The debatable topic of police body cameras has an extensive history to it. There has been a demand for more police surveillance since the civil rights movement, but within the past six years the demand for the new technology of body cameras has grown far greater than before. A popular example of this is the death of Walter Scott by police officer Michael Slager. Slager said in his report that he had to shoot Scott because Scott had obtained his taser and was a danger to him, however a bystander released footage showing that Slager put his taser near Scott after he and Scott had a struggle, then unnecessarily shot Scott in the back eight times ("Police Body Cameras"). This example suggests that without any film of this scenario obtained by
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.
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.
Police Brutality is a big issue in America. There has been many cases in which the Police Officer is put into question. Body Cameras have already been used in other states and it has proven that it reduces Police Brutality. On October 18, Corey Jones a musician was killed by a Palm Beach Garden’s Officer. Corey Jones was having trouble with his car so, he called his brother to come pick him up. The Police Officer didn’t have a body camera nor a police dashboard camera in his vehicle. He was was wearing a baseball cap, T-shirt, and jeans. He was driving in an unmarked 15-passenger van. There were no witnesses at the scene just the Police Officer and Corey Jones.The use of body cameras may invade the public or police privacy, but it helps more in cases because it provides evidence, reveals officers’ behavior, and protects the public as well as officers.
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.
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
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
Walter Scott’s shooting by a police officer in April 2015 defines the racism in the American policing from a new perspective. In the incident, 33-year-old American police officer Michael Slager shot Walter Scott eight times in the back when Scott tried to run away from him. Slager had asked Scott to pull over because of some issues in the taillight of the car. Slager claimed before the court that he had to take this action because Scott had taken away his taser, and he was afraid that Scott might be a threat to his own life. However, later evidence from Feidin Santana, a passerby, revealed to the media a video that Santana had shot at the time of this incident. In this video, it was evident that Slager and Scott indulged in a little brawl before Scott tried to run away. Slager had his taser intact because the video clarifies that while tackling the dead body of Scott, Slager was seen handling his taser - it was not in the victim 's hands. Slager was dismissed with immediate effect from his post, and he was accused of murder (Infobase). The injustice of Walter Scott 's death clearly demonstrates that it is crucial for all police officers to wear body cameras. Police officers in body cameras will prevent violence between officers and civilians, hold officers accountable for inappropriate behavior, and serve as on-hand evidence for future judicial actions.
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.
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).
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
On the evening of February 26, 2012, in Sanford, Florida, a neighborhood watch coordinator, George Zimmerman fatally shot unarmed 17-year-old teenager named Trayvon Martin. Some say Zimmerman acted rightfully in self-defense while others believe he acted wrongfully by racially profiling Martin during the incident. Similarly, on August 9, 2015, an 18-year-old teenager named Michael Brown was fatally shot to death by police officer, Darren Wilson in Ferguson, Missouri. Some witnesses believe that Brown was unarmed during this unfortunate incident and that he was holding his hands up in order to surrender to Wilson. Unfortunately, society may never know what actually happened since witnesses, proof, and evidence were very limited during that time of the events. Incidents like these may never have to happen again if law enforcement wore body cameras during their shifts. Body-worn cameras are a video recorder mainly used by police and law enforcement to record interactions with the public, evidence at crime scenes while still improving officer and citizen accountability. Due to the recent rise in news following innocent people being unjustly shot by law enforcement, the idea of wearing body cameras are starting to look like a great idea. Body worn cameras seem like a great asset to utilize for every police officer out there however there are some faults to it as well like some security, ethical, and social issues.
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
On August 9, 2014 in Ferguson, Missouri, an 18 year old boy named Michael Brown was fatally shot by police officer, Darren Wilson. The circumstances of the shooting resulted in protests and a vigorous debate between the relationship between law enforcement and civilians. Many people have been demanding body cameras for police in hopes of minimizing the number of incidences of police brutality around the U.S. The footage may support or implicate officers, like Wilson, whose actions are in question. In addition, people behave better when they know they are under surveillance and there are various officers who already use them for documentation purposes. Questions of costs arise when considering the option of body cameras but it is a small hurdle to jump that will result in many benefits.
One of the biggest concerning social issues in our country has been the use of force and civilian interactions with the law enforcement. Incidents with Eric Garner and Michael Brown that could have been avoided have left people wondering if the use of force was necessary. Many have begun to question police officers for their actions and believe that the implementation of body cameras on an officer’s uniform is crucial for the safety of people. Although some may argue that body-worn cameras reduce the number of incidents and that footage recovered can serve as evidence, the truth of the matter is body cameras violate the privacy of people, there is a broad selection of cameras with different capabilities, and issues with camera data can be problematic.