More handpicked essays just for you.
Body worn cameras on officers essay
Body cameras for law enforcement essay
Body worn cameras on officers essay
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Jhoana Inga Yauri
Ms. Gilgin
English 10
5 April 2016 The Benefits of Body Cameras Officers wearing body cameras has created a huge controversy, but why? Body cameras cause many concerns. Body cameras have shown to be a great way to reduce officer misconduct and improve civilian behavior. Others believe that officers should not wear body cameras because it creates issues regarding the privacy of citizens. However people like, Nick Wing and Ben Bolton believe that officers should wear body cameras because it has shown to improve civilian and officer behavior. Although, citizens are being recorded without consent, it is important to understand that body cameras have shown a decline in civilian complaints against the officer, a decline
…show more content…
When police officer behavior improves there are not many complaints reported because they are doing their job properly. Citizens become more comfortable with officers as they are treated in a proper manner. Studies have shown that “Civilian complaints against those officers also saw a 65 percent decline” (Wing 1). This study has demonstrated a massive drop in complaints. This will ultimately lead officers to gain a better reputation in their communities. “The goal, eventually, is to rebuild the trust between the police and community that has eroded in the last few years”(Martin 1). Citizen’s perceptions of officers will change into acknowledging that officers are there to protect them and are not to be feared of. Police officer reputations will change from being labeled as cruel and authoritarian to trustworthy and honorable. Citizens will gradually build more trust with police officers. Body cameras have demonstrated the ability to bring citizens and officers together to peacefully communicate among each …show more content…
Many people claim that officers should not be required to wear body cameras because it invades the privacy of citizens. When citizens are recorded in public places they are recorded without consent. In addition, the recordings are public and are posted up on YouTube. The point presented by the opponents, however, is insignificant because anybody can record what is happening and posted it up online. “Several of the killings have been captured by surveillance cameras or by bystanders with mobile phones”(Williams 2). As you can see there are many other ways to attain the footage that can invade the privacy of citizens. People will use less violence against officers because they are being recorded. Police officer misconduct will also decrease due to body cameras being used. Thus, body camera captures the truth and is essential as
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
The author focuses on the U.S. Task Force on 21st Century Policing and Police Data Initiative or PDI to determine if it helps to restore trust and the broken relationship between and communities and police officers. The Task Force made by Barack Obama recommended the analysis of department policies, incidents of misconduct, recent stops and arrests, and demographics of the officers. The PDI has tasked 21 cities to comprehend the police behavior and find out what to do to change it. Also PDI was said to have data and information on vehicle stops and shootings by police officers. The use of statistics has a purpose to help rebuild trust and the relationship between and communities and police officers.
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.
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.
The intent of this study is to determine the effects between the independent variable of law enforcement professionals wearing body-cameras and the dependent variable of civilian’s willingness to talk to the police. The research questions that the data collected intends to answer are: Do civilians that come in contact with police deterred from talking to them about relevant information regarding a crime when there is a camera on the officer? What effects do police body-cameras have beyond accountability of law enforcement professionals? Will body-cameras damage communication between civilians and law enforcement that could result in a decrease in willingness to report crimes thus increasing crime itself?
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.
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
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
Evidence: The Mesa (Arizona) Police Department has also found that body-worn cameras can undermine information-gathering efforts. “We have definitely seen people being more reluctant to give information when they know that they are being videotaped,” said Lieutenant Harold Rankin. Chief of Police Sean Whent of Oakland, California, explained, “Our policy is to film all detentions and to keep recording until the encounter is over. But let’s say an officer detains someone, and now that person wants to give up information. We are finding that people are not inclined to do so with the camera running. We are considering changing our policy to allow officers to turn off the camera in those
Police misconduct is as rampant as ever in America, and it has become a fixture of the news cycle. Police brutality is the use of any force exceeding that reasonably necessary to accomplish a lawful police purpose. The media is inevitably drawn toward tales of conflict, hence why there are so many crime and police stories on the news. Despite the increasing frequency of misbehaving cops, many Americans still maintain a high respect for the man in uniform. Still, police misconduct is a systemic problem, not just an anecdotal one. Here are some reasons why it is a problem. First, many departments do not provide adequate training in nonviolent solutions. With this, police are unfamiliar with what to
Officers need sufficient training on the technology they are to use in their job, and policies regarding body cameras use within the police department need to be strong enough to guarantee their success. Across the United States police departments, the level of training and procedures in how to use body cameras vary from police station to police station. Due to this, it is hard to determine what the most effective way to use these cameras is. Those with weak policies are more likely to face legal issues such as the lawsuit in Round Lake. Without knowing how to operate the equipment properly and issues such as placement of the device the technology could become ineffective (Bakardjiev). By training officers to use the equipment properly police officers will be more familiar with it and be able to avoid issues in the equipment. At the forefront of the Round Lake issue, the invasion of privacy must be addressed. The reason cameras are not constantly filming officers is to build a positive work environment and foster trust (Bakardjiev). The ten officers in the lawsuit feel as if that trust was violated. The implications of the lawsuit are those who were in charge of training and ensuring the cameras were working as promised failed, and this has broken the trust of the officers
Many of the citizens never had a one on one altercation with the law they only base their opinions on experiences with the police influence from other citizens, and that where they get their general image of the police. Many study indicates that police courteousness/friendliness in the direction of the citizen in a recent contact with police exerts the most powerful influence on the citizen’s general assessment of the police. However more studies have indicated that people’s previous overall views of police have sturdier influence on their evaluation of a succeeding specific contact than their evaluation of a specific contact has on subsequent overall views of police. The majority of the American public has not had face-to-face contact with a police officer. Most people respect the mass media as their primary source of information about the many crimes that go on around them, and crime news is the background for most mass media interpretations of police work. The implied message of much crime news is the lack of ability to catch offenders. A trend that is rising in a major way is in the news media. They are using it to focus their attention on a few