Jordan Edwards was a 15 year old that was shot and killed by a police officer in Balch Springs, Texas, as the teenager’s car was driving away. Because of the body camera worn by the police officer, the police officer was fired and faced murder charges. Although many police officers worry about privacy concerns while wearing cameras, the camera could contain evidence that supports both the officer and the suspects.
Wearing body cameras is the future of our police departments. The cameras can help provide evidence in many situations. In Baltimore, a police officer’s body camera caught the police officer planting drugs. Because of the body camera, the police officer was suspended. Body cameras could cause some problems though. They could
…show more content…
malfunction and provide inaccurate evidence. “As simplistic as it seems to put a ... camera on your hat or shoulder, the technology is out of pace with reality, and laws are out of pace with current conditions,” said John Rago, a Duquesne University law professor who studies police practices(Cuza). Even though the cameras could malfunction the times the cameras actually work would outnumber the times it did not work. Body cameras worn by police officers can help them become better police officers.
Decisions made by officers can be reviewed and evaluated for better success. The cameras can also be used to teach new officers what to do during some situations and to train them on how to do their job more effectively. Most police officers think that wearing cameras area a good idea, but they worry about privacy issues. What should a police officer do when they go to the restroom? What should they do when they get a personal phone call? Even though the cameras could have some privacy concerns, the film could help police officers review their actions in intense …show more content…
situations. Many citizens think when police officers wear cameras, police behavior is improved. This is a true statement. Police officers are absolutely going to act better when someone can review their every move. A study from Cambridge University shows that when police officers wear cameras, citizens assault on police officers went up, while police officer assaults on citizens stayed the same. “The biggest benefit of cameras has been having a clear record in controversial incidents, such as a Dec. 25, 2016, fatal police shooting of a man during a domestic dispute. Relatives argued police shot an unarmed man; the body camera video showed the man with a rather large butcher’s knife.”(Hermann). Because these police officers were wearing cameras, the citizens that did assault the police officers will serve time because the body camera proved that the police officers are innocent. Even though wearing cameras caused police officers to get assaulted more, police officers are trained to defend themselves is those situations. Unlike citizens or police officers, body cameras are unable lie.
When police wear body cameras, they no longer have to trust the words of citizens or eyewitnesses. “In the wake of high-profile incidents in Ferguson, Staten Island, North Charleston, Baltimore, and elsewhere, law enforcement agencies across the country have rapidly adopted body-worn cameras for their officers. One of the main selling points for these cameras is their potential to provide transparency into some police interactions, and to help protect civil rights, especially in heavily policed communities of color.”(The Leadership Conference). This could speed up the court process by having accurate information about the situation. “If body cameras become standard across the nation, some of these cases will be dismissed or go uncharged when video fails to support the officer’s account or the citizen’s accounts. Others will end with a quick guilty plea because the footage will constitute overwhelming evidence. Either way, taxpayers will be spared the substantial cost of going to trial.”(Roberts). Storing the evidence is the problem. Unlike traditional evidence like bullet fragments, knives, and guns that is stored in a locked room, digital film would be be stored in a database or a hard drive that could risk being hacked at any minute. The demands for video storage are unprecedented for many police departments, which don't have enough space on servers or hard drives to store the additional data. Storage
costs can reach up to $2 million annually for a police department, as a recent Police Executive Research Forum pointed out. Even though storing the videos is major problem, the technology we have today is no match for it. Although technology has its flaws, police should have to wear body cameras The body cameras can save lives of many innocent and put people behind bars who truly deserve it. The cameras can save many police officers jobs by preventing false accusations. There are so many positives of using the body cameras. Technology continues to improve more and more everyday, and soon body cameras will no longer be something we have to worry about.
Have you ever heard of the idea of body-mounted cameras on police officers? If not, David Brooks will introduce you to the idea that was discussed in an article from New York Times called “The Lost Language of Privacy”. In this article, the author addressed both the positive and negative aspects of this topic but mostly concerned with privacy invasion for Americans. Although that is a valid concern but on a larger scale, he neglected to focus greatly on the significant benefits that we all desire.
