More handpicked essays just for you.
Body cameras essay introduction
Challenges to police legitimacy and accountability
Body cameras research paper
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
On the night of August 9th, 2014 in Ferguson, Missouri, Officer Darren Wilson shot and killed an unarmed, 18 year old, Michael Brown. Officer Wilson was tried for the murder of Michael Brown by the state of Missouri’s Grand Jury and was found not guilty. Officer Wilson was not wearing a body camera. The town of Ferguson was outraged as violent riots and protests broke out because of the ruling (Buchanan). Mentioned in Larry Buchanan’s New York Times article titled “What Happened in Ferguson?” Many citizens of Ferguson and others who heard about the story across the United States argue that Officer Wilson used excessive force in the altercation and should be guilty of murder; however, the court and jury members believed differently. If …show more content…
From the Harvard Law Review pertaining to body cameras, “This technology[body cameras] has also been praised as likely to reveal instances of police misconduct, reform police (and civilian) behavior, and build trust between the police and the community, all of which provide strong justifications for adoption” (Considering sec. B). By adopting body cameras, officers can do their job without having to worry about getting punished or fired for doing the right thing, even if the events take a turn for the worst, as long as the officer is taking the correct actions they will be protected. Police officers are required to go through months of training and multiple probationary periods before being put out on the streets. The officers know right from wrong, the camera is just there to remind them, someone is always watching. Not only providing protection for officers, the body cameras equally provide protection for citizens. Like previously stated, there are constantly eyes on every move the officer makes. If the citizen feels the officer wronged them, the citizen can make a complaint and an investigating officer will follow through with the video evidence. At that point disciplinary action may be applied to the …show more content…
White explains in his book, “Following implementation of the body-worn camera program [2012], citizen complaints against police declined by 88 percent—from 24 in 2011, a year before the study, to just three complaints during the camera project study period. Moreover, use of force by police officers dropped by 60 percent, from 61 to 25 instances, following the start of the body worn camera study” (White 20). With complaints and use of force each dramatically dropping a year after implementing the body camera, it is fair to say the body camera changes the way police officers interact with
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
Policeone.com reports that there is a “spillover effect” in departments where only some officers wear cameras as “citizen complaints declined both when cameras were in use and when they weren’t” and that it “may reflect a conscious effort by officers without cameras during a given shift to competitively improve their behavior to favorably match that of fellow officers who had the ‘advantage’ of wearing a body cam.” Logically, if the spillover effect is true, it would not be necessary for every officer in the department to have a body camera for a clear benefit to be visible. Those who believe that even minor use of body worn cameras (BWCs) as such is an unconstitutional violation of rights have been proven wrong time and time again through many levels of case law like People v. Lucero, 190 Cal. App. 3d 1065 where the case effectively explains that “a person has no expectation of privacy when they are engaged in an interaction with police.” (Ramirez, pg. 5) While some may also make the argument that “user licenses, storage
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
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
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:
According to interviewed police officers, once members of the public were notified that they were being filmed, “even drunk or agitated people tended to become more polite.” As a result of these behavioral changes, “police departments saw a nearly 90 percent decrease in complaints against officers since body cameras have been introduced into the communities.” The use of body cameras should be able to reduce the complaints and potentially help to nourish a culture of more respectful interactions between police and the public. “Body cameras should, in turn, be expected to lead to greater public engagement with police officers and ultimately to improved public safety.” Complaints of police misconduct usually begin with a written or oral statement by a person claiming that one or more officers engaged in conduct that breaches the law or policies of the department. “Officers and other witnesses then give their own statements of the incidence, video footage, unlike the memory of a human being, does not become less accurate over time.” In addition, many complaints are currently resolved only by making a credibility determination between the complainant and one or more of the officers involved. “By objectively recording events as they transpire, body cameras could help investigators make even more accurate findings.” These finding can help maintain the integrity of the officer being accused and the police
Ultimately showing that body cams are effectively reducing false accusations of police brutality and unreasonable arrests. "When you know you're being watched you behave a little better. That's just human nature," said Farrar. "As an officer you act a bit more professional, follow the rules a bit better’’ (2) police are more in check but civilian privacy is at risk.
