Police 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.

and striving to make them right.  As time has developed, the issues of old have passed, but now,

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.

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

There is so much crime which occurs in our society today, which it is very difficult to put an end to it. But there is a thing which is common among these crimes which are the criminals. According to the article, "Police body Cams: Solution or scam? Nwanevu the author has stated many questions to which he gathers the responses from three panels who is Mariame Kaba a member of the Chicago antipolice violence organization, David Fleck a vice president and he is also a major manufacturer of the police body cameras, and Connor Boyack who is a president of Utah 's Liberates Institute. This article mentions the popular magazine such as Time magazine, this magazine reports that over a quarter of the country 's police departments are already testing or actively using cameras, including the NYPD and the LAPD (Nwanevu, 2015). Also the author Nwanevu states that The Obama administration has called for the federal funding to support the deployment of as many as 50,000 devices to state and local law enforcement agencies. The administration 's reasoning captures the perspective of most camera supporters. According to the status the usage by police officers will help sustain trust between law enforcement agencies and the communities they interact with (Nwanevu, 2015). Reformers have suggested that the video could have gone a long way towards resolving the ambiguities of the Michael Brown case where eyewitnesses had given conflicting stories and also the death of Eric Garner according to

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.

The community will feel more trustful towards the police and the work they do if they have the body cameras that can support their work. The police department in Rialto, California has received 88 percent less complaints since using body cameras than those not using body cameras (Police Body).

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

Police Body Cameras So does anyone know what this is? This may look like a simple device, but is caused a lot of controversy 6 years ago. It is still being questioned if we should or should not be using these things. These things are police body cameras.

From examining the past, we can understand why certain rules and regulations have been put into place. For example, body cameras are now being required based off of events that have taken place in the past. The police shootings against African American males has brought much attention to police violence and the need for body cameras. Because of the past shootings, police officers across the nation are now required by law to wear body cameras while on duty. Another event that can be related to this subject is the right to drive your vehicle in front of certain buildings. Because of past bombings, as well as shootings, you prohibited by law from driving your vehicle in front of particular buildings such as, the White House and Capitol. These

Only five states in America have laws that require the use of body cameras. In addition, there are six states that have eavesdropping laws in place in relation to government officials. Lastly, there are eighteen states and the District of Columbia that have legislated how body-worn camera data is addressed under open record laws (“Body-Worn Camera Funding”). In recent years, the discussion of how states should regulate the use of body cameras and the ethics of body cameras as an moral solution to police brutality has spiked due to the easier access to smart phones and the greater publication of altercations between police and civilians. These discussions have lead this topic to ultimately become a controversy across America.

Police body cameras are controversial. There are people that agree with it and some that do not.  This paper will discuss the pros and cons of police officers using body cameras.And the legal implications and functionality of the police body cameras. It will also discuss the history and show scientific research that shows how it can be helpful to our society.

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.

document link Abstract: Liability-conscious city attorneys say the cameras could help in lawsuits; rights groups, including the American Civil Liberties Union, say police accountability will be bolstered by another layer of public documentation; and the Justice Department, surveying 63 police departments that were using body cameras and many others that were not, concluded in a report this month that the technology had the potential to "promote the perceived legitimacy and sense of procedural justice" in interactions between the public and law enforcement. Links: Linking Service Full text: PULLMAN, Wash. -- Amateur videos of police officers doing their jobs have

Every sector within all the economies has felt and continued to feel the influence of technology advancement and changes. Technological change is currently inevitable in every sector. Organizations and government agencies have to embrace it so as one of the way to promote success. Where organizations are reluctant to embrace technological change, they should be prepared to deal with the negative effects that may result from failure to use technology. Law enforcement agencies such as police and military have no choice but exploit technology so as to prevent as well as deal with crime. This paper will explore how the use of cameras surveillance by police continues influence mixed reactions within from different people.