Body Cameras Research Paper

2. Another good thing about it is that police officers or the aggressor can be held accountable for their actions. Continuously wearing body cameras would hold police accountable for their appropriate, and inappropriate, conduct (Baum, E.,2015).

Police body cameras hold one main purpose and that’s to work to prevent brutality on the parts of both the officer and civilian(s) in question. The Police brutality issue finds itself weaved into history, going back as far as the 19th century. Of course, the idea of equipping police officers with body cameras wasn't around at that time, but one can’t help but entertain the thought of how much more peaceful things would be today had we been able to incorporate them sooner. Whether anyone will really admit it or not, the police have a long history of

There has been many citizens that have complained about the use of body cameras. Police Officers have commented that these body cameras invade unwanted personal privacy. Some Police Officers believe that body cameras will not help decrease force by Police Officers because a

Opponents of having all police officers wear body cameras cite privacy concerns, especially if the video recordings are made part of the public record. As stated in Source 3 “The Right Body Camera Policy” it states that “the critic’s main objection to the policy is that it will promote dishonest reporting.” For example, Officers that is feared , will tailor their reports to fit the captured images, revealing only what could not be plausibly denied and leaving out other important details. Even when the video footage reveals unambiguous misconduct, officers would be foolish to file dishonest reports.It's important to consider the detrimental consequences of depriving police officers of video that contains information directly pertinent to their fate.It has fed citizens distrust in police reporting and an impulse to shut down any prospect of dishonesty. You would think because police officers wear body cameras that they will be honest and

Police behavior could greatly improve with the assistance of body cameras. The body cameras could be a magnificent idea and could improve the public's view on police officers, as long as they are utilized responsibly. Even though they are a good idea, police cameras do have a few disadvantages that cannot be overlooked. Police body cameras are a respectable idea, and they would improve the process of arrests, allow civilians to see the good in officers, and keep officers responsible and

The use of previous videos can be detrimental to new cops because it can teach them how to deal with many different situations correctly that way they don’t put their career in jeopardy or the lives of their partners in danger. Everyone knows that there is always three sides to a story: what one individual says happens, what the other individual says happened, and what happened. With the execution of body-worn cameras, it would eliminate, the reduction seen in complaints filed and sustained against officers and videos can reduce the need for lengthy

One of the biggest concerns of police departments is the cost of implementing cameras and, more importantly, storing the video footage. According to “The Promise and Pitfalls of Cops and Cameras,” the cost of video storage could be as high as $300,000 a year, depending on the duration of time the footage is kept. Video footage is usually stored on the department server for 30-60 days, but it can be even longer if this footage is used in a criminal or disciplinary case; sometimes it is kept forever (Elinson and Frosch). That, combined with the initial cost of the cameras and the maintenance, adds up to tremendous amounts of money that some police departments are just not willing to spend. Another issue people have with body cameras is that they believe that the cameras would be a breach of privacy. Body cameras would film even the slightest of violations, such as traffic tickets, and according to “The Promise and Pitfalls of Cops and Cameras,” “the video record of their every word and action will, in many cases, be available to anyone who requests it.” This compromises people’s privacy over trivial things that do not need to be recorded in the first place. Additionally, a law has been introduced that allows police officers to film within the private dwelling of a person without requesting permission (Boone and Schneider). The law makes many

We are all living in a time where technology prevails freely and cameras are found everywhere (Should Police Officers Wear…). These body worn police cameras should be used to reduce the force used by officers in a police-public interaction, decrease the complaints from citizens, and increase accountability (Ariel 730-731). This evidence should show that the benefits of these cameras outweigh the concerns

Another alternative to decrease police misconduct is through the use of body cameras which would hold officers accountable for their actions. Often, commanding officers exercise little supervision over the daily activities of their officers. Not only do officers patrol alone, but they are authorized to quickly create solutions and sanctions on the spot. This provides officers the freedom to get away with both minor and major violations to outright crimes. A tactic to prevent this from occurring is to mount body cameras on officers while on duty. Stav Zhiv of Newsweek writes that body cameras “[reduce] the use of force by roughly 50 percent.” allowing for increased transparency and citizen views over police legitimacy. (1) Transparency, or

