Red Light Cameras: A Direction Violation of our Constitutional Rights, or a Necessary Safety Measure?

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

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.

2 The issue of Red Light Cameras has been an ongoing issue for a long time now. It has gotten to the point where our state government has jumped in. Individuals in our community have worked hard to ban the red light cameras; while the government has done the opposite. In the article, “Effort to ban red light cameras stopped in Texas House” states that effort to ban red light cameras in Texas died after a House lawmaker called a point of order- which is a procedural tactic used to kill bills. While on the other hand Rep. Joe Pickett, believes Texas should have the ability to determine whether each city should keep the red light camera program. Only four months into 2017 many bills have been filed to limit or disallow the use of red light cameras in many cities. Individuals of communities have tried to compromise with higher ups with the exemptions of tollways and police officers only using cameras. Many people in cities are tired of going to war with a camera and losing. Many cities such like Dallas are not moving in the direction of eliminating Red Light Cameras, majority of the community support the thought of having red light cameras at important congested intersections. 3 According to the article, “ Hate red-light cameras? Texas Lawmakers will try to ban them – again”, supports of red light cameras said “ the devices make the streets safer” , it was also stated that statistics show that since red light cameras have been present the number of child deaths have decreased. If the problem is people constantly running red lights then maybe state government should make it a priority to enforce that there is more police patrol around. Instead of state government expressing why they believe we should not ban red light cameras, they do not and allow local citizens to feel the need to argue or debate with state government. The biggest problem state government

Stop and Frisk laws have been a statistically proven means of crime prevention across America as a whole. Still, ever since their creation, Stop and Frisk laws have been a major source of controversy in America. The constitutionality of Stop and Frisk laws was confirmed in the 1968 case of Terry vs Ohio and since then, crime levels across America have been at historic lows. Yet, the 2013 verdict of the class action lawsuit, Floyd v. City of New York has ruled otherwise. The court found the NYPD of violating both the fourth and fourteenth amendment mostly on the grounds of racial profiling. The court has as a result put in place a serious of complex changes to these laws making the job as a police officer even more dangerous than it already was. The topic of “racial profiling” is the fuel to the majority of the arguments opposing Stop and frisk. However, the subject of racial profiling is vastly misconstrued and deeply misunderstood. Stop and Frisk laws have flaws and are not perfect by any means, nevertheless they are an imperative source of preventing crime in America that needs to continue.

Although this study’s emphasis is on racial profiling in traffic stops, it is but one of many avenues of legal and or extralegal social control that have been shown historical bias towards blacks and racial minorities in the U.S.

In an analysis on racial profiling, criminologist Shaun Gabbidon discusses the racist practices of the Maryland State Police and how the department was able to reduce profiling by changing its policies. He explains, “The policy targeted Black drivers who were felt to provide ‘the biggest bang for their buck’. As a result of the suit, in 1993, the Maryland State Police was required to track its traffic stops” (Gabbidon). This requirement produced shocking data which revealed that officers could determine the race of drivers just by their vehicles or driving patterns and that officers refrained from pulling over many white traffic law violators who should have been stopped. For instance, it is possible for police officers to distinguish what neighborhood a driver is from based on the parking permit stickers affixed to their cars. If someone is from a predominantly minority neighborhood, then it is clearly more likely that they belong to a minority race. Additionally, in regards to driving patterns, they found that it is more likely for a Black person to not wear their seatbelt than a White person and it is more likely for a White person to speed than a Black person. As a result, to pull over more Black drivers, there may be greater emphasis put on pulling over drivers who are not

With the increasing emergence of traffic cameras around the nation, there has emerged a debate about whether the cameras are effectively functioning to keep drivers safe or whether they are just another source of revenue for cites. Facts have proven that the purpose for the traffic cameras is simply generating more money for the cities. The estimated amount of money that the city of Denver will be making in 2011 from these cameras (Kaminsky)—excluding the ones recently put up—a grand estimation total of seven million dollars… “According to the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety more than 550 communities in the United States use red light cameras.” (Urie) Research shows how the cameras are not improving safety for drivers, and for

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.

It’s only fair that body cameras are used in every situation involving the police, given that, at any moment, the proceedings could turn criminal, requiring the use of immutable evidence. Similarly, some may argue that it is fiscally irresponsible for police departments to store the footage, due to the cost of the cameras themselves and the video storage. For example, the New Orleans Police Department is currently planning on spending $1.2 million on body cameras and data storage (Kotowski). However, many other police departments debating the use of body cameras are convinced that the benefits completely outweigh the costs. Commander Noah Johnson of the Tempe Police Department believes that “you can’t put a price on developing a better relationship with your community…”

I think red light cameras are a good thing because it catches a person running a red light when a cop is not around. So how it works according to (www.police.qld.gov.au) the camera takes a picture of the license plate when the car passes over the stop line when the light has changed to red and emails it to the person who owns the car. Just because there a no cops around doesn’t mean you should speed through an intersection when the light turns red. Not only is it dangerous to you and your passengers it is also hazardous to everyone else on the road. The cameras not only work during the day but also at night. According to (www.ghsa.org) 21 states including the U.S. Virgin Islands and the District of Columbia use red light cameras. 19 states

You succinctly described the impact dashboard cameras have on after action reviews and training. As you note, cameras mounted on police vehicles can help to make police even more effective at their jobs and improve their safety. There is no denying both body cameras and dashboard cameras provide both police and citizen accountability. The cameras are an unblinking eye on a given situation with only a slight biased, as they only record what is in their line of sight. It is here where public unrest may develop in the notion that not every stop captured on cameras will tell the whole story. As you note, cameras have been used to exonerate and convict citizens and police officers. “Therefore take up the whole armor of God, that you may be able

For law enforcement cameras are extremely important! The cameras will show the truth and nothing but the truth! It will also show what actually happened, like if the cop got an accident on film then they can figure out what happened. With body cameras, it can help decide what a person is convicted of because you get to see what the cop sees. Also, if the cops didn't have cameras and microphones, then how can you tell that the person convicted of something is actually telling the truth? So how is showing and telling the truth invading someone's privacy?

In February 2012, St. Louis Circuit Court Judge Mark Neill officially declared the red light camera ordinance in the city of St. Louis void. On 9 August 2012, the Cary, North Carolina town council voted to end their program. New Jersey had to renew the Red Light law by the state legislature in early 2015 and did not do this, making the use of red light cameras illegal in the state

Red light cameras are world wide not just in the United States, places like Australia, Canada, United Kingdom, New Zealand, and Singapore has them as well. Red light cameras have been used since the 1960’s, introduced by Gatso in the Netherlands. Gatso

Law enforcement cameras are an invasion to privacy. They make people insecure in their persons, they are able to be hacked, or abused. They also could be unconstitutional due to investigators using them to spy on people who are not always guilty. Here is why I think we should get rid of them.