More handpicked essays just for you.
How has technology impacted law enforcement
Policing: history and structure chapter 5
How has technology impacted law enforcement
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
There are at least 6 to 8 complaints of every 100 officers made each year. At least 30 percent of the complaints are for excessive use of force and that doesn 't include all the undocumented complaints civilians make that are failed to be reported. In the past year, police officers have killed more than 776 people. This information has only recently been brought to light. For once the media is not exaggerating on the crimes police are committing; this is happening right here, right now in our own country. What can people do to stop these unlawful police officers from hurting innocent civilians? Having the officers wear body cameras can be a start. Even though there is not enough research to prove their effectiveness, body cameras should be
Only recently has there been an increased amount of police involvement with citizens all over the media because of the past years fatal police encounters with unarmed black men in New York City, Ferguson, Mo., Baltimore and other parts of the U.S. Most of it has been either feeding the war on cops theory or shedding light to the real injustices dealt by police officers. The reality of the issue is that there 's too many opinions and not enough facts to back up either notion of whether the body cameras work or not due to the fact of how recent the issue is. Time is a large factor in any study dealing with long term effects for what is being researched. There has only been a handful of studies made to combat the real issues present in our society today, but there is not enough time to provide the people today the long term effects of police worn body cameras.(7 Findings from First-ever Study on Body
Any cop can tell you they have never had an incident where a person in their charge was hurt, but how can one know for sure whether or not the officer is telling the truth? The body cameras help to regulate behavior of police officers. By having evidence of their day to day proclivities, offers have an incentive to behave a certain way when being viewed. The camera acts as a psychological guide to help ensure the best performance and behavior from an officer. A case study was made to see how cameras affect the police officers psychologically which shows that, “People adhere to social-norms and alter their behavior because of the awareness that someone else is watching. It seems that knowing with sufficient certainty that our behavior is being observed or judged 3 affects various social cognitive processes: We experience public self-awareness , become more prone to socially-acceptable-behavior and sense a heightened need to cooperate with rules”(Noam, paragraph 3). By enforcing body cameras on police officers, improper use of force and behavior can be altered to suit the needs of any given situation to the best of their abilities. (Expert Findings on Surveillance Cameras: What Criminologists and Others Studying Cameras Have
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:
Police Body Cameras Due to devastating events that have occurred between policemen and civilians, law enforcements find it liable for police officers to be fitted with body cameras. In doing so it is thought to bring an increase in trust in the community, reduce brutality and crime, as well as elucidate good cops still around. I feel body cameras will bring more awareness to police departments when it comes to the honesty in their staff’s actions when they are unsupervised. They can be used as hard evidence in courtrooms, to help make the correct judgment on the situation in question.
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.
Since their inception, police body cameras have been a controversial topic as many do not agree on their effectiveness and legality. To the trained eye, body cameras clearly have no negatives other than the sheer cost of their implementation. Some people, nonetheless, do believe that it is an encroachment of privacy for police to record private and/or public interactions even though it is purely legal. While that may be seen as a negative, it is wholly subjective and must be completely ignored when considering the factual analysis of police body camera use that is necessary to verify their validity. When only taking fact into account, there is no way to deny the nearly infinite benefits of body cameras.
The study will consist of sampling of students in the criminal justice field along with any respective civilian that may come in contact with the study. The research on the subject of body-cameras and their effects on the civilians that they record seem to be mostly engaged with the idea of reducing civilian complaints and other factors involving police accountability. However, one report states that in regards to civilian opinions, “Of ...
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.
The struggle for more transparency in policing is an issue that has been waging on for years unchecked, but with necessary body cameras this problem will be able to be solved. With the use of body cameras, police procedure can become public knowledge. This will help prevent things like the Ferguson riots that took place after the decision to not indict officer Darren Wilson. Some people argue that the use of these body cameras could violate privacy laws because “Unlike previous forms of surveillance, body-cameras can enter private spaces more easily, and can focus on individuals more effectively” (Freund 95). However, this issue can be easily solved as unlike dash cameras, which are automatic, the body cameras need to be switched on. This allows the officer to use their discretion on when to actively record. This information can repair the already damaged trust between the police and the public. Use of cameras would also decrease the rate at which police receive complaints. According to Brucato “For the police, accountability offers the opportunity to exonerate themselves and their agencies from false complaints” (457). All the frivolous complaints and lawsuits that using a body camera prevents also serves a purpose to save money of the police department. In today 's society people only see the police incidents being recorded through the use of cellphone filmed
The American public has been dealing with a lot of police brutality over the last two years. We have asked for body cameras to be mandatory for all police officers and even though a lot of cities and town don’t have them yet it has been some changes. Some people want them to show evidence of misconduct by police officers while others want it to protect those officers and then you have those that think it is violating privacy laws. My argument will be are body cameras working so far and are they the solution for the future. Does police officers wearing camera put at risk the privacy of the American public or does it expose
The research strategy divided the Rialto Police Department into two different shifts where one shift required to wear a body camera and the other was not required (Farrar, 2013). These two shifts were called experiment and control shifts. There was data collected from officers that used force during public contact and the number of complaints filed from the public for police misconduct (Farrar, 2013). The outcome of this experiment revealed how the use of body cameras can be beneficial in reducing the use of force. Toward the end of this experiment there was a decrease of police use of force about 60 percent and there was twice as many encounters that police officers had to use force without cameras than officers with cameras (Farrar, 2013). There was a significant decrease of complaints from the public about police misconduct about 80 percent (Farrar,
Thesis: By implementing Body cameras there will be more effective ways to monitor police activity the ability to protect civilians and law officials will greatly increase. Today I would like to share more with everyone the huge issue police brutality plays in our society and hopefully by the end of my speech you will want police officers to wear mandatory body cameras as well.
A. Thesis: Although there has been much controversy surrounding the use of body cameras, they are necessary because they can minimize the harm of innocent people, ensure accountability for the everyone involved, and help build trust in the tarnished image of law enforcement.
According to the New York Civil Liberties Union in four well-known areas of New York the number of public surveillance cameras has rose from 769 in 1998 to 4,468 in 2005. This seems like a huge increase but if you think about it really isn’t. In a period of seven years there were 3,699 new cameras, which lined the streets keeping the citizens safe. These cameras, which are all over the world cause no harm to anyone, all they do is keep us safe and help the authorities know when we are in need of help faster. People who are against surveillance cameras will say they are an invasion of privacy, but that is completely false. The cameras are only put in public places where there are large numbers of people. If you are in a large area with a lot of people you don’t have any privacy then ether. I think that surveillance cameras are a good idea.
According to the National Police Academy, in the past year, there have been over 7,000 reports of police misconduct; fatalities have been linked to more than 400 of these cases (Gul). Police brutality is often triggered by disrespect towards the police officer. The most noticeable form of brutality is physical, where Chemical gas, batons, tasers, and guns, can be used for physical intimidation or to actually hurt people. Police brutality can also take the form of verbal abuse or psychological intimidation. It seems reasonable to understand that sometimes the police are put into situations where excessive force may be needed. But, because some officers use these extreme actions in situations when it is not, police brutality should be addressed and looked into by both the police and the public. For instance, a police officer who beats a nonviolent protester with a baton would probably be accused of excessive use of force, under the argument that the police officer probably could have dealt with the situation less violently.