Body Cameras: Article Analysis

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

Moreover, to stop the crime and police brutality, body cameras would not be a bad idea if they were to be taken a step forward. Nancy La Vigne writer of “Body Cameras for Police Could Be One Smart Step” talks about supervisors monitoring the cameras in case an altercation were to happen (6). Nancy also talks about body cameras invading constitutional rights of the citizens. Vigne writes, “Body cameras will capture not just an officers actions, but also those of the citizens with whom they interact – or even individuals walking by or in the background” (Vigne). Nancy’s point is that with the body cameras and civilians being recorded, should the citizens know they are being recorded. Another solution for the body cameras to be able to work would be for the cops to have no access to the cameras.

For years and years, there have been many cases that police officers use unnecessary force on citizens. Citizens have reported the incidents, taken the incidents to court, and as well as people starting protests because of this. Instead of people feeling safe that the police is around people fear them. There has been a solution that involves police officers now having to be required wear body cameras. The use of body cameras on officers will reduce the use of force and will reduce dishonesty on incident reports; however, officers should not wear body cameras as it is an invasion of their privacy.

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.

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

Next, let’s talk about body worn camera these are very important. This could help put a lot of people in jail or even corrupt officers. In a sample of police departments surveyed in 2013, approximately 75 percent of them reported that they did not use body-worn cameras. The survey was funded by the Office of Community Oriented Policing Services and conducted by the Police Executive Research Forum PERF’s report about the survey notes a number of perceived benefits for using body-worn cameras, including better evidence documentation and increased accountability and transparency. But the report also notes many other factors that law

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.

According to Rialto’s police department, the use of force by officers declined by 60% during their first year of using body cameras and complaints from citizens dropped by 88% in the state of California. The cameras were able to keep track of the statements and evidence, but also possessed a threat to the public that may see it as an invasion of privacy. For example, citizens know that they are being recorded on cameras on streets or inside public buildings, but having a police wearing a body camera come to a civilian’s home would be a huge invasion of privacy. Although the study of the Rialto police department came back mostly positive, the fact remains that the officers still have the ability to use the cameras as they want to, and only turning it on or off when they choose to. In some states, officers are ordered to turn the cameras on as soon as they approach a citizen, or they will be responsible for any complaint or action that will happen during the encounter, keeping the officers

Much interest in the technology of the body cameras comes from a growing problem that the United States has been having a major problem with police violence. Though some might argue that the wearing of body cameras violate privacy, in fact the use of the cameras will minimize violence, show accountability, and a human side of policing. These body cameras would help serve by providing video evidence that can be referenced and use anytime allegations are made against police officers and criminals alike. The use of these body cameras are somewhat in the evaluation and study stages, but they are quickly becoming the standard in some police departments across the United States. These cameras would not only serve to provide video evidence, but it provide accountability. The ideal policy for the cams is that they stay on and continue recording throughout police officers shifts, which would help eliminate any possibility of doing something that would not be used as evidence later on and help them evade the recording of abuse committed while on duty.

In the recent wake of the death of Michael Brown, an eighteen-year-old, who was shot by Ferguson, Missouri police officer Darren Wilson, the topic of police accountability and excess force have been heavily discussed. Among those discussions a reoccurring question has been asked “Should police officers wear body cameras”? While some view this as a violation of privacy, many agree that they law enforcement should be equipped with body cameras. Law enforcement should wear body cameras to promote compliance from the public when interacting with law enforcement, provide documented evidence, and also cameras would help reduce the complaints made against officers, while promoting accountability.

“Body Worn Cameras are spreading worldwide, under the assumption that police performance, conduct, accountability, and legitimacy, in the eyes of the public, are enhanced as a result of using these devices. Also, suspects' demeanor during police-public engagements is hypothesized to change as a consequence of the video-recording of the encounter” (Ariel, 2016, para.1). Research has shown that body-worn cameras by law enforcement officers dramatically reduces both civilian complaints against officers and the use of force by officers. Since the beginning of using the body-worn cameras by law enforcement officers, behavior has improved, and de-escalation on both sides of the cameras that happen during the interactions with the public has decreased. The body-worn cameras provide members of the public, the media, and researchers with vital information about the quality of police-public interactions; especially the relatively small, but critical, minority that involves officer use of force. (Kiernan, 2016) "These videos will not resolve all debates about the propriety of the officer's behaviors they portray, but the information they do reveal can advance empirically grounded policing reform."(Kiernan, 2016, para. 6)

In addition, supporters of body cameras have argued that this new innovation to policing is positive and beneficial for both police department’s administrators, police officers, citizens, and the courts in plenty of ways. Those who are in favor body camera note that recording police interactions keep the officer and the subject they are addressing well behaved because video recording is viewed as an oversight. According to Katz et al. (2014), numbers of arrests are higher among officers who wear body cameras than those do not. Also, complaints by citizens against officers who

According to the National Institute of Justice, at the end of 2013 only 25% of the 18,000 police departments in the United States were using body cameras (Maney, 2014). This number has increased greatly since 2013 as one-third of police departments are now outfitting policemen with wearable cameras (Delong, 2015). The American Civil Liberties Union has voiced concerns about privacy regarding footage recorded on body cameras and has asked questions about whether the scene like that of a suicide or domestic battery be made public (Vega, 2015). In response to concerns about privacy, the President of Citizen’s for Privacy authorized this study to determine if the benefits of police worn body cameras outweigh the impact on people’s privacy and to establish some recommendations to further protect citizen’s privacy with the ever growing use of this

Communities expect officers to honor their oath by protecting and serving the neighborhoods they work in, treating everyone fairly, and most importantly to not abuse the powers granted to them by the citizens that reside in the jurisdiction they serve. Police excessive use of force and other official misconduct is a major emerging issue that tremendously plagued the relationship between law enforcement officials and the public the last several years (Ariel et al., 2015). Police misconduct translates into continuous complaints against the police by citizens, which is the reason why various departments around the United States have implemented the use of body cameras. The purpose of police body cameras is to reduce