Police Body Camera Argumentative Paper

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

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.

Today, law enforcement agencies, or more specifically police officers, are under constant scrutiny from their peers as well as outside sources. Many of these problems arise from how the police treat and deal with these citizens. There is however a solution to these problems, which can not only improve officer safety, but can also protect anyone else that the officer encounters. The solution to this problem is officer mounted camera systems, or better known as body cameras. These body cameras capture almost everything an officer see’s as well as hears. This allows for protection against a police officer as well as protection for a citizen who was scrutinized for something he or she might have done or not. Body cameras are ever increasing in policing and have many benefit’s as well as draw backs.

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.

During the period of 1830-1860 slavery existed throughout the United States. The topic of slavery has a long history in the United States, beginning with the slaves used to cultivate tobacco in the southern colonies. When writing the Declaration of Independence, the Founding Fathers realized they could not include any articles against slavery, for it would lead to the South not agreeing upon it. In the 1830’s to 1860’s, attitudes towards the institution of slavery varied throughout social classes and regions, ultimately settling with the North coming out against the expansion of slavery and the South for it.

Nearly all abolitionist insisted that economic, civil and political rights in the United States should be equally enjoyed without regard to race. American society they insisted meant rooting out just slavery, but racism in all its forms, anti-slavery leaders took advantage of the rapid development of print technology and the expansion of literacy due to common school education to spread their message. Identifying slavery as a sin was essential to replacing the traditional strategies of gradual emancipation and colonization with immediate abolition. Their strategy was moral suasion and their area the public sphere, abolitionist adopted the role of radical social critics. Abolitionist also pioneered the modern idea that human rights took precedence over national sovereignty, invented the concept of equality before the law regardless of race one all but unknown in America life before the civil war. ( chapter 12, page 448, 449,

The dispute of police body cameras truly hit the media hard this week. Blasting from the headlines all citizens were aware that Michael Brown was lethally shot in Ferguson, Missouri. This prompted officers to become fortified with body cameras. This technologically progressive world that we live in today has shaped a world of tweeting, posting and uploading. It’s about time that police departments take advantage of the tools accessible to them, especially with the advancement of equipment. The move forward in technology will help to alleviate speculation on any misconduct perpetrated. There now will be hard honest evidence of any crime committed against a police officer.

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.

The familiarity of such cases is evidence to believe that one case or even many cases of the same caliber did not prompt the decision to fund police body cameras alone but a more influential reason can explain the decision for body cameras. A state of field assessment conducted by the police reform revealed that various forms of technology is being adapted or developed for law enforcement purposes, and there are many specific technologies, both current and emerging, that can benefit law enforcement. The theory that can best explain new emerging technologies that has power to influence political decisions can best be explained by the new media

  Introduction The Issue Lately, mainstream media outlets have deeply covered recent officer involved shootings and use of force events by police. As a result, much of the public has latched onto the idea that police officers should be required to wear body cameras, which the public believes will somehow miraculously stop any excessive use of force by police. Are police body cameras really the answer, or is this our “human tendency, in times of tragedy, to latch on to the

“San Diego Police Body Cameras Reducing Misconduct, Aggressive Use of Force, Report Says.” Los Angeles Times, Los Angeles Times, 10 Feb. 2017, www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-san-diego-

March 2017, Vol. 99 Issue 2, p6, 4 p. Summary of article: . The article summarizes the beliefs within police officers and the residents who have been affected by the actions of their local law enforcement officers. The article summarizes the introduction to the U.S. Department of Justice promoting the adoption of the body-worn cameras in 2015.

So far experiences with the cameras have mainly been positive. Stated by Schiff, "The department experienced an 88 percent reduction in complaints against officers" (Schiff 2). The public likes how things are working out now with the cameras. Along with this positive reaction is another was found in a study in Rialto, California. Over a 12-month period in Rialto, California, officers found that wearing cameras resulted in them involved in 60 percent fewer incidents of force and received fewer citizen complaints than without cameras ("Police Body"2). One can conclude that if things are working out the way they are, there is no reason to change it. With all the evidence presented it makes sense for police to wear cameras because all that is coming from them is

This paper will be discussing the reasons that make it safer and the statistics behind it. The advancement of technology has made it to where the common everyday person(s) can record anything. Which may sound pleasing but may cause conflict with the word of the officers on duty or can be altered by the victim/district attorneys (Purdy, Rholetter, Popan, Elena, MA 2016). The uses

Although law enforcement agencies were dabbling in the use of cameras during officer encounters, incidents like Eric Garner, Walter Scott, and Tamir Rice increased the political and public pressure for the usage of body-worn cameras. The touted advantages are reductions of unprofessional behavior, alteration of individual’s behaviors during interactions, providing evidence to deal with citizen complaints, evidence for court, and the ability to review incidents for future training (White, 2014). From the administration's standpoint these advantages pushed their implementation almost nationwide; furthermore, from the public perception, it repeals officers’ abilities to lie about their misconduct. Even though these advantages do provide merit for body-worn camera use, there are also specific concerns related to their implementation.