Surveillance Cameras Should Be Public Places

Body cameras can hold police officers accountable for their actions, both the good and the bad. “Continuously wearing body cameras would hold police accountable for their appropriate, and inappropriate, conduct” (Buam). Also when the citizens make accusations they could pull the video from the camera and see whether the police officer did what they said they did or not. “Video recorded by body cams protect any false accusations, misconduct, or abuse

Police officers should have to be required to wear body cameras to ensure the safety of the citizens and to provide evidence for a court case. Many times the police have gotten away with too many things and commit crimes that go unnoticed It’s time we put a stop to that and we make a change. With the use of body cameras that police force would be more trustworthy, they wouldn’t commit crimes, and they would be able to supply the court with undisputable evidence.

Making sure that every officer has a body camera will cut down on brutality and excessive force, making it safer for the officer and the civilian or suspect. With proper tranning it will create more accountability and cost will also be cut from false accusations creating better edvidence.

There has been a lot of talk lately in the news about police body cameras. Some people agree that body cameras should be used by all police officers, while others disagree and believe that they shouldn’t be used at all. There are some cons to having body cameras but all of the pros outweigh it. Police body cameras should be used in all towns no matter how small because the people will act less aggressive towards officers, they provide truthful evidence that cannot be altered with, and the videos can be stored so if something were to happen, they could be brought up and checked as sort of like a surveillance device.

Now : Surveillance cameras in most buildings (operated by businesses), and in some public streets (operated by police) to prevent crime. Although most of these cameras are operated by private businesses instead

I am always scared that my manager is going to look at the cameras after every shift and she would find a moment in which I was not working to my fullest potential, and would reprimand me. I also feel like surveillance systems can be used as a defense for the worker whenever they believe that or accuse a customer for shoplifting. All the worker would have to do is quickly go back and review the cameras before making their statement. If a customer feels that they are being harassed or discriminated by a worker, all the customer would have to do is make a request for the manager to review the surveillance tapes and then the customer’s claim will either be justified and taken into consideration, or it will be discarded. Cameras mounted on street signs can log cars by license plate number, scan facial characteristics, and take notes of vehicles repeatedly circling or driving above or below the speed limit. About two summers ago, my friends and I took a day-trip down to Washing D.C. I decided to drive down there since my car was the safest and out of all of the other cars, my car had the most gas in it. While we were down there, I accidentally ran a red

The presence of body cameras make the community that they are in a safer and better place. Body cams can make

They are not going to solve the problem. It is one of the steps.” Although I agree with Al Shipp’s point, I cannot accept his overriding assumption that cameras are not going to solve the problem. Cameras don’t necessarily mean no crimes, they are still going to happen, more are just going to get caught. Some people can know they are on camera and still choose to break a law or commit a crime. My view, contrary to what Shipp is arguing is that these cameras are catching people and decreasing the number of crimes. There would not be many crimes caught without these cameras and would not be proof of knowing who committed the crime.

One such petition, has reached that mark. It asks the government to create a law that to require all “state, county, and local police, to wear a camera”, on duty (Mike Brown Law 2014, August 13). The petition argues that forcing officers to record their interactions with the public will deter things like police brutality, racial profiling, and abuse of power. They also argue that it will hold all parties accountable for their actions. Eliminating the he said/she said type of questions that can come out of police investigations. The cameras, which records both video and audio, will benefit citizens and the police force alike. On the citizen side of things, police tend to be less aggressive and more subdued when they know they are being watched. While police also benefit because they can prove that excessive force complaints are inaccurate and false. The benefits of body cameras include but are not limited to, less police related lawsuits, less unnecessary police violence, and more trust in police, these benefits far outweigh the

