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 …show more content…
Police officers are held accountable to have their camera on. Also the use of these cameras will be minimizing the accusation against police officers that use unethical behaviors. The video tape will protect any false accusation or misconduct. In some cases the defendant or the prosecutor who is on trial the footage of the body camera will expedite the process. This motion can have is up and down in the fields it can protect the public also invade their …show more content…
It will cost over $75 million to cover just half of the cost of 50,000 body cameras for police officers around the country. Nowadays, there are over 680,000 police officers in the United States, so you can imagine how much it would cost to provide cameras for all police officers. In my opinion, the cost of buying body cameras is well worth it. Body Worn, will be able to make cases of brutality or just regular criminal cases that are caught on camera easier to solve, costing those involved less money from court fees, if the police department were to get sued. In conclusion, there are some potential benefits to officers wearing body cameras and having the cameras recording at all times the costs associate with the cameras, the privacy violations of the average citizen, and the recording of witnesses in key situations putting the person at risk outweigh the benefits. Maybe in a few years when there has been more time to think through policies and ways to address the privacy concerns the body camera could be implemented, but as of now the cameras should remain on the shelves and not on
“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.
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
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.
Not only will using body cameras decrease the number of civilian deaths, it will also allow better and faster punishment for both officers accused with violating the rights of an innocent civilians. These recorded videos will also help punish civilians accused of crimes caught on camera, due to the jury and judge 's ability to get visual first-hand evidence of the incident. According to Paul Marks, author of Police, Camera, Action, “Confronted with footage of their actions, defendants are pleading guilty earlier” (2). Also these cameras will be a deterrent as because these officers know they are being watched and will be more cautious about the amount of force used when subduing a suspect and in policing in general, because just like in normal situations people act differently if they know they are being recorded. Others may argue that because the cameras are recording people will be less likely to come forward with evidence. However, according to Kelly Freund, author of When Cameras Are Rolling: Privacy Implications of Body Mounted Cameras on
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
There has been scrutiny from some but I think the requirement to wear body cams outweigh any other reasons to not wear them. The cams provide tons of things to include misconduct, are procedures being followed, their decision making, and tons of data for training cops on what to do and to not do while being assigned as a cop.
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:
There is no point in wasting money on this equipment if the officer won’t wear them and some of them can be turned off and aren’t used to show any evidence. Senator Tim Scott stated some interesting facts that would be crucial to the Freddie Gray Case. Scott states “Obviously if you had six officers with six different police cameras, six different angels, we would know exactly what happened” (Diamond 2015). If there would have been something in the van we would have been able to not only see Gray but see if the wounds were superficial or brought upon by Gray himself. There are several videos out there that have some videos of officers with body cams on and the actions and behavior are completely different then the videos we see people put up all over social media. Watching the video of the Gray incident there is no struggle or any resist of arrest what so ever and none of the officers applied any force, the only thing is that Gray was screaming of pain but nothing other than that. The officers just drag him until you see him finally go into the back of the police van. This is one of the most interesting cases I have ever studied and still shocked as the result of the young mans’ death. The officers whom I previously stated above that were indicted will be back in court on July 2 of this year to be brought to their charges (Fenton
Unfortunately, it doesn’t always happen that way, most police body cameras have to be turned on and sometimes they might not be turned on in time. The police body cameras also only show the point of view from in front of the officer, and don’t show behind the officer, or to the sides of the officer. Also, during a scuffle or encounter the police body camera may malfunction or be damaged leaving no video of what happened. The security of the recorded video is also a concern because it could be manipulated to sway points of view or leave out important
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
...ith the public” (When cops kill). The bodycams would capture the time when Officers use force it will protect the Officer with lawsuits but it can also be used as evidence against him. There are many controversies that come from using the bodycam many are that the Officer can pause or stop the recording or that they can edit the recording so it can not look bad to the public.
If and when body camera are used it creates lots of problems. Technological issues related to the cameras may prevent proper functioning at times. This would result in missing important witness statements or crucial behavior by officers or citizens. Witnesses won't come forward thinking that they are going to die if they testify against someone. However police use a subpoena to force the witness to testify with protection.