The Article On Police Body Cams

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 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.

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

Today, law enforcement agencies, or more specifically police officers, are under constant scrutiny from their peers as well as outside sources. Many of these problems arise from how the police treat and deal with these citizens. There is however a solution to these problems, which can not only improve officer safety, but can also protect anyone else that the officer encounters. The solution to this problem is officer mounted camera systems, or better known as body cameras. These body cameras capture almost everything an officer see’s as well as hears. This allows for protection against a police officer as well as protection for a citizen who was scrutinized for something he or she might have done or not. Body cameras are ever increasing in policing and have many benefit’s as well as draw backs.

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

Rialto, California is an example of a city with positive results from the use of body-cameras. In Rialto, police began wearing body-cameras a little less than three years ago. As a result of officers wearing body-cameras, citizens’ complaints against police officers dropped 88 percent and use of force by police officers dropped 60 percent from the previous 12 month period when body-cameras were not in use. Rialto’s police chief said, “When you put a camera on a police officer, they tend to behave a little better, follow the rules a little better. And if the citizen knows the officer is wearing a camera, chances are the citizen will behave a little better” (Lovett).

What is a body worn video? A body worn video, also known as body camera is a video recording system that is typically utilized by law enforcement to record their interactions with the public or gather video evidence at crime scenes, and have been known to increase both officer and citizen accountability. The idea is that a video camera mounted on an officer 's vest or uniform would provide an accurate, objective account of every encounter with a civilian. Ideally, the camera would discourage police misconduct while protecting officers against unfounded civil complaints of brutality or corruption. While the use of body cameras may seem to invade the privacy of officers and the public, officers should wear body cameras because playing body cameras could improve, accountability, behavior, use of force, evidence, and processing and editing.

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.

This moving article written by Shaun King in January 2016, details the appalling criminal justice system in America and how many people don’t know or understand the true extent of the racism in the police force. I was moved by this article and it put into perspective statistics I wasn’t aware of (“every single day in the United States, three people are killed by police before they ever get to a jail and at least eight die in jail…”). This article uses evidence (dates, names, etc.), rhetorical questions (What are we supposed to do when…...?) and bias (only showing one side of the story) to position the reader to believe this article, making it very persuasive.

Imagine if every police officer in the United States had to be required to wear body cameras. The questioning between officer Darren Wilson and Mike Brown could have been solved if a body camera could have captured the incident. This can increase the better outcomes of police officers and their job. People will be able to see everything that happens through the camera 's lens. How do you feel about body cameras being worn? Even though some people believe police officers should not have to wear body cameras, I believe that police officers should be required to wear body cams at all times on duty because it creates more evidence in cases, enforces officers to abide by the laws,and builds trust with the community.

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

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

Evidence: It is valuable for police to have recordings of witness and victim statements, but recording might make people reluctant to talk. If there are policies that restrict recording of First Amendment activity, such as protests and religious meetings, then what makes it right for police officers to record an incident?

Ariel, B., Farrar, W., & Sutherland, A. (2015). The Effect of Police Body-Worn Cameras on Use of Force and Citizens' Complaints Against the Police: A Randomized Controlled Trial. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 31(3), 509-535.