On August 9th 2014, Michael Brown, an unarmed black teenager, was shot and killed by police officer Darren Wilson in Ferguson Missouri. On November 24th, the St. Louis grand jury decided there were no probable cause to indict Mr. Wilson. This decision sparked an outrage around the community where building where set on fire and lootings were prevalent around the city. With much of the evidence being he-say-she-say, it is hard for the public to actually know what happened. This led to an increased interest in body cameras. Body cameras should be required by federal law to protect officers, citizens, and prevent police brutality.

First, they shouldn’t wear body cameras because it raises high privacy concerns. For example, “Recordings raise high privacy concerns. In some states, anyone can access the video.” (Should Police Wear Body Cameras, pg.23) Also, “Study Reveals Police Officer Are More Likely To Be Assaulted.” (Study Reveals Police Officers Wearing Body Cameras Are More Likely To Be Assaulted, pg.1) In my understanding, the critics are saying their privacy is more important than their security. We can use body cameras to help solve crimes and protect our country in the process. They are also saying police officers are more likely to be assaulted. Police Officers are here to deal with violence. They can get assaulted everyday almost, and can call for backup if needed. The police are here to protect us citizens from things like that. But with body cameras, security could reach higher levels of security. In Conclusion, these are the reasons why police officers should or shouldn’t wear body

So many lives could be saved and so many police officers’ careers could be saved through the utilization of this idea and the reaping of its benefits. Whether it captures a citizen attack on a police officer or whether it captures a case of police brutality, the great possibilities outweigh the potential cons of police body cameras and make them a risk worth taking. Whether one takes the side of the citizens and believe the police are typically irrational or one takes the side of the police and believe they are only doing their jobs to the best of their ability, the incorporation of body cameras to the controversial police force would be extremely beneficial for

These body cameras protect the truth with all officers. As the victims step on the court what many don’t know is the truth is carried by officers at all times. These will be supporting any court trail’s if other people have videos it does not have a chance to beat the body cameras. The point of these cameras is so that nothing really bad goes wrong and so officers won’t be accused of police brutality. All this is positive for any law enforcement, nobody will be lying about anything. No assuming witnesses will be made towards many officers. As citizens, many are scared of officers just because knowing what they are capable of doing, and also seeing so many viral videos on the internet. All police do not enjoy being criticized by others knowing

Furthermore, author Charles Rabin writes about a situation that occurred when a cop was wrong. Rabin describes, “And just Monday, Miami Beach police Detective Philippe Archer was docked a month’s pay after surveillance video caught him kicking and then punching a woman in the face who had already been handcuffed and was standing outside a Miami Beach hotel” (2). Not only does a police officer need to be protected, but so does the offender. The detective should not have hurt the woman already in handcuffs because she had been subdued and was not aggressive. It was cruel and unfair to the woman, therefore body cameras are a must to defend those who cannot defend themselves from a law enforcer. Police body cameras are a necessity for the protection of the perpetrator from an officer that is using excessive force to get him or her to calm down and obey orders. People need to feel safe and should not feel afraid of the cops when they are doing nothing wrong, by using body cameras everyone is and feels

All too often media airs news reports with details only revealed that support their own political agenda. Even with that said, if the very officer that is supposed to uphold the laws in society is engaging in misconduct or illegal activity, the public will diminish an officer’s credibility and legitimacy. (Elliot) This is why body worn cameras are so important. Credibility is everything to an officer. From interactions on the street to testifying in open court, an officer’s word is everything. Once that credibility is gone it is almost impossible for that officer to continue in a law enforcement capacity. Body cameras have emerged as a potential solution to the evolving discussion around police trust and legitimacy issues. One benefit of having a body camera is that if a critical incident, officer involved shooting, or accusation of brutality arises, the camera will provide footage from the officer’s point of view that