right. In all but the rarest of cases, rogue cops convicted of betraying the "public trust" can discard any expectation of sympathy when standing before a sentencing judge.
One of the simplest things to do and it requires is hold the law enforcement personnel accountable for actions deemed to be in the wrong. Examples of bribes, getting out DUI’s, abusing their power to name a few. According to the law everyone is to be treated fairly and equally. If a moto with police leaders was to believe that our profession must be held to a higher standard that would be such a positive example while showing no one is above the law.
Second part is having all records available for any department to request when it is pertaining to new employment. Especially
…show more content…
This little camera doesn’t have but one job and that is to record the story. “Advantages of police body cameras..” article talks about the pro and cons of such camera on the officers while on shift. The camera is there to help give an unbiased account of what happen. When you know you are being recorded, then you naturally act a little better because you know someone is watching you not so impulsive. There is a statement “A study performed by the Rialto, CA police department found that the cameras led to an 87.5 percent decrease in officer complaints as well as a 59 percent reduction in use of force over the course of a year—and they’re not the only departments seeing positive results.” “This drop in complaints can also lead to a substantial decrease in the time and resources devoted to investigating complaints and resolving civil litigation.” .The two cons I keep seeing against using cameras is the initial cost to issue one out to all law enforcement and the upkeep cost required by them. Additional is a privacy issue with what is recorded on them. These successes number out weight the cons specifically dealing with the public …show more content…
But should that also mean the same thing for people when they are dealing with the police. I said earlier that some people that are cops shouldn’t be cops and that is why they should be held higher standard and they should be able to get fired when they people in charge see a pattern of misconduct or know that they are not good people. It should not have to come down to something tragic to happen to realize they should not be a cop any more. Unarmed people getting killed by the hands of the police and the same police only getting a slap on the wrist or worse yet not getting charges. There have been plenty of stories recently in the news about these same types of cases. Example of Officer Ringgenberg and Officer Schwarze of Minneapolis, MN not getting charged with the death of unarmed man while attempting arrest. A police officer is a great Job for great people, but you have to hold great people to higher standards because you know they are great and can do great things if pushed in the right direction. The bottom line is this: It 's not just a job. It becomes part of whom and what you are, and there are not many professions that can get into your blood like law
Due to devastating events that have occurred between policemen and civilians; law enforcements find it liable for police officers to be suited 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.
Officers are known as public servants, they are held at higher standards than everyday citizens. According to Wyatt-Nichol & Franks(2009) when officers behave unethically, it is a violation of public trust and damages the image of law enforcement everywhere (p. 40). Officer should receive in-death training of cases that make headlines within the newspapers or media. For example, the Freddie Gray or Eric Garner case could be used in scenarios with the steps taken to avoid any ethical dilemmas they could possibly run into. Updated training should be conducted every 6 months for ethics alone in addition to the yearly training that’s already in place. The civilian review board can recommend more training of officers that engage in unethical behavior or misconduct. Intense training, followed through with morals is important factors to avoiding the civilian review board and their process in reviewing investigations against officers. When all training officers receive has been overlooked and failed to comply. Police officers should be held accountable for their actions, through training officers learn to understand their position and need within the community. Although training is offered yearly and on an as need basics, officers are held to a high standard within their community. Some tend to lose sight of their mission of daily duties which are to maintain order and
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.
While both dash cams and body mounted cams record interactions between police and citizens, “dash cam- eras are confined to places where cars can go, which are usually public places, such as roads and parking lots. A dash camera cannot easily record inside people’s homes and other places where there is a heightened expectation of privacy”(Freund 97). Thus, allowing body mounted cameras to record the more private aspects of a law enforcement related situations. Also “unlike body-mounted cameras, CCTV cameras do not record conversations”(Freund 98).This could deter people from going to the police when they witness a crime, because they are afraid of being exposed to the person who committed the crime, giving them the information needed if they choose to retaliate. Ebi, Kevin states that “sensitive information can 't get out if it 's never recorded in the first place,” so, if there is a distress call made to the police for help, there won’t be concern that the person in distresses voice, face or the inside of their home could end up on YouTube ("Body Of
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.
