Police Body Cameras Pros And Cons

During a time of widespread speculation and controversy surrounding the subject of police body cameras, many have developed arguments concerning whether or not they should be used. Due to the immense amount of police misconduct that has struck the United States over the past couple years this topic has become heavily debated. Although some may believe otherwise, the use of police body cameras is extremely beneficial in a number of ways; they provide effective evidence for trials, cause a decrease in police misconduct and an increase in clarity, and enhance both officer training and civil complaint outcomes. Throughout this essay, three outside source arguments will be presented, in order to prove the opposing arguments wrong through the use

of statistical and persuasive knowledge.
Although many citizens may believe otherwise, it has been proven that the uses of police body cameras are beneficial to all aspects of law enforcement. In the article, “Scholar Warns Body Cams Used to Show Underrepresented in Worst Light,” freelance journalist and well renowned writer Jamaal Abdul-Alim argues that the use of police body cameras will result in the reduction of both complaints against officers and police force. Abdul-Alim supports his main argument when he presents a yearlong study on the effect police body cameras have on law enforcement that states, “Wearing BWC’s by police can reduce both officer use of force and subsequent complaints against officers” (8). Abdul-Alim then goes into the specifics when he provides the reader a statistic that provides exactly how effective the use of these police body cameras are when he states, “The study found that the officers wearing the cameras had 87.5 percent fewer incidents of use of force and 59 percent fewer complaints than the officers not wearing the cameras” (8). The use of this statistic to support Abdul-Alim’s argument perfectly illustrates how effective the use of police body cameras are when properly used. When forming an argument on a certain topic, incorporating statistics from reliable sources can make an argument exceedingly strong. In retrospect, Abdul-Alim’s article can be considered one of strong validity as he uses this approach to strengthen his overall argument and thus, through statistical evidence, it shows that police body cameras lower crime rates.
Additionally, police body cameras are beneficial to society, not only because they decrease crime rates, but they also benefit officers in countless ways.

In the article, “Candid Cameras,” award-winning journalist Kevin Davis argues that police body cameras are huge assets to officers when retrieving information about their physical interactions with criminals. Davis aids his main statement when he asserts, “For police, the plus side is that cameras can improve how officers capture evidence. The camera can also provide a record of interrogations and arrests, how officers conduct themselves and what they witness at crime scenes” (15). Soon after, Davis then provides a deeper understanding as to why police body cameras benefit officers when he asserts, “It eliminates the ‘he said, she said’, and it will be easier for police to defend their conduct in the routine case” (15). These quotes do an exceptional job of showing the reader the way in which the use of police body cameras are in fact positive additions to law enforcement. In the end, police body cameras have shown to be nothing but positive additions to society as a

whole.
Furthermore, the uses of police body cameras are not only beneficial to officers amidst a civilian altercation, but are helpful to officers still in training.

In the article published in the Harvard Law Review, “Considering Police Body Cameras,” well renowned author Michael McAuliff argues that police body cameras possess various qualities directly associated to the enrichment of law enforcement, that which most relevantly shows the improvement of officer training. McAuliff provides the reader with an in depth explanation of this when he asserts, “Footage can be incorporated into training programs to demonstrate what actual, on-the-ground civilian encounters should (and should not) look like, and review of body-camera footage may be particularly useful in monitoring new officers” (1802). The use of these cameras while in training properly teaches officers how to conduct themselves accordingly so they can react correctly while in the field, which results in the decrease of police misconduct complaints. Shortly after, McAuliff then asserts that, “recordings [can] be used for remedial training or correcting the behavior of individual officers against whom misconduct allegations have been filed” (1802). This shows that although some officers may misconduct themselves, they can learn and correct their actions for the future by viewing the footage of their misconducts. Ultimately, throughout the entire spectrum of law enforcement, police body cameras have continuously shown to be

a plethora of benefits to all.
On the contrary, some individuals strongly stand by their anti police body camera views in society. Many may argue that the use of police body cameras is unreliable because officers can manually turn them on and off. Add quote However, statistically proven in many different ways it is shown that the use of police body cameras is far more beneficial than harmful. More specifically, these studies have shown the use of these devices lowering police misconduct rates, improving officer training, improving the resolution of civilian complaints, providing effective evidence for trails, and increasing the accountability and clarity of both officer and civilian.
The reader should write a letter to the governor Jerry Brown stating that officer use of police body cameras needs to be more widespread and utilized throughout the entire United States of America. This is done in hopes of the letter being approved and acted upon.