Communities Expect Officers To Honor Their Oath By Protecting

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

First advantage in law enforcement agents wearing body cameras is to hold the officers accountable. “Holding the officers accountable, will ensure the officer adheres to policies and procedures during an encounter with victims and suspects.” Body-worn cameras are poised to help boost accountability for law enforcement and citizens and, unlike many new police technologies, the cameras share preliminary support from both law enforcement and social justice groups. Successful implementation of the cameras will require careful policies that respect and protect both the police and the public.

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

I selected an article about police body cameras. The article cited several studies, as well as the authors’ ideas and thoughts. The article, titled Police Body Cameras, is part of the CATO Institute’s National Police Misconduct Reporting Project, and prepared by Matthew Feeney in 2015. The theme throughout the article is that the use of body cameras will reduce police misconduct. Although we all hope this is the case, we must also look at the other issues involved with the wearing of body cameras. In an effort to gain citizen buy-in and obtain their opinions, they conducted surveys. Interestingly enough, most people did not want the officers to record them, unless it was during an enforcement encounter, such as a traffic stop or arrest situation.

One widely accepted idea is that body cameras for police to wear will help to observe what actually happens in traffic stops with police and serve justice to civilians and police officers. According to the article, “Should Police Wear Body Cameras?”, in May of 2015 the Obama administration started a $75 million dollar program to test how effective body cameras are, with hopes to give out 50,000 body cameras in 2018 to police officers (Majerol 6). Body cameras is a solution that is extremely considered and is already taking some effect. Moreover, research shows that body cameras can keep tense police encounters calm, help behavior of both the officer and civilian, and the footage that comes from the cameras can serve as evidence ( “Should Police Wear” 7). Research proves that body cameras can have an effect on police brutality and will help fix the issue. However, there are other techniques that can possibly help fix the issue such as training. “An officer also needs training on dealing with community members in nonthreatening ways and better communication skills” ( “Police Need Better” 1). Training will help officers work on making police encounters less tense and make sure excessive force is not a go to. Lastly, according to analysts, changing hiring practices in the law enforcement could make sure that unbiased officers that are focused on being close to all communities could help lower the amount of police brutality cases (“Police Need Better” 2). If police departments really focused on an officer’s beliefs involving the topics of race or religion, officers that are not willing to be fair to all would not be hired and in turn prevent more police brutality cases from happening. To conclude, officers wearing body cameras and police departments changing hiring practices could help stop more police brutality cases from

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 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.

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.

With so many incidents occurring between law enforcement and civilians, it’s about time we have our officers wear body cameras. Law enforcement wants to use body cameras, many politicians are in favor for them, Civil-rights groups are advocating them, and communities that already have a strong police presence in their neighborhoods are requesting that the police get cameras now. With the uproar of law enforcement and the death of many black American’s, body cameras can be very useful. There is always that missing link when trying to put these horrible moments back together. Far too many times we end up with the suspect dead and only get one side of the story. With the use of body cameras, we can now get more insight on the events that happen (Boyd, 2015).

Imagine you received mistreatment from a police officer and decide to take legal action against them. The situation becomes their word against yours because there is no evidence to prove the mistreatment you suffered. Not all police officers are out to treat people incorrectly or use excessive force; however, in the cases when they do, there is usually no way to prove that it happened. There are also cases where people say they were mistreated by a police officer, but it is not true. What if there were a way to monitor how cops interact with the public? Body cameras offer a solution to the need to monitor police actions. They capture the truth, whether good or bad, that happens with police officers. Police should wear body cameras to be protected from legal cases, as demonstrated in the case of David Muniz, who was accused of being the reason for a Cleveland man’s death.

Before the creation of these cameras, complaints about police officers were numerous. By using these cameras, studies have shown that they enhance officers’ behaviors and have also helped reduce citizen complaints. “They found that the ‘officers wearing the cameras had 87.5 percent fewer incidents of use of force and 59 percent fewer complaints than the officers not wearing the cameras,’ the report states”

Furthermore, as opposed to popular belief, body cameras can not only lead citizens to act lawfully, they can also provide amenity for both officers and citizens. Throughout history, times have arisen where an officer has acted out of the law. Body cameras can ensure that officers acting unlawful are punished for their wrongdoings. (The Police Foundation) A a result, this can assure citizens that they are not the only ones being punished for acting out of the law. Officers and citizens will also be more likely to act within the law, knowing that they are on camera. (Weisburg) In response, studies have shown, that citizens have developed comfort towards officers equipped with body cameras. (Fullerton Police Department) This new found trust has the ability to change the mentality of a community in an affirmative manner. (Mims) This alone could help revive a community such as Ferguson, that has been in shambles ever since Michael Brown was killed. In addition, Officer Drumond a highly respected officer at Sherwood said “I support body cameras and find it very comforting that everything I do is on camera”. (Weisburg) If body cameras can give officers a sense of comfort it can help improve their work ethic as well as keep them relaxed while on shift. This can lead to trust between officers and the community. Ultimately, body cameras have the ability to restore trust in a community as well as keeping both citizens and officers safe and acting within the law.

Recently, there has been numerous accusations of police brutality, racism, and misconduct. In some cases the police have acted inappropriately as accused. However, in other cases, law enforcement officers have acted appropriately and followed regulations. But, it is hard to determine if an officer acted properly without actual video evidence. Of course, the officers word should be valued more than that of a criminal. But there are in fact some officers who misuse the law, attack racial minorities, or breach code. Therefore, it has become difficult to determine if an officer acted wrongly unless the officer is wearing a body camera. Likewise, the fact that an officer is wearing a body camera may make officers less likely to behave wrongly and

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.