It is not right for one to abuse their powers especially when it harms other people, police officers have a lot of power in their hands and to some that power goes to their heads and they abuse of that power and use excessive force when needed or not needed, either way they do not have the right to use it. Because police officers are using excessive force they should change how police officers deal in certain situations, they should punish police officers who use excessive force and they should put body cameras on police officers.
In some cases, when police officers use excessive force without a reason on a person it results in the death or injury of the person who was not fighting with the police officer. One of those cases was the Eric Garner
…show more content…
If they would put body cameras on every police officer the use of excessive force would be almost extinct because now they are being watched and if they use excessive force it will be caught on video. According to Michael D. White “Advocates of body-worn cameras have argued the technology will change police officer behavior during encounters with citizens. In the NYPD ruling, the judge noted: If, in fact, the police do, on occasion, use offensive language—including racial slurs—or act with more force than necessary, the use of body-worn cameras will inevitably reduce such behavior”. Not only is the body camera a benefit for the civilians but also to the police officers as well, they said “The Rialto evaluation reported that, following implementation of the body-worn camera program, 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 (Farrar 2013). 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 (ibid.)”. Any false report given by a civilian the truth comes out with the body camera footage. They also said that “a qualitative review of all use of force incidents determined that officers without cameras were more likely to use force without having been physically threatened”. That shows how body cameras can diminish the use of excessive force and how it is beneficial for all parties
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.
Over the years, our nation has witnessed countless cases of police brutality. It has developed into a controversial topic between communities. For instance, deindustrialization is the removal or reduction of manufacturing capability or activity can lead to more crimes when people are laid off. Police officers are faced with many threatening situations day-to-day gripping them to make split second decisions; either to expect the worst or hope for the best. The police are given the authority to take any citizen away for their action that can ruin their lives. With that kind of power comes great responsibility, which is one main concern with the amount of discretion officers have is when to use lethal force. The use of excessive force might or
“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.
In 2014, the New York Police Department announced that it would begin a pilot program to have its officers wear body cameras while on duty (Bruinius). However, the issue of privacy invasion and confidentiality of officers and the public has arisen. Though Body cameras on police officers could help in some scenarios such as random crimes, or police to citizen behavior, they also threaten privacy. Body mounted cameras are an invasion of privacy not only for the officers but also for the citizens involved. According to Freund Kelly, “Police officers often go inside businesses, private property and private homes as part of their duties. When police officers have a warrant, or believe there is an emergency,
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
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
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:
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
The use of excessive force may or may not be a large predicament, but should be viewed by both the police and the community. Police brutality is hypocrisy as the police are meant to protect society from harm, not cause further damage and stress. Police should be trained properly so they do not resort to violence and abuse of power. Many cases of police brutality are not sanctioned and are undertaken by a group of police as a form of "mob mentality". Police are placed on a pedestal of authority and respect by the rest of society.
Recently in the United States there has been in increase in deaths that have come from police officers using deadly force. The use of force is inevitable as a police officer, many times their own lives or the life’s civilians are at risk when it comes to determine what type of force a officer should use. There are many incidents where police officer have to react in a matter of seconds and has to choose between his own life or that of the individual causing the disturbance. When a Police Officer uses deadly force has caused outraged with the public, stirring up protests and creating a scandal for the police officer and the Police Department. Many do not know when it is right for an officer to use deadly force and what constitutes it, or what happens when the officer does not use the appropriate amount of force that is required to control the situation. There has been many changes in Police Departments around the country to try to reduce the use of deadly force in response to the issues that have occurred because of it.
As a result of the recent rise of the use of excessive force cases against police and law enforcement, I have chosen to research the definition of that excessive force. When is it considered justifiable? What training do officers receive? What liability issues are there? In an ABC news article, Sascha Segan states there is no specific definition of excessive force. A part of everyday police work is to subdue criminal and suspects. Another everyday task of police officers is personal discretion - making the right decision based on the specific situation. It has been documented in multiple viral videos that law enforcement officer’s discretion is not always favorable in the public eye and is quick to be judged. Yet shouldn’t we be asking if the officer’s actions were justifiable within the court system and if
According to the National Police Academy, in the past year, there have been over 7,000 reports of police misconduct; fatalities have been linked to more than 400 of these cases (Gul). Police brutality is often triggered by disrespect towards the police officer. The most noticeable form of brutality is physical, where Chemical gas, batons, tasers, and guns, can be used for physical intimidation or to actually hurt people. Police brutality can also take the form of verbal abuse or psychological intimidation. It seems reasonable to understand that sometimes the police are put into situations where excessive force may be needed. But, because some officers use these extreme actions in situations when it is not, police brutality should be addressed and looked into by both the police and the public. For instance, a police officer who beats a nonviolent protester with a baton would probably be accused of excessive use of force, under the argument that the police officer probably could have dealt with the situation less violently.