'Cameras, October The Age' By James Martin

Technology today is a substantial part of policing. From the two way radios of the reforming era, and the use of video feeds in the patrol cars. The video recorded in today’s highly

Although the cameras keep track of people for most of their lifetime outside their homes, the surveillance is necessary to regulate citizens and prevent them from doing criminal activity. Cameras control a large part of people’s lives, with purpose “to enforce good laws... to track the government’s political enemies, to gather ammunition for blackmail, and so on,” (Volokh 9). Cameras do not watch everyday activities to observe where one needs to go, but they are there to examine the cities for thieves and vandals. While these cameras appear in almost every part of the city, and people are unaware of what information of theirs is being taken away, the government or city does not scrutinize and judge people for everything they do. Unless a recent crime has occurred and the police requires its usage to track down the suspect, only then would a footage be released for the public regarding the criminal. Otherwise, other trivial and personal information about where one goes is not revealed. Whether the information is recorded or not, it does not affect the normal citizens who live in the area who have done nothing

To peep or not to peep, that is the question being asked by many regarding police body cameras in communities. The topic of police brutality is a rising issue in today’s society. Several questions have arose over the use of police body cameras and whether they are a good or bad idea. Police body cameras have has a variety of concern to many communities regarding their potential. Every city has a different trust and relationship for their police force and these concerns vary depending on the community. People have the concern regarding privacy, protection, and impact on the community and more. After researching the problems caused by Police body cameras as well as its background, the current state of the issue, and the potential solutions, it is clear that communities need to bring a solution to this situation.Such as laws, policies, rules, and more to control this new information.

Surveillance is not a new thing. In fact, espionage, tracking, and sleuthing were part of society ever since 5000 B.C. But in the rise of the modern era, the idea of surveillance in the public eye serves as a controversial topic of discussion. People everywhere complain about the existence of security cameras, government tracking, and the right to privacy. Such problems, however, are not due to the sudden discovery of surveillance, but the modern abuse of it. Seeing the disastrous effects of over surveillance from George Orwell’s 1984, the public rightfully fears societal deterioration through modern surveillance abuse portrayed in Matthew Hutson’s “Even Bugs Will Be Bugged” and the effects of such in Jennifer Golbeck’s “All Eyes On You”. The abuse of surveillance induces the fear of discovery through the invasion of privacy, and ensures the omnipresence of one’s past that haunt future endeavors, to ultimately obstruct human development and the progress of society overall.

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.

“In the first year after the camera 's introduction, the use of force by officers’ decline 60%, and citizens’ complaints against police fell 88%”. (Christopher Mims) The introduction of police body cameras impacted the world in many better ways than bad. But, police body cameras were introduced due to the public 's awareness to police brutality and numerous of publicity deaths which has impacted the outcome of police interactions.

in the minds of concerned people is that the use of the police body cameras prevent Michael’s death? Many people believe that the police body cameras are the solution to a situation like this since it enables recording of interactions between the police officers and civilians. The recorded interactions may aid in judging whether the police officers used unfair treatment or not. However, myriad questions still surround the use of the police body cameras, encompassing its effect on the privacy rights and police-civilian relationship (Southhall, 2017). One study was conducted to investigate the use of police cameras revealed that body-worn cameras reduce the use of excessive by the police officers (Southhall, 2017).

When the government or law enforcement has reasonable suspicion of criminal behavior, different methods of obtaining information and evidence must be used in the interest of preventing violence and decreasing crime. This is seen in the actions of Persistent Surveillance Systems, a security company run by Ross McNutt that utilizes military grade cameras, flown on planes two miles in the sky, to gain a bird's eye view of a region and any crimes that might occur. A controversy over privacy surrounds these methods; people tend to be uneasy with the feeling that they are being watched all the time, and it is easy to draw a parallel to Orwell’s all-seeing Big Brother. However, the cameras overhead are not forcing citizens to conform to a single mold or limiting freedom, they are monitoring for crime, or used to retrace the path of a crime after it occurs, as is the case in a murder in Juarez, Mexico. In this case, the police brought Persistent Surveillance the location of a body, which had been shot with no witnesses. McNutt and his team used the photos taken that day to locate the murder at the time it happened and trace the killer’s path to their current location, in less than a day. Upon further investigation the

In some cases, the incidents were captured on camera and in other instances they weren’t. Body-worn cameras are the public’s popular choice to potentially be the solution to preventing officer-involved shootings. These devices can help by reducing police use-of-force, reducing citizen complaints against officers, increasing transparency and accountability, and increasing the likeliness of prosecution of guilty officers. There has been a lot of talk about implementing body-worn cameras in the media. In addition to the United States, there has been talk about their implementation in the United Kingdom as well. The College of Policing in England and Wales suggests that body-worn cameras will help to restore the public’s confidence in justice regarding police misconduct (Ariel, Farrar, & Sutherland, 2015). Despite these great promises, a lot more research needs to be done on body-worn

Justin Hansford article “Body Cameras Won’t Stop Police Brutality. Eric Garner is only one of Several Reasons Why” published on 4 December 2014 in The Washington Post explains how body cameras won’t stop officers from being violent. The purpose of Hansford article is to inform readers of the advantages and disadvantages of having police officers wearing body cameras. He claims that footage from these cameras has only provided a one sided view of the interaction. This article presents

Having a video verification of event not just prevents the use of unnecessary power, but in addition it helps difference of opinion and reveal claims of police force brutality. It is for the protection of the public and the officer and many cities around the country. The cities that have started the use of cameras for their officer to create record have change police behavior. A study conducted of the Rialto, California, police department from 2012 to 2013 showed the potential of cameras. With half of the police department wearing cameras video recording have illustrate each interface with the public; in which the department experienced an 88 percent decrease in complaints against officers(Schiff 1).

Sadly, despite the obvious fact that police body cameras have a number of benefits, there are definite concerns regarding the possibility that these same cameras pose a risk to the privacy of both the police officers and members of the general public. The general feeling is that these concerns need to be addressed as the use of body

The police officials whom Police Executive Research Forum (PERF) asked mentioned numerous ways in which body-worn cameras have assisted their agencies toughen liability and transparency. These officials said that, by furnishing a video record of police activity, body-worn cameras have made their jobs more transparent to the public and have helped decide questions following a meeting between officers and the public. These officials also believed that body-worn cameras are helping to avoid complications from arising in the first place

As current policy stands, much of the footage recorded by police body cameras may become public record; anyone can request access. Neighbours could view it and it could go viral on YouTube (Boone & Schneider). Police officers who record incidents in private homes can create detailed layouts for the public to access, which can create worries about what the information can be used for. However, it will be vital to make video evidence accessible for transparency and accountability purposes while keeping privacy concerns in mind; otherwise, the utility of the cameras become severely limited.

Over the past few years, there have been many complaints about police brutality. Some of these have even ended in the deaths of the civilians. Because of the deaths, citizens have lost a lot of trust in police officers. Now the departments are trying to fix this loss of trust, and one of the ways is to have officers wear body cameras. With officers wearing the cameras there will be a video of everything that happens between the officers and civilians. The police departments are hoping with these videos that civilians will be more willing to trust the officers since everything will be recorded, and the officers will not be able to deny or hide anything that happens. In this essay, I want to show some of the many benefits for the cameras. A few of these would be that the videos give evidence of what happens between the officers and civilians, officers and civilians are more aware of their actions when the cameras are present, because of this there have been fewer complaints made against officers, the use of force has also decreased since police have started using the cameras, but there is still the concern of peoples’ privacy being protected.