Police officers need to insure the safety and trust of the citizens by wearing body camera. One argument is that some people believe that body cameras will invade people's privacy. Yes, everyone has the right to keep their issues private, but the officers
However, I believe that police officers should wear body cameras because it prevents excessive force and discrimination, allows to harness the technology, and is a tool for evidence gathering. First of all, some police officers think that body cameras could affect police moral and recruitment. However, it prevents excessive force and racial discrimination. When police officers are using body cameras they have on mind the recording, so they will be conscious to behave; as a result, the excessive force and discrimination could decrease. As the author mentions that Researchers “found that officers who wore cameras used force less often…” (3).
Either way there needs to be something that can protect the public from police misconduct and also protect law enforcement from dealing with false accusations that can tarnish their reputation. That is why body worn cameras need to be mandatory for all police officers to wear because it protects the public and the police officers that are wearing them. A couple positive outcomes police officers wearing body cameras is how they can lower police officers misuse of authority and also lower false complaints against officers as well. These are two
That totally violates your privacy as a person. I also believe if you are a convicted felon you have lost all of your rights until you have proven you are good again. What this means is that I think the police should search through your home from time to time. I think it will benefit because if the criminal is doing illegal things the police will find out and criminal activity would go down. This is already practiced by the term called probation which takes the felons 4th right
The zero-tolerance policy was implemented to update the police’s discretion of what to stop and to keep crime down. The source has limitations because it strictly gives the background of the history of policing strategies to reducing crime. Jeffrey Rosen uses former Mayor Giuliani’s quotes and worked closely with transit-police authority. I would be able to use quotes from this article because it relates to my topic, being in New York and dealing with stop and frisk. My final questions for Rosen would include, why did he not mention more about these policing strategies tie in with Supreme Court cases?
Another reason why a police officer may be able to conduct a warrantless search is due to an emergency exception. A warrantless search may also be conducted if the police officer deems that someone’s safety is in question or that criminal activity is occurring at that time. Of the three warrantless search requirements that I mentioned, the last two are ones that have been subject to a lot of controversy recently. The Plain View Doctrine is pretty simple to understand but the judgment call or the honesty of the police officer is what is in question. It has happened in previous cases in the past that corrupt officers will say that they saw something or smelled something as the defendant opened the door so that they can go in and
Today I want to tell you of the injustice of police brutality, the people it affects, and how just asking the right questions could make sure that police are punished for their crimes. BODY PARAGRAPH 1 Police brutality is a big problem in the United States. Police brutality is a misconduct when police use violence that is not necessary. This includes unjust shootings, which is when whoever was shot did not deserve to be shot because they either did nothing wrong or was complying with orders but was still shot. This is a big problem in the U.S. because it happens all around the states.
If I tell you a secret would you keep it to yourself or would you tell someone else? Confidentiality is the act of keeping information you are told secret. This means that the doctors are told information in private, so they need to keep the information confidential. The opposition has two sides: they say that there shouldn't be confidentiality and others say that they shouldn't be able to tell anyone in any situation. It is the legal duty of medical professionals to keep the information they are told confidential, however it is ethical in some situations where the information can be shared if necessary.
Police officers are given slaps on the wrist for taking a life or injuring an innocent person. This will show how police brutality has affected black communities and how African American communities’ have responded to it with movements and protest, and how they try to overcome
However, even with the lack of matching DNA evidence, the boys were still convicted of the crime; they had confessed to the crime. Confessions are irresistibly persuasive, and the effects cannot be reversed. Once a confession is given, it corrupts everything else, trumping DNA evidence and even changing witness testimonies. With the prosecutor’s argument of “just because we didn’t get all of them doesn’t mean we didn’t get all of them,” the public was completely convinced that the boys had committed the crime, and once a strong belief that somebody is guilty of a crime is formed, the contradictory details do not matter. The evidence may not fit the accusation, but they do not fundamentally change the belief in their guilt.