More handpicked essays just for you.
Effects of police brutality in society
Effects of police brutality in society
Effects of police brutality in society
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Effects of police brutality in society
Although the conduct of police officers and the validity of the video evidence will be scrutinized, body cameras are necessary because police brutality and falsified reports would be diminished. Malcom X stated “If someone puts their hands on you make sure they never put their hands on anybody else again.” In my opinion, I feel the police officers would be held in check due to the knowledge of their constant monitoring. The controversy surrounding police body cameras have been great because the desire of people wanting to protect themselves and their community. The conceptual intent of these cameras would not only be to protect the suspect being recorded, as well as, the officer that is involved in the situation in question.
First I will start
…show more content…
If body cameras were required many police officers would be serving time in prison for some of their actions. A vast majority of the victims also would not have been harmed. Following a study done by Rialto, Calif. Police that ran from February 2012 to July 2013. A group of officers wore tiny video cameras while interacting with citizens. According to the New York Times, the video cameras resulted in a 60 percent drop in the use of force and an 88 percent drop in complaints against officers (Amalcar Scott, 2015, p.13). On a different randomized controlled trial, “nearly 1,000 officer shifts were randomized over a 12-month period of treatment and control conditions. During ‘‘treatment shifts’’ officers were required to wear and use body-worn-cameras when interacting with members of the public, while during ‘‘control shifts’’ officers were instructed not to carry or use the devices in any way. We observed the number of complaints, incidents of use-of-force, and the number of contacts between police officers and the public, in the years and months preceding the trial (in order to establish a baseline) and during the 12 months of the experiment” (Tabarrok,
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,” cameras will help donate evidence of handicap wrong doers in any aspect. In reference to a twelve year old named Tamir Rice being shot in Cleveland. The city rioted after finding that the accused police officer was deemed innocent in the murder of the twelve year old. This situation was visualized as "a pattern or practice of unreasonable and unnecessary use of force" and "the employment of poor and dangerous tactics that place officers in situations where avoidable force become inevitable." Though Cleveland police felt releasing the video of what really happened would only puncture the trust with civilians, it would also help provide evidence to the actual events that took place. "It was a horrible situation that obviously had deadly consequences, but at least we don 't have to be at this point questioning whether the officer was making up a story," Using cameras is like having an insurance policy on the victim, whether it be the police officer or a civilian. “Cameras have potential to be a win-win, helping protect the public against police misconduct, and at the same time helping protect
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
“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.
The researcher hypothesizes that the use of body-cameras on police officers would reduce the instances of gainful communication between civilians and law enforcement. The null-hypothesis is that the use of body-cameras on police officers will have no effect on gainful communication between civilian and law enforcement. In determining the implications of how body-cameras effects civilian behavior, the research will include a sampling survey of criminal justice students and information gathered from journal documents related to research on police body-cameras.
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
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
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:
Over the years many cases had emerged on police brutality , like for example, in 2015 , Sandra Bland was pulled over for not using her signal light when switching lanes .During getting pulled over she was asked to put out her cigarette then refused . Later that day , she was killed in police custody .While seeing the video many people speculate that the video that was recorded on the car camera was tampered with . If the officer had on a body camera that day we would've see what happened of out the cameras view .If officers would wear body cameras it would lessen brutality from policemen, honest reports , and lessen the number of complaints .
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
Recently there have been many controversies and talks about body cameras going on police officers uniforms to help stop crimes. Birmingham, AL has given their police officers 319 body cameras this July, causing the use of force to drop 30 percent and complaints from public by 70 percent. Here we can tell, that body cameras can give justice and fairness to the public by stating how high percentages raise for safety. Their procedures and policies change for the officers that take their duty as a joke and misuse their power and position. Policies tends to change, because the police officers will have to control their temper and despite how rude a civilian is behaving they will have to give full cooperation and kindness. They will not be
The article by Elida S. Perez discusses the Police Union’s push back on body cameras in El Paso, Texas. Perez states the denial of El Paso Police Department to equip body cameras because they believe other funding priorities and privacy concerns must be addressed. Some of the top funding priorities that Perez states are “hiring more police officers, buying new police cars, and updating radios”(par. 5). In addition, the police union is also concerned over unfair disciplinary actions against the police officers because of any camera malfunctions. She added an example that explained El Paso Municipal Police Officers Association President Ron Martin’s statement, “sometimes emergency situations unfold so quickly that an officer may not have time to turn on the camera, which he fears may be seen as an attempt to hide what occurred” (par.
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
Due to the riot that happened in Ferguson, MO contemplating if officer Darren Wilson shot Michael Brown through self defense, police officers should wear body cameras because it provides more evidence, shows the actual situation at that particular time, the area of the officer to show it was safe, or prove not all cops are “crooks” or racist.
The past decade has seen a proliferation of law enforcement security cameras in public areas, with central London having more cameras than any other city. In cities like New York, Los Angeles, and central London, cameras can be found at almost every intersection. Terrorist attacks have been a major basis for this significant increase in law enforcement security cameras; however, privacy advocates, along with many of the public, feel that it’s an invasion of privacy. People are concerned that all this video surveillance, which is continuously expanding, has created a “Big Brother” society, where people are constantly watched. This creates paranoia and unease for people that just want to go about living there private lives, without feeling that their every move is being watched. The increased presence of surveillance cameras is almost compared to George Orwell’s novel from 1984, where he imagined a future in which people would be monitored and controlled by the government. One question that needs to be asked is: does the benefits of law enforcement security cameras outweigh the negative sides to it? Although the invasion of privacy is a serious argument against law enforcement cameras; nevertheless, it should be seen as a valuable tool to help fight crime. As long as surveillance cameras are in public places and not in people's homes, privacy advocates should not be concerned.