Police Militarization

When I consider the police I think of how they protect people and our city. Some people assume that cops are just trash and they hate them. The topic of police body cameras sounded like a good idea to me because many people are always filming cops at their worst. When they happen to be beating up on someone, but notice it is always only after the police “agonized” the person then the camera turns off. It never shows how this individual may have been acting towards the officers. It is all about how the world sees things. If many police departments got body cameras, then there would be fewer stunts pulled, in my opinion. Why would the individual want them acting like a fool on camera? They would be less likely to harass the police and more likely to listen because now the police have a way to back up their story. Police need body cameras to stop the public from violence towards them, even though the police

3. The cons about body cameras are privacy issues and limitations. Body cameras are seen as an invasion of privacy, as they provide state-owned footage. When police cameras are on, they will capture everyday civilian and police behavior that does not necessarily need to be recorded.

It’s no secret that everyone holds their own opinion regarding the actions of police officers and other positions of authority within these past years, be it good or bad. From the shootings of innocent and unarmed civilians to disciplinary action being taken against those that haven’t done anything unlawful, there’s rarely a day when the police force of the United States doesn’t find itself involved in some sort of controversy. No matter what side you find yourself supporting in these instances, be it the police or the civilian, it’s true that both sides can benefit from the use of these police body cameras.

A major benefit for having body cams is the fact that it will decrease the force used by Police Officers. For the past couple of years there has been many videos of Police Officers using excessive force against innocent victims, especially with African Americans. “The notion has been around for a while. But since August 's fatal shooting of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri -- for which witness accounts varied widely -- it 's gained traction to become part of the national conversation about police conduct.” (Brandon Griggs 1) People have been recently protesting against Police Officers because of the excessive force people have seen them use recently in viral videos. Some Departments have been using body cams and have seen some significant results. “A year-long study in Orlando found use-of-force incidents dropped by 53 percent among officers wearing bodycams and civilian complaints also dropped 65 percent.” ( Should 2) These statistics show that the force by Police Officers decreased significantly for this one city. Imagine how much this would decrease the force of Police Officers globally if they used body cams in all

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

Surely everyone has wondered about the accountability of police officers, but maybe this will no longer be an issue. With the help of police body cameras, officers will be accountable for the good they do, and in some situations the awful actions. Although police body cameras would be a moral idea, there are some downsides. The body cameras could be seen as an invasion of privacy, as they would record everyday behavior for police officers, which is not necessary to record. All in all, police cameras could greatly improve the behavior of police officers.

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

“In Rialto, California, a police department has been using body mounted cameras and recording what happens between officers and the public. The use of force by officers declined 60% during the first year the cameras were introduced and citizen complaints against officers dropped by 88% (Safety vision). This statistic proves the debate of police body cameras or not. Though these cameras have a big price tag, they are a piece of equipment all officers need to wear in order to maintain a more clear picture of what happens in an incident.

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, of all, body cameras can show the community what the police are doing. First, if the community wants to know what the police are doing, body cameras are a great way to show it. For example, “The community wants to know what police are doing. Lindsay Miller, of the Police Executive Research Forum, notes. Body cameras are a good way to show that.”(Should Police Officer Wear Body

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

The concept of police body cameras became a hot topic around Fall of 2013 in New York City when a judge found that the NYPD’s stop and frisk tactics violated the constitutional rights of New Yorkers. A solution that the judge found was to experiment with officers wearing body cameras, which ignited fervent debate on the usage of technology in such instances. The debate is based on the common expectation in American society for political authorities to respect the privacy of citizens in terms of monitoring and surveillance. Although this is an important and respectable standard, the unique purpose of police on-body cameras refutes this claim. The goal of police-body cameras is to improve the quality of life of American citizens by

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

There are some studies that reveal that the use of body cameras in the Law Enforcement decrease use of force, discriminatory and excessive police severity when they are working. The complaints from residents also decreased since they are using body cameras. This is because agents maybe are scared of people watching the images of their work, so they act more carefully about criminal policy and procedures. They want to be an example for people and they want the approve of the citizens while they are working. Therefore, there are changes in the action of the agents when they use body cameras, this fact may limit the use of discretion in the field and help the citizens to be more

The study demonstrated the effects of body-cameras in their use of enforcing domestic violence cases. Because domestic violence cases were often dependent on the testimony of one of the spouses Martin Goodall looked into the application of using portable cameras to record police contacts in situations other than car stops. This form of evidence gathering technique showed to increase the amount of cases in conviction of domestic violence offenders by providing an alternative form of evidence. “The evidence could be considered as the victim’s first statement and be useful in supporting prosecutions if the victim is reluctant to give evidence, changes their evidence or does not support the prosecution through the court process” (pg. 12). The data collection revealed that 66.2% of cases involving the body-cameras result in arrest (pg. 15). This form of data collection is primarily focused on the effects on domestic violence, but allows for interpretation in regards to its impacts of civilian behavior