Body Cameras On The United States

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

“There have been other high-profile instances of officers not turning on cameras. One officer involved in the shooting of a 22-year-old black man in the small city of Saratoga Springs, Utah, in September didn't turn on his body camera. A second officer involved in the incident had no camera” (Jackson). Body Cameras could help officers make their jobs easier by keeping civilians more civil. Body Cameras would help show if they unnecessary force against civilians. The more use of body cameras would help improve behaviors of officers who are using excessive force for no

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

Body cameras are proven to make policemen act better while they’re are on duty. “Police officers "tend to behave a little better"(Kon, Body Cameras for Police Officers). if they know their behavior is being recorded on camera” stated author Tsin Yen Kon. Police will act better cause they know they are being “watched”. Just like when a student has a parent to sit in their class, they act very well, police do the same. Police will also act right, because they don’t want to lose their jobs or get fired because some careless mistake that they made while on camera. “When police officers are acutely aware that their behavior is being monitored (because they turn on the cameras), and when officers tell citizens that the cameras are recording their behavior, everyone behaves better” (Knickerbocker). Brad Knickerbocker, the author, explains how both sides of the camera, police, and criminal will have an effect on their behavior because they know that they are being watched, and recorded. When people know they are being watched, it is like they get scared, because they don't want anything to be used against them. Although cameras will make police act better, people will still think that police brutality will still happen.

Rialto, California is an example of a city with positive results from the use of body-cameras. In Rialto, police began wearing body-cameras a little less than three years ago. As a result of officers wearing body-cameras, citizens’ complaints against police officers dropped 88 percent and use of force by police officers dropped 60 percent from the previous 12 month period when body-cameras were not in use. Rialto’s police chief said, “When you put a camera on a police officer, they tend to behave a little better, follow the rules a little better. And if the citizen knows the officer is wearing a camera, chances are the citizen will behave a little better” (Lovett).

The presence of body cameras make the community that they are in a safer and better place. Body cams can make

The body camera has become a popular choice amongst police departments worldwide. The situation of the scenario, and if the officer or suspect acted in the right can be determined from past footage. The cause of the body camera has been the allegations against officers for how they acted in certain situations, as well as for how the suspect acted during the callout. The effect has been officers being terminated due to lack of integrity or situational awareness, as well as officer safety. Suspects have also been convicted of false accusations against a police officer, as well as crimes presented in court, from fights, to officer involved shootings. The body worn camera has benefited both police officers and the general public.

Claim #1: • There are positive effects on the relationships between Law enforcement and community when Law personal wear Body Cameras Claim #2: • Persons are less likely to use force when body cameras are present • To ensure the safety of law enforcement and the

All of the recent excessive force incidents could have been totally preventable. In cases where no body cameras were used, people were found guilty with no evidence, but instead just the officer’s statement. And clearly in the Michael Brown case, Daren Wilson was not exactly honest. The pain that the victims’ families feel is unimaginable. Having body cameras will stop officers from using excessive force in situations where things can be handled calmly. Body cameras not only help civilians, but police officers as well. Such as shown in the Cleveland Case where the officers’ jobs were saved because of their body camera footage. Society can be pulled back together, and the public can start trusting the law enforcement if body cameras are put to

Law enforcement agencies have been in a heated debate in the use of body cams by the surrounding communities because of the use of force incidents that have occurred in the media. Body cameras are the new age technology that allows law enforcement agencies to record encounters with the community. There are some positives aspects of law enforcement wearing body cams. The body cam allows the officer to interact with residents which will help to eliminate complaints about police behavior and the use of force encounters. The body cam gives video evidence of the decisions made by on-duty law enforcement in violent situations. This helps keep accountability of law enforcement and the ensure that the department and decreases liability. Because the

Bill Vaughn said, “They could help prove accusations of officer misconduct,” (Blad 1, 15). “In 2014, an officer in Albuquerque captured the fatal shooting of a homeless man by officers who did not appear to be threatened. The two officers have been charged with second-degree murder and are expected to stand trial soon,” (Galles 1). Cameras can put the public on their best behavior. “When officers tell citizens that the cameras are recording their behavior, everyone behaves better,” (Knickerbocker).

And the benefits work both ways. The article also reported citizen complaints against police fell 88 percent after the department began using the cameras. The same article cites studies from the U.K., where body cameras are more widely used, that found the cameras “aid in the prosecution of crimes, by providing … uniquely compelling evidence.”

Researches from the University of Cambridge’s institute of Criminology conducted a study in 2014 on the effects of body cameras on cops. The study showed that once a small town in California had the technology introduced the altercations with involving officers decreased drastically. University of Cambridge officials gave an opinionated statement saying, “knowledge that events are being recorder creates a ‘self-awareness’ in all participants during police interactions.” In article by the USA Today a notable statistic shows that in Rialto, California, there was a 60% reduction in use-of-force altercations

The body cams will help bring peace between police and civilians. For example, in California a police department has been using body cams and recording what happens between officers and civilians. The use of force by officers declined 60% during the first year the cameras were introduced

However, for the intended purpose of this discussion, according to the most recent studies they would not be a solution to police abuse of authority. Unfortunately, it is an idea that sounds like perfect response on paper but is not supported by statistics after implementation. While the original smaller case studies supported the concept, a researcher on the largest study to date on the subject claims “We found essentially that we could not detect any statistically significant effect of the body-worn cameras” (Durkheimer, 2017). With the newest study arriving at an unexpected conclusion, the cost does not justify the use for a majority of departments. Privacy concerns, like supported by the ACLU and Brennan Center for Justice, can be disputed by acknowledging that any instance that requires interaction with police cannot be considered private. Police interactions are either in the form of direct response for intervention or in the form of as a community caretaker, in both roles privacy cannot be expected. Especially when accounting for the rise in use of cellphone videos, no one can have a reasonable expectation of anonymity or privacy in public. Furthermore, an officer would not have before-hand knowledge of what should be recorded or not. Thus, body cameras that are only activated when necessary due