I believe that police should not be required to wear a body camera while on patrol. Some believe that police should be required to wear a camera while questioning a suspect. “Proponents argue that body cameras will provide accurate and contemporaneous records of events, thereby both enhancing the transparency and accountability of the police by protecting members of the public and improving the ability of the police to gather evidence and prosecute suspects.” (Tsin 2). I think that it is a bad idea to wear for police to wear body cameras. These cameras will not save the victim. Video evidence can be interpreted in different ways from the viewer. If police are required to wear body cameras it will look like we do not trust our own police system. The use of body cameras may also prevent witnesses to come forward and help assist with investigations, due to fear of retaliation or fear of exposure. Others, like myself, argue that police should not be required to wear this equipment. “On the other hand, skeptics are concerned that camera footage cannot provide full and accurate details of incidents, that the increasing use of video technology raises privacy concerns, and that the adoption of body cameras fails to address the underlying causes of social problems.” (Tsin 2). Wearing a body camera will not stop the suspect from doing what they intended to do, if anything he or she would act out more in aggression. In most cases, body cameras show that it was the suspect that is the one who is unwilling to comply with the officers commands. Body cameras are seen an invasion of privacy. “The use of video technology has also raised concerns about privacy of both citizens and police officers.” (Tsin 4). The camera captures footage from everyday civilian and police behavior that should not necessarily be recorded. Bystanders and all defendants are recorded without their
Many numerous police officers have been given body cameras over the last few months. Due to this, there have been videos that were made public which caused an outcry throughout the country. With the increase in body cameras over the country, there has been many setbacks and potential benefits that
Cameras ensure that law enforcement officers act in a manner befitting their situation. This prevents officers from acting incorrectly in a given situation, which protects the public from any misconduct by the police. A study conducted by the University of South Florida showed a significant reduction in the number of civilian injuries by officers wearing the cameras, and the injuries to officers themselves. (Huffington Post) This shows how the body cameras were able to protect both citizens and officers from injury. Body cameras make finding truly bad officers easier due to solid evidence, reducing tenions and making the jobs of good officers easier. As a result, the job of policing becomes less dangerous, both from the perspective of anti-police violence and legal liabiility. This causes officers to be more judicious about use of force.Transparency is essential for trust between law enforcement and the public. Body cameras help increase transparency and accountablity of officers. The cameras help reduce police use of force and complaints against officers. This enhamces police legitamacy and transparency. The cameras give insight to what officers do everyday, thus creating a window between departments and its citizens. Body cameras provide an additional eye witness to situations they encounter. This omproves officer accountability, as the cameras make sure officers are policing fairly and
There was a before and after analysis of use-of force and complaints done that results in complaints filed against officers dropping from .70 per 1,000 contacts to only .07 per 1,000 contacts. (Barak, Farrar, Sutherland, 2014). Just think that’s a big difference in numbers. With little to no evidence to really show the benefits of body worn cameras, there is some anecdotal data that’s taken in non-controlled conditions, comparison, and without gathering of evidence, no real estimates of the good outcome of body worn cameras. (Barak, Farrar, Sutherland, 2014). That after analysis shows benefits from body cameras very well
A man researching these encounters by the name of Tobin said “It seems that the body camera isn’t just making some of the officers act different it is also making the normal everyday people that police encounter act more formal and professional” this makes the police officers job easier and a little less stressful (“Police Officers with Body Cameras”). There was another researcher that said that these police agencies should not expect huge dramatic changes in the accusations (“Police Officers with Body Cameras”). I believe we won’t see these dramatic until we have people change their morals because some of the people out there just think that the police are out to get them even though they are breaking the law and on the other side of that, there are a few police officers that have it out for the minorities or different races, so the brutality or the false accusations won’t slow down or stop until we as a community change our morals. “Even if things don’t change, could be a good thing,” said Sgt. Matthew Mahl, “meaning that would prove that they are doing everything right from the beginning.”
The family of Michael Brown wanted justice for their son in which they felt was an unjust shooting. His mother was quoted expressing mistrust towards the police, "You 're not God. You don 't decide when you 're going to take somebody from here.” (McLaughlin, E. C. (2014, August 15) The family was obviously hurt by the shooting and wanted justice and support. The community began protesting the shooting and Officer Darren Wilson. Chaos broke out in Ferguson and a State of Emergency was issued. The community felt that the shooting was unjust and did not trust police officers. The community response to the shooting often attracted attention and made many political statements. Darren Wilson’s family were interested in maintaining his innocence. They hoped that the investigation would prove to the world that Wilson acted out of self-defense and did not violate Brown’s rights. The Criminal Justice system’s interests all hoped to create reforms and eliminate racism in police departments. On the local level many had to maintain safety in the community and assure proper police procedures. The state had to step into issue curfews and State of Emergencies to keep the state safe despite protests and riots as well as make sure Darren Wilson did not violate any laws of the state of Missouri. The state also hoped to create reforms to better race relations. On the federal level was the investigation which hoped to find out if the