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:
“Keeping the videos hidden will only heighten mistrust and spur conspiracy theories about what they really show”. Law enforcement also have confidence in body cameras, diminishing police brutality and crime, by exposing all types of misconduct. They would minimize environments where victims feel powerless and belittled when up against an officer. “Body cams can not only record the entire context of a police encounter, but are invaluable in assessing the demeanor of victims, witnesses, and suspects,” said Smith. The cameras will help collect evidence of wrongdoers in any aspect.
“A body-worn camera in public policing is a miniature audio and video recording device which allows recording of officers’ duties and citizen interaction,” notes Thomas K. Bud. Police body-cameras are significantly growing in popularity across Canada. While legislation has not confirmed definite rules regarding the use of body-cameras, local police departments have begun their implementation. Canadian police services involved in these projects include Toronto, Victoria, Edmonton, Calgary, and Amherstburg Police Services. The results of these projects have revealed mixed thoughts regarding body-camera effectiveness. Is it a good idea for police to wear body-cameras? While the cost of police wearing body cameras seems prohibitive, police wearing
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.
Should police officers be mandated to wear body cameras? That is a question that has grown to be widely discussed in media, politics, and the public. The death of Michael Brown due to a fatal shooting by a law enforcement officer inflamed the idea that police officers should wear body cameras (Griggs, Brandon). The opposing sides of such controversial questions both provide a strong reasonable argument that supports each side. However, despite the critiques against body cameras, I believe the evidence that supports the use of body cameras to be overwhelmingly positive and the intention is of pure deeds.
Do police officers really need body cameras is a question that has been repeated all throughout the nation. Body cameras are video recording systems that are used by law enforcement to record their interactions with the public and gather video evidence. Most police departments do not wear body cameras currently and the ones that do are in trial phases to see how it works out. There are many advantages to police officers wearing body cameras but in asking the question should they wear body cameras the stakeholders should look at the complete picture. One reason that police and body cameras have constantly been brought up lately are the instances of police brutality happening within the United States. Police brutality within the United States
One of the many drawbacks that come with using body cameras is due to the fact that there is a locus of control. This may pose a problem because there is an underlying question of who can control the cameras. There can be many videos of incidents that are not captured because an officer decided to turn off their camera. Officers have the ability to turn them off or on which causes the problem of each officer not releasing them. Many departments across the country does not even allow individuals to access the footage that is recorded and with the laws that are in place for many department to deny access to the footage that they have. Due to each officer having to release the footage that they capture, they are allowed to review the footage that they record before they make a statement (Harvard Law Review). This is one of the biggest drawbacks because controlling the video footage is important in not only courts but to ensure the minds of
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
...f police officers are diligent in the process of storing information than it should lay to rest the concerns that some have over the protection of privacy. The advantage of body worn cameras by law enforcement is essential in protecting the officers from wrongful accusations and is beneficial to citizens as well. By having an unbiased recount of events it protects both sides from wrong doing. It also encourages police officers and citizens to behave better when their actions are being recorded. The use of body cameras also provides a detailed account of a crime scene. This can be useful in the prosecution of a crime and can also provide documentation of witness statements. Deputy Chief David Ramirez of the San Diego police department lauded the practice. "Body-worn camera technology is a win-win for both the officer and the community," he said in the report (Prall).
Body cameras, also known as Body Worn Video, these systems can record video and audio are used by officers. Over the years the police department has had an increase in surveillance. The Pros, Prevent Violence, Accountability, Human Side of Policing. The Cons, Privacy, Limitations. One of the topics that have been raising concern is whether officers wearing a body camera can be an invasion of privacy, body cameras are designed to be worn on offices lapel, chest and glasses. The footage can be used for evidence in court against citizens or police officers after the murder of Trayvon Martin and Michael Brown, the law enforcement was forced to come up with a solution that can help stop police brutality and gain the public trust. These cameras have
What’s a body camera? It’s a video recording system that is typically utilized by law enforcement to record their interactions with the public or gather video evidence at crime scenes, and has been known to increase both officer and citizen accountability; although arguments have been made those body cameras are primarily to protect police. Body cameras are notable because their placement, often on the front of a shirt, provides for first-person perspective and a more complete chain of evidence. It’s a form of closed-circuit television. Implementing an effective body camera program involves far more than procuring and disseminating equipment to officers.
People were skeptics about the use of the cameras but the police officers were won over. They valued the use of them. The cameras help show that the officers are doing the right thing consistently and are very hardworking. In the past 2 years they have seen that the complaints