Police Body Cameras Essay

Over the last few years there has been much controversy leading up to the need for law enforcement officers to wear body cameras. This is not only for citizens but also for the officers’ protection. With so much debate regarding police brutality and excessive force body cameras are quickly on the rise. New technology is giving police on a state and federal level a new opportunity to cut back on some of the allegations and negativity we have seen in the last few years. On the other hand it is giving citizens all over the country the safety they should feel when being approached by law enforcement. Our technology has improved significantly over the years and this seems to be something that will benefit everyone.

“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

Video Footage has the potential to expose officer misconduct and exonerate civilians whose actions have been falsely accused by officers. In the case of John Crawford III, going into his local Walmart, just wanting to spend quality time with his family roasting s’mores. Officers had over 200 video cameras showing he wasn’t doing anything wrong, but they refused to look at them. Even though he had an unloaded pellet gun that he picked up off the shelf. Why shoot, instead of tasering him. (Harvard Law Review N.A., 2015). Even with some witnesses around that still didn’t stop New York Police officers from using excessive force on Eric Garner. His death was recorded, and the officers were indicted. There are many cases where officers are accused of excessive force such as PEOPLE vs ATKINSON. In cases such as this, there are officers stating force was necessary and defendants saying that unnecessary force had been used. The use of cameras helps to determine without prejudice and protect all

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

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

Growing up was a little boy who had a dream that wanted to become a hero, a hero that helps and save lives, a hero that is willing to a take risk for his country. A hero willing to save their family and friends . A Police officer was made to enforce the law, to serve and protect from crime and to stop all the killing and the violence. As soon start to get a little older,started to understand more and seeing them on the news saw the police were killing citizens, beating up teenagers, accusing others of having drugs and police were also dope dealing. My dream of becoming a police was fading away, my hero days were crushed and thinking police was our hero’s. Police were not creating justice in our cities.

On August 9th 2014 in Ferguson Missouri a suburb north of Saint Louis, 18-year-old Michael Brown was fatally shot by police officer Darren Wilson after allegedly robbing a convenience store. The initial dispute over the circumstances surrounding Brown’s death resulted in tensions and civil unrest in a predominately African American city, where a police officer had just fatally shot an unarmed African American teenager. A grand jury chose not to indict Wilson leading to his exoneration of any criminal wrongdoing by the United States Justice Department. These events received large-scale media attention and drew protesters from across the country, resulting in intense debate about the relationship between law enforcement and civilians, with special attention being given to what consists as an appropriate use of force.

A shot rings out in the night and soon after, there is a body in the streets. Within days there are multiple eye witnesses on the news, protests in the streets and silence from official sources. This has become an all too common occurrence today in regards to police where the public outcry after deadly force incident can go out of control before officials have had a chance to review the facts. Nearly 1,000 people were killed by police in 2016, with 2017 on pace to top that (Washington Post). One of the most publicly sought after improvements, as there are few answers, to his situation is the mandatory use of body cameras by law enforcement officials. In theory, body cameras would preserve a public record of at least

Citizens embellishing their stories, police officers abusing their power, and having footage to interpret evidence better are a few reasons why we need body cameras for our officers. There have been cases in the past that should have been resolved with body cameras; as blatant as that sounds, body cameras can spark controversy through the public with cases like the shooting of Michael Brown. Michael Brown was a black man who lived in the town of Ferguson, Missouri. Unfortunately his life was ended at 18 years old by Darren Wilson who was a former police officer. Wilson stepped down from his position as a police officer because of the shooting.

I think body cameras on police officers are worth the expense. Abby Phillips from the Washington Post says “At the 1 year memorial for Michael Brown,Tyrone Harris was supposedly armed with a 9mm Sig Sauer that was reported stolen last year so the cops opened fire on him and he is now in critical condition. His family and friends denied that he was armed.” (Phillips 1) We should have body cameras on police officers because it would show evidence of what actually happened at this crime scene and many others that are still being questioned. The cameras would basically show if there is any foul play from the cop and or if it was the actual suspects fault. Having the camera’s would end all of the questioning in police cases

In today’s society no one is safe from everyday peril. Situations arise daily that may present either a law enforcement official or civilian that could warrant the need for extra protection. In some cases it is a matter of he said, she said. For those faced with such situations, documentation that could be provided by body cameras worn by police officials could be of great use. Body cameras have been tested in a small group of police departments and have provided an overwhelming positive effect. Police officers wearing body cameras not only provide the officers with extra peace o mind but give civilians documentation to back up their sides of the story. Not everyone is in favor of police

According to the article “Why police should wear body cameras” by Michelle. M chief, William A. Farrar said to the New York Times “When you put a camera on a police officer, they tend to behave a little better, follow the rules a little better, and if a citizen knows the officer is wearing a camera, chances are the citizen will behave a little better” (MAR, 2014). In other words, the camera will minimize the amount of complaints about officers that use unnecessary force or inappropriate behavior from both sides, the officer and the citizen. If anything happens, the camera will have everything recorded on tape. Americans say most police officers don't do a good job and they routinely lie to serve their own interests.

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

In today’s society no one is safe from everyday peril. Situations arise daily that may present either a law enforcement official or just a civilian with a situation that could warrant the need for extra protection. In some cases it is a matter of he said she said. In just those instances it is important that there be some sort of documentation that provides corresponding evidence. Body cameras have been tested in a small group of police departments and have provided an overwhelming positive effect. Police officers wearing body cameras not only provide the officers with an extra peace of mind but give the civilians documentation to back up their sides of the story.

The DOJ report mentioned that there appeared to be soot around the wound on the right hand which is “evidence of close range discharge of a firearm” (p. 9). The report listed eight gunshot wounds on Brown’s body. The DOJ concluded that six of the eight bullets that impacted Brown’s body entered through the front. The two bullets that were determined not to have entered through the front were the ones that struck the right arm and right forearm. The bullet to the right arm was concluded to have an “indeterminate trajectory” and the bullet to the right forearm entered through the back (p. 9). All but one of the gunshot wounds were found to be inflicted from a distance. The bullet that entered through the back of the forearm can be explained by Brown swinging his arm in the act of running towards Officer Wilson. This evidence supports Wilson’s statement that he fired at Brown not at close range, but while he was charging at him from a distance. It further shows that it was impossible that Michael Brown was shot in the back as some had previously