Franklin County was one that was affected by a officer involved shooting. The Franklin County was under a lot of heat due to the fact that the videos that were released didn’t benefit the officers. Additionally, the videos that were recorded in Pasco only show one side of the story. We don’t know what the officers saw in the moments leading up to the shooting. However, if the officers were wearing body cameras, people would probably understand why those actions were taken. Franklin County should implement body cameras for their officers so that next time there’s a situation like this the police officers and the community will be protected.
Antonio Zambrano-Montes was the man shot and killed by Franklin County police. Antonio was throwing rocks
…show more content…
In 2015 there were approximately 965 police involved shootings nationwide. Police involved shooting was an issue for a while, but ever since Ferguson it’s gotten worse. In 2014 Michael Brown was shot by Ferguson police, which led to a long riot and a nationwide protest of the use of force by police (Kindy et al, par.1, 4).
A way to deal with this problem seems to be body cameras. According to Jay Stanley, writer of “Police Body-Mounted Cameras: With Right Policies in Place, a Win For All” states that body cameras are “small, pager-sized cameras that clip on to an officer 's uniform or are worn as a headset, and record audio and video of the officer 's interactions with the public.”. However, having these new cameras come with privacy and money issues. With 25% of all agencies in the nation already using them and 80% looking into them (pg. 1). So, the two main issues with body cameras have to be addressed before moving
…show more content…
According to Timothy Williams writer of “Downside of Police Body Cameras” said Chief Strachan of Bremerton will not invest in the cameras because anyone can walk in and request for the footage. They were being asked for anything and everything and the departments just couldn’t handle the large amount of demands that were being requested (par. 1). When dealing with a serious situation like a domestic violence call the camera has to be on. However, the footage captured should never be released to the public due to the fact that it’s a private issue. So far there is no law in place to prevent someone from walking in and watching the
“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.
Evidence: The Mesa (Arizona) Police Department has also found that body-worn cameras can undermine information-gathering efforts. “We have definitely seen people being more reluctant to give information when they know that they are being videotaped,” said Lieutenant Harold Rankin. Chief of Police Sean Whent of Oakland, California, explained, “Our policy is to film all detentions and to keep recording until the encounter is over. But let’s say an officer detains someone, and now that person wants to give up information. We are finding that people are not inclined to do so with the camera running. We are considering changing our policy to allow officers to turn off the camera in those
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.
After considering the information in this week’s instructor guidance and readings, I have selected the research topic:
The authors also explain that there are no real statistics to help explain how many times an officer has used a firearm. The text explains that there is no significant data to help explain police shootings and how many occur each year (Kappeler & Potter, 2005). Most of the data that can be found does not clearly state the numbers of times a firearm was used. Majority of data is found through data bases such as Vital Statistics (Kappeler & Potter, 2005). Even data bases such as Vital Statistics do not provide clear information on police
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:
Even if, all of this was true not all police are a threat for there will always be good cops the community can count on. One way to catch the corrupted police to have officers wear body-worn cameras (BWCs) which are very effective on reducing R2R incidents and external complaints. Pre- companions in the groups that e=were selected showed that there was a 53.4% reduction in R2R incidents and a 65.4 % reduction in external complaints. The police officers that wore the BWCs found that they also help with collecting
Police shootings occur all over the world but are a huge problem within the United States. We continue to hear more and more about them. These shootings are making headlines. Front page news it seems almost weekly. All the shootings go one of two ways.
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 cameras not only keep officers accountable, but also keeps individuals in line because people tend to be more rational and calm when they are aware that they are being watched. Deputy Chief David Honan reassured the public that the department will review any issues pertaining to the service they provide. This is relevant to my topic because it shows that some officers believe that body cameras are a good first step to restoring the community's faith in the police. The cameras would show events as it happened and would be evidence of transparency.
Efforts are taken by police departments all over the country to solve the issue through the body-worn camera policy. This policy does show some resolutions to racial profiling according to several studies and department chiefs’ claims. However, there are many impactful consequences of the social problem that were not specifically discussed. On top of that, there are problems growing out of the policy itself. Notwithstanding the flaws in the policy, there are more than 50% of Caucasians and more than 60% of both African Americans and Hispanics supporting the proposal for police officers to wear body cameras (The Cato Institute 2015).
In the summer of 2015 James Walsh wrote an article about whether or not police body cameras are invading our privacy. Walsh provides statements supporting and opposing these cameras. While some people say they are invading our privacy, others say they will be a great benefit. Although they may provide helpful surveillance, it is possible it may intrude on police officers and civilian’s private lives. The public wants for them to have their cameras on during certain circumstances and not 24/7 to protect the privacy of others.