Body Camera Benefits

Body cameras can hold police officers accountable for their actions, both the good and the bad. “Continuously wearing body cameras would hold police accountable for their appropriate, and inappropriate, conduct” (Buam). Also when the citizens make accusations they could pull the video from the camera and see whether the police officer did what they said they did or not. “Video recorded by body cams protect any false accusations, misconduct, or abuse

Over the last few years there has been much controversy leading up to the need for law enforcement officers to wear body cameras. This is not only for citizens but also for the officers’ protection. With so much debate regarding police brutality and excessive force body cameras are quickly on the rise. New technology is giving police on a state and federal level a new opportunity to cut back on some of the allegations and negativity we have seen in the last few years. On the other hand it is giving citizens all over the country the safety they should feel when being approached by law enforcement. Our technology has improved significantly over the years and this seems to be something that will benefit everyone.

The social media and the public might want police body cam footage release but sometimes it might be to graphic or controversial. Police body cameras have been a topic since the incident with Michael Brown in august of 2014. Police shot and killed an unarmed individual in ferguson, MO, leading to many people wanting cameras on police. Whether the cameras are a good idea or not this paper will explore the facts and sides of police body cameras. Overall body cameras should be required Because they can save the lives of the innocent, keep innocent people from going to jail, and can help a case as more evidence.

Across the country a growing number of legislative departments have been debating about the pros and cons of police body cameras. This paper will further explore benefits, as well as the downfalls of using such devices. This paper will also look at specific cases and examine whether or not body cameras were helpful in various situations. It will examine if they were a deterrent in cases dealing with police brutality and domestic violence. It also looks at how they could be misused and assisting some officers in covering up their corrupt behavior.

Within recent years there has been much controversy surrounding police officers and whether or not they should be wearing body cameras to document their everyday interactions with the public. While the use of body cameras may seem to invade the public or police privacy. Police-worn body cameras will be beneficial to law enforcement and civilians all over the world. Police must be equipped with body cameras to alleviate any doubt in the effectiveness of officers. Law enforcement worn body cameras would enhance the trust of the public by keeping both the officers and the citizens accountable for their actions, providing evidence, and helping protect them from false accusations, while protecting privacy

In today 's society, one highly debatable topic is whether or not law enforcement agents should wear body cameras. Most cameras used by law enforcement agencies across the country record audio and video, therefore, the cameras see and hear nearly everything a law enforcement officer does. There are many advantages to law enforcement personnel using body cameras while on duty because it holds the officers accountable, is used to document the contact made between the officers and the victims and/or suspects, supports the “use of force” action, keeps the officers and citizens honest, and the videos can even be used for training for other officers.

Body cams have the potential to provide more accurate evidence and depiction of the moment of police incidents.

Body cameras in policing are still new, but more and more agencies are beginning to implement this technology into their line of work. At first police officers were very hesitant to wear these body cameras because they were afraid they would infringe themselves and give away their own privacy. Later, as body cameras were beginning to see more use in the work place, officers began to realize that these very own body cameras that they once thought would only cause themselves harm would actual prove to be useful in a variety of situations. Some of these situations can be citizen complaints, to even backing up an officers use of force. Body cameras can be the one sole thing that can give

On August 9, 2014 Officer Darren Wilson with the Ferguson Missouri Police Department was on his way to a reported strong-arm robbery at a local convenience store in the city. While on his way, he observed two African-American males walking in the middle of the roadway (#1). Officer Wilson realized the pair matched the description given of the suspects from the robbery call in which he had been dispatched. While still in his patrol vehicle, Officer Wilson drove up to the males, and began speaking with Michael Brown. Officer Wilson told Brown to not walk in the lanes of traffic (#1).

Marfin stated the different issues presented for the department, such as the individual privacy and cost as she discussed UTPD’s process of implementing this technology. She emphasized this by stating “UTPD began testing different versions of body cameras two years ago, but the implementation of the technology took many years to complete” (par.9). Although the time and cost of the body-cameras brought issues to the department the author emphasizes that UTPD’s main goal is to build trust between the community and the police officers to ensure the community’s safety. Therefore, they made sure to invest in their safety by enforcing body cameras on the officers as explained in the article, ““This is something we believe is important to the UT community and to UTPD,” UTPD Chief David Carter said. “This is something to ensure that people have confidence and trust when it comes to our department.”” (par. 3). Throughout the article the cost of the cameras is highlighted informing how the technology works and what exactly it does to preserve the safety in the community. She emphasizes this statement by saying

Police Body Camera Have you ever thought about police body cameras and whether they will provide accurate proof and evidence regarding all the crimes that are happening in different cities in the United States? This is may or may not be the case, but believe it or not it's a win for all. For instance, let’s say a police officer is out on duty and he sees that somebody is being murdered. When the officer pulls over to check out what is happening, the suspect had already gotten away, even though the suspect had gotten away, the body camera that is attached to the police uniform caught the face of the suspect. Having this evidence on video, eventually they will find him.

I will identify the advantages of using body cameras as well as the drawbacks (Pollack, 2017). I will discuss if I was stopped by a police officer for a traffic offense would I want to be videotaped. If I was involved in a domestic violence incident would I want to be videotaped when the officers arrived? Then I will discuss whether the police should have the discretion to turn off the camera when they believe a person’s privacy is being invaded regardless of what the person involved thinks so.

When police officers wear body cameras, less complaints are filed, use-of-force situations decrease, and training opportunities are gained. In 2012 the Rialto Police Department in California conducted a year long study on the use of body cameras. The department randomly assigned 27 officers to wear body cameras. After the year, the department saw a 59% decrease of use-of- force situations and a 87% decrease in complaints filed against officers (Body Worn Camera Study). In addition, body cameras provide training opportunities for officers. They do this by recording the situation, which allows the officer to know what mistakes were made. If the officer can evaluate what they did wrong, then they can fix it (White 29). Fixing mistakes improves the whole department’s performance and efficiency.

The use of excessive force by the police, particularly in the Unites States has been under much scrutiny and criticism. The implementation of police worn body cameras were introduced as a way to not only improve the safety of the police officers but most importantly to make them accountable for their own misconduct. The presence of a body cam worn by police either during an altercation or on duty, in theory should mean that there would be less of a likelihood of an officer committing any form of misconduct, as this means that the public would also be able to see the footage and the officer would and could be held liable for their actions. The reality of using body cams worn by police and their effectiveness in achieving these goals are

The thing is that if two officers are on duty together they should be able to talk without being recorded and the footage of them talking about personal stuff or work shouldn’t be leaked to the public. Police should interact with the public just to be friendly to show that police aren’t seriously all work and something like that should not be filmed. Things like that shouldn’t be recorded and if a police enforcement policy requires that, the policy should also be that cameras should be off, so everything is good. As time goes on police officers will probably be given body cameras.