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 duty of a police officer is to protect the people with the laws and enforce them, not hurt the people. For all the African American women and men that have been killed by a police officer should be brought to justice. However, this is not the solution to the problem of police brutality in America. The solution to police brutality is the proper training and certification of police officers, so they understand how to handle various situations without using lethal weapons. For instance, Moore states that “extensive training for several weeks in patrol and observation, narcotics activities and community relations” (Moore, 2010) will lead to the solution of police brutality. Also, in order to dissolve the police brutality in America, America must recognize race as more than just one complexion and accept that people of color shouldn’t be dehumanized, but equal to their
The negative views of everyday people often make work hard for officers, adding more stress to their careers. The general public regularly criticizes officers for using excessive force and brutality, especially when a police officer ends up killing a suspect or criminal. Oftentimes, especially when a white police officer shoots a citizen of a minority race, the general public is quick to find faults in the officer, blaming the officer for being racist. However, cold, hard statistics show that the majority of police officers are, in fact, white, and the neighborhoods in which these officers are placed in tend to be high-crime areas with many minority citizens living there (Miller “When Cops Kill”). In addition, people might say that a citizen who was shot was not armed; however, almost anything close to the shot individual could have been turned into a deadly weapon that he or she could have used to wound or kill the officer involved. Whenever officers are in this position, the natural reaction is to defend themselves. Everyday, police officers confront the most aggressive, immoral, and sick-minded individuals of society. Officers jeopardize their own lives every time they report for work. Officers witness things that no person should ever have to encounter. They see the most horrific and gruesome scenes that the general public turns away from and
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:
In the Ferguson article (2015), there was an example given about an African American man claimed that he was standing outside of of Wal-Mart, an officer called him a “stupid motherf****r” and a “bastard.” According to the man, a lieutenant was on the scene and did nothing to reproach the officer, instead threatening to arrest the man (p. 80). This demonstrates that the police in Ferguson had no respect for the civilian and even though the lieutenant was present, they did nothing. The officer was not suspended nor held responsible for this incident. By failing to hold officers accountable, it sends a message that officers can behave as they like, “regardless of law or policy, and even if caught, that punishment will be light.” (Ferguson, 86). This message serves to excuse officer wrongdoing and heighten community distrust. This is also to say that police can possibly get away with murder because they are higher officials and work for the
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
There's a solid case that the issue with policing isn't really the police. There’s nothing wrong with the concept of the police it looks good on paper for some people, but in reality the police are just upholding the majority rule will. However, the genuine advantages of this umbrella term we've named "police change"-decriminalization, duty to diminishing jail populaces and group oversight, to give some examples- can in any case be impactful, if not exactly a cure-all. Keeping that in mind, the Center for Popular Democracy and Policy Link, two philanthropic promotion associations, have banded together with different nonconformists and road level coordinators to locate some solid answers for this issue. The outcome is a 15-point report, titled Building from the Ground Up: A Toolkit for Promoting Justice in Policing, which Mic has integrated beneath to recognize the solid strides natives and nearby governments can take to influence
Problems like police corruption have no easy answer. However, there are steps to target the root of the problem. We must start by holding officers accountable for their actions. If an officer uses too much force, he should be put on probation. The people must show the police that misconduct will not be tolerated. The attitudes must change within the departments. When the departments no longer ignore the complaints of excessive force, then the police's attitudes will begin to change. Screening of officers needs to be done more often. More psychologists and criminologists are needed to spot those officers who are in trouble or on the brink of mental illness. A good start would be to teach the superior officers to recognize warning signs like lateness or angry mode swings.
When the media sensationalize cases about police officers abusing their powers, the public’s immediate response is to demand restrictions on them. While the abuse of discretion exists, allowing police officers to exercise discretion without controls is vital due to the unpredictable and multifaceted nature of crime. Thus, abolishing police discretion would be detrimental because police officers will primarily become law enforcers who ignore individual circumstances, cannot make meaningful differences in others’ lives, and cause inefficiencies in the criminal justice system.
In this case they act as role model to the society. Therefore their actions should be reasonable and that does not affect the rights and freedom of the citizens. Police officers enforces the law therefore they should be held to a higher standard so as to gain respect from the community. Ones the respect is established, a relationship is created and the community begins to cooperate and work with the police instead of against them. When the police officers are held at a higher standards, this keeps them on the right way.