All of the recent excessive force incidents could have been totally preventable. In cases where no body cameras were used, people were found guilty with no evidence, but instead just the officer’s statement. And clearly in the Michael Brown case, Daren Wilson was not exactly honest. The pain that the victims’ families feel is unimaginable. Having body cameras will stop officers from using excessive force in situations where things can be handled calmly. Body cameras not only help civilians, but police officers as well. Such as shown in the Cleveland Case where the officers’ jobs were saved because of their body camera footage. Society can be pulled back together, and the public can start trusting the law enforcement if body cameras are put to

Disobeying and dishonest police officers are the ones that would have something to worry about because they can lose their jobs and potentially get time in prison for crime they have done that was caught on film. This is a positive as well because it will seek out negative officers. The majority of findings that can happen by requiring police officers to wear body cameras are positives rarely any negatives. It would not only show undeniable evidence but also make more police officers obey the law which has been proven by statics. Kaste states “The people who like body cameras always point to a Study done in Rialto, Calif, in 2012. Researchers found that officers who wore cameras used force less often — incidents dropped by more than 50 percent”(kaste). According to Kaste a study was done on police officers that used body cameras and it was ruled that officers that used body cameras used less force and the amount of incidents that happend dropped by 50 percent. Civilians as well if they know everything is being recorded by them they will think twice before doing anything that could get them into some sort of

Body cameras “can serve to check against the abuse of power by police” (Stanley, “Police Body-Mounted Cameras: With Right Policies in Place, A Win for All”). Also, like previously stated, people are less likely to behave bad if being watched or recorded (Mims). Studies show that “body cameras can help de-escalate tense situations and make both officers and civilians behave better” (Majerol, “Should Police Wear Body Cameras?”). Although other issues like maintaining privacy and making sure officers can’t manipulate recordings need to be balanced, the benefits should outweigh the

Police officers aren’t high schoolers, they have strictly enforced laws about privacy. They aren’t allowed, without authorization of the sheriff, to reveal that recorded information. On the flip side, these could make officers and suspects interact better at traffic stops or calls, because who is going to want recorded proof of them resisting arrest or breaking the law? Not many. Being in a family with a dad and grandpa as police officers, sending them out on calls is the scariest thing I’ve had to do. As a family most of our free time is spent listening to the dispatch radio to see what they have to deal with. Body cameras would help bring a sense of comfort to families with officers, knowing that if something would happen to them that there is evidence of everything that happened. A lot of departments claim that the cost is huge factor, which is understandable for cities like LA or Chicago or even Fort Wayne. A lot of people don’t realize how many officers some cities have, for example, Fort Wayne has approximately 1,800 officers (Garry Hamilton, FWPD Chief). If a camera is $300, that’s $540,000; that’s fourteen brand new 2016 Dodge Chargers (standard issued patrol car). In reality, who wouldn’t go with the new patrol cars? Some cities, like Fort Wayne, still have the basic 2002 Ford Interceptors, which are starting to get outran by

One of the ideas behind the cameras is to help with false accusations made against law enforcement. A problem that police deal with is the accusations that police stick together, therefore it is the perception that law enforcement will not go against another officer’s word. No one is perfect, therefore I am sure that this has happened before, although the idea of the camera is to show the public that no one is above the law. Implementing these cameras will help “by adopting an objective, transparent monitoring system that allows us to defend those unjustly accused and correct or punish those caught abusing their power, we can prove to the public we believe no person should be above the law, particularly those sworn to uphold it” (New York Times, 2013). This will put more pressure on the police officer, but at the same time it will increase their accountability by making them more aware of their surroundings when a situation may occur.

Possibly the technological feature creating the most controversy is surveillance cameras. What is seemingly there for public safety could also inhibit safety by exposing the public’s private life. Every move made under the hawk-like vision of the camera is observed and judged by someone sitting behind the scenes. Women risk being stalked by sexual predators, and assailants have been known to memorize the schedule of a subject in order to time the perfect attack (Stead). “Bad cops” may gain insight to a personal life that allows for the watcher to blackmail the victim. In recent studies it has been proven that an increase in surveillance cameras does not decrease the crime rate; it