, there have been videos that were made public which caused an outcry throughout the country. With the increase in body cameras over the country, there has been many setbacks and potential benefits that
After considering the information in this week’s instructor guidance and readings, I have selected the research topic:
The authors also explain that there are no real statistics to help explain how many times an officer has used a firearm. The text explains that there is no significant data to help explain police shootings and how many occur each year (Kappeler & Potter, 2005). Most of the data that can be found does not clearly state the numbers of times a firearm was used. Majority of data is found through data bases such as Vital Statistics (Kappeler & Potter, 2005). Even data bases such as Vital Statistics do not provide clear information on police
Police shootings occur all over the world but are a huge problem within the United States. We continue to hear more and more about them. These shootings are making headlines. Front page news it seems almost weekly. All the shootings go one of two ways.
Even if, all of this was true not all police are a threat for there will always be good cops the community can count on. One way to catch the corrupted police to have officers wear body-worn cameras (BWCs) which are very effective on reducing R2R incidents and external complaints. Pre- companions in the groups that e=were selected showed that there was a 53.4% reduction in R2R incidents and a 65.4 % reduction in external complaints. The police officers that wore the BWCs found that they also help with collecting
As time goes on, the notion that all cops are bad will eventually be dispelled. If police officers on a campus can see the benefits of body cameras, why can’t police departments in some of the biggest cities do the same? Miller, Michael E. "A body cam caught a Cleveland cop acting heroically.
Efforts are taken by police departments all over the country to solve the issue through the body-worn camera policy. This policy does show some resolutions to racial profiling according to several studies and department chiefs’ claims. However, there are many impactful consequences of the social problem that were not specifically discussed. On top of that, there are problems growing out of the policy itself. Notwithstanding the flaws in the policy, there are more than 50% of Caucasians and more than 60% of both African Americans and Hispanics supporting the proposal for police officers to wear body cameras (The Cato Institute 2015).
This audience consists of people that are having opinions towards this issue, United States citizens, victims themselves and Police Departments that do not have the cameras. The purpose of the article is to inform us that they are protecting and receiving a better insight of how our community is as a whole. Are we going to improve our ways on how we act if we know we are being recorded? The main message is that we, the public, have to understand that policemen choose to put their lives on the line. The reason why this is such an uproar in the “real world” is because in past years, there has been a various number of racial conflicts about policemen killing unarmed civilians that have been caught on police body cameras.