Everyone is entitled to privacy, especially when it comes to law enforcement. To make the public, and the officers protecting them, feel protected the implementation of body-worn-cameras in the police force is occurring. Sometimes, this equipment malfunctions and ends up doing more harm than the good it promised. When this occurs, a reevaluation of how the cameras are being used should happen to make sure improvements occur. As shown by the recent privacy violations to the Round Lake Police Department regarding body-worn cameras, officers need to become more familiar with the technology they are using and stricter policies about their usage are necessary.
Recently, issues concerning officer privacy have arisen due to the misuse of
…show more content…
Immediately after discovering the recordings, Izzo informed his commander of the problem which caused a department-wide suspension of body camera use. These recordings violate the department’s policy to not record during private times of the officers (McCoppin). One officer on the force claims to have seen Burch remove the video in question. This disregards the state law put into place that requires the recordings to be saved no less than ninety days. Consequently, out of the thirteen officers within the department, ten are suing over the unauthorized video recordings and requesting more than $100,000 each in damages due to the violation of their privacy. Initial training for camera use involves the supplier, WatchGuard, to show administrators, such as Burch, how to use a feature that deactivates continuous filming with the cameras. Administrators are then in charge of showing officers how this works. If this feature is not disabled, the camera will not stop filming (McCoppin). All these issues together have caused conflict with the Round Lake Park Police Department and raised questions concerning the use of body-worn cameras.
Concerning legal problems, body camera issues over their use and policies are still unclear. Incidents of police brutality, like those that occurred in Ferguson, MO, have increased the demand for body-worn cameras in
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.
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
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.
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.
A man walks down a road, and is confronted by a police officer wearing a body worn camera. The man and the officer exchange words, and soon after a physical altercation ensues. According to the man’s statement, the officer was out of line, assaulted him, and his privacy was violated by the use of the camera. The officer’s statement, however, said that he was trying to question the man about being intoxicated and the usage of vulgar language, when the subject then began threatening him and ultimately began the attack on him; the officer continued to state he used the minimum amount of force necessary to minimize the threat. The man was ultimately convicted by the video evidence. Police officers feel that wearing body worn cameras will provide all the necessary evidence in any given situation, and protect them from public scrutiny, while the public believes that their privacy is being violated, and at too high of a financial cost. Police officers and public citizens must each concede to find the truth.
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
Historically speaking, authorities of the law were never in a position where their professional duties and their character as a public servant of the law were demeaned in a way that there needs to be constant surveillance of them and the people whom they come into contact with. There was never a need of documenting every encounter you had with a civilian before. In this day in age, things have certainly changed, and the past has always been something society likes to change and make better even if it raises concerns. Due to all the violent police stories that has surfaced in the past decade, the idea of having police officers wear video cameras as a part of their uniform while on duty has resulted in a radically divergent account of society’s future. The law may uphold cops to wear cameras while working, but is this really the best decision? This topic is very controversial and may create issues with cops and the civilians they try and protect in the future.
There is an argument that police officers are getting out of hand with handling arrest. The most recent solution to the problem is having every policeman have a body camera, in order to make the police officer feel as if their every movement is being watched. Recently, there has been discussion if police officers using body cameras is a Liberty Issues and that it gives the police force way too much unchecked power. Some citizens believe that body cameras leads into privacy issues (4th Amendment), violation of civil rights (1st Amendment), and may give too much power to the government (Limited Government via James Madison).
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).
Some will say that body cameras are invading their privacy and they are causing bigger issues, but the statistics show a drop in complaints over the past few years because body cameras are making a big improvement in today’s world. Body-worn cameras are going to continue to be used by police officer’s and they are going to continue to make big improvements. All people who are being recorded should feel safe and comfortable while being on camera and that’s what the police are aiming for. As of right now in the year 2017, body cameras are going to remain on police officer’s and resolve all the issues that are
Marfin stated the different issues presented for the department, such as the individual privacy and cost as she discussed UTPD’s process of implementing this technology. She emphasized this by stating “UTPD began testing different versions of body cameras two years ago, but the implementation of the technology took many years to complete” (par.9). Although the time and cost of the body-cameras brought issues to the department the author emphasizes that UTPD’s main goal is to build trust between the community and the police officers to ensure the community’s safety. Therefore, they made sure to invest in their safety by enforcing body cameras on the officers as explained in the article, ““This is something we believe is important to the UT community and to UTPD,” UTPD Chief David Carter said. “This is something to ensure that people have confidence and trust when it comes to our department.”” (par. 3). Throughout the article the cost of the cameras is highlighted informing how the technology works and what exactly it does to preserve the safety in the community. She emphasizes this statement by saying
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
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
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.