In discussions of passing the Michael brown Jr law which equips police officers to wear a body camera, one controversial issue has been that most police brutalities are not caught on tape or no witness sees what exactly happened, and who started what. The source argues that some cases of police brutalities that are caught on tape police does nothing to handle the case. My own view is that police officers should be equipped with body cameras so in case of police brutality cases they can know exactly what happened that day so there will be no questions asked for the police officers.
According to article “Pass the Michael Brown, Jr. Law to begin equipping police with body cameras” that the case of Michael Brown Jr in Ferguson where Officer Darren
…show more content…
Critics claim that watching the video will alter the officers ' memory of the incident. But this isn 't necessarily a bad thing. Human memory is a very complex and can change every time. Human memory is also susceptible to a host of biases. Like the rest of us, police officers are bound to remember events in ways that protect their sense of self and justify their actions. Some may worry that body cameras on police officers are not necessary a great idea, some may even say it’s against their privacy. According to “Cameras on Cops a Privacy Question “states that Governments and police departments argue that while the cameras provide transparency and accountability, they may also compromise a citizen 's right to privacy and the integrity of some investigations which will inevitably rely on the video in a …show more content…
In conclusion on passing the Michael Brown Jr law to equip police officers with body cameras that are useful evidence for a trial for a case of police brutality. Its only of time for a police officer can prove that it was necessary to use lethal force by using a body camera could clear their name. The use of body cameras are also useful for the victims’ families so when they play the recording’s at the trial they can finally find out if the officer had every right to use lethal force to stop the whole situation or using lethal force was not necessary. Passing the law to equip the law could help justice for victims of police brutality as well heling the officers to prove they used lethal force was
Should officers always have a recording of everything they do? Should people be able to choose if an officer can record inside their home? There are two sides to everything, and both have their own points. There are both civilians and police who say that body cameras should be allowed, enforced and encouraged.
According to Body Cam Policy paragraph six “Like the rest of us police officers are bound to remember events in ways that justify their actions.” People are people not everybody is going to remember every single event that took place. That is why having a body cam is the only way to gain the truth with no basis. Privacy concerns most say is important but when trying to avoid another Ferguson event mothers and fathers can say without a doubt that privacy is the last thing on anyone’s minds.
If you pay attention to the news, you have probably heard about police brutality. There are almost constant reports of police abusing their power and, consequently, injuring those that they are meant to protect. Police should not be required to wear body cameras while on duty! Why should they be monitored to make sure that they are properly doing their job? Why should they be expected maintain the same standards that they enforce on others?
Body cameras on law enforcement officers can by far be one of the best ways to slow down or even stop law enforcement officer’s misconduct in the field by providing a bird’s eye view of the law enforcement officer’s encounters with the public in the community they have sworn to protect. Body cameras can be a deterrent and possibly make law enforcement officers and the citizens think very hard before acting in an inappropriate manner because they know they are being recorded and these recording can be used as evidence in a court of
Michael Brown, an unarmed black teenager, was shot and killed on August 9, 2014 by Darren Wilson, a white police officer, in Ferguson, Missouri. The shooting prompted protests. When it was announced that Officer Wilson would not be indicted, the announcement set off another wave of protests. Not all police officers are dishonest and abuse their power but It 's obvious that today 's community of people has a suspicion of officers true intentions. The idea of cops and cameras has been around for a while but ever since the fatal shooting of Michael Brown the debate on whether police officers should be required to wear body cameras has been the center of attention.
With technology advancing, we are able to use technology to monitor and examine. As the encounters with officers that may result in violent outbursts, civilians are concerned with police brutality and their rights. Body-worn video video devices as tools can be an insurance for the compliance of the fourth amendment. The sole reason for favor of police body cams are due to the unbiased record of what exactly occurred during an officer 's interaction. With this, testimonies cannot be distorted since there would be a new way to assert evidence.
It’s no secret that everyone holds their own opinion regarding the actions of police officers and other positions of authority within these past years, be it positive or negative. From the shootings of innocent and unarmed civilians to disciplinary action being taken against those that haven’t done anything unlawful, there’s rarely a day when the police force of the United States doesn’t find itself involved in some sort of controversy. No matter what side people find themselves supporting in these instances, be it the police or the civilian, it’s true that both sides can benefit from the use of these police body cameras. Police body cameras hold one main purpose and that’s to deteriorate the ever-present risk of unnecessary aggression on
First, they shouldn’t wear body cameras because it raises high privacy concerns. For example, “Recordings raise high privacy concerns. In some states, anyone can access the video.” (Should Police Wear Body Cameras, pg.23) Also, “Study Reveals Police Officer Are More Likely To Be Assaulted.”
Although officers claim they aren’t as unprofessional as everyone says, many people beg to differ. A lot of people have evidence on how they were mistreated, and how the officers weren’t at all professional. Others have been killed and seriously injured, but the idea is still up in the air after several years. To protect themselves, and others around them, police officers should be forced to wear body cameras while they’re in a case or are talking to a suspect while on duty. Having to wear body cameras would be a positive way to help the authorities to see the truth better than just having to listen to the voice recorder.
Now there is two possible outcomes, there was police misconduct and abuse of power, or the police officer did everything correctly and by the book. Either way there needs to be something that can protect the public from police misconduct and also protect law enforcement from dealing with false accusations that can tarnish their reputation. That is why body worn cameras need to be mandatory for all police officers to wear because it protects the public and the police officers that are wearing them. A couple positive outcomes police officers wearing body cameras is how they can lower police officers misuse of authority and also lower false complaints against officers as well. These are two
Arizona State University 's Center for Violence Prevention and Community Safety on body camera studies, Professor Michael D. White states “Body-worn cameras (BWCs) are perhaps the most debated topic in policing today. Advocates and critics have made numerous claims about the impact and consequences of the technology, but most of these claims are untested. BWCs have the potential to completely transform police-citizen encounters, and in the wake of the shooting of Michael Brown in Ferguson, adoption of the technology is likely to be exponential. This transformation, in the virtual absence of empirical evidence on BWCs, is profoundly troubling.” So although there are many pros and cons to body worn cameras by police officers, the benefits surely outweigh the negatives and more studies are being conducted to prove
Although the conduct of police officers and the validity of the video evidence will be highly scrutinized, body cameras are necessary because police brutality and falsified reports would be diminished. Malcom X stated “If someone puts their hands on you make sure they never put their hands on anybody else again.” In my personal opinion, I feel the police officers would be held in check due to their knowing that they are constantly being monitored. First I will state by explaining why cameras are considered an unbiased resource.
According to the passages it states ¨on August 9, 2014 Michael Brown, an 18 year old resident of Ferguson Missouri, was shot and killed by police officer Darren Wilson, at about noon on that day, Wilson observed brown and a friend on the street, nothing that brown matched the description of a suspect in a convenience store robbery , Wilsonasked the two men to move to the sidewalk. An altercation reportedly ensued between Wilson and Brown untindently Wilson fired upon Brown who was unarmed. Brown did not survive¨ (“Police Body Camera Use In The United States' ' 2). This shows that if there was a body camera this would have gone differently it would've shown what happened.
A major benefit for having body cams is the fact that it will decrease the force used by Police Officers. For the past couple of years there has been many videos of Police Officers using excessive force against innocent victims, especially with African Americans. “The notion has been around for a while. But since August 's fatal shooting of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri -- for which witness accounts varied widely -- it 's gained traction to become part of the national conversation about police conduct.” (Brandon Griggs 1)
Speech Outline Title: Body Cameras I. Introduction Attention-getter: Body cameras were used because of Michael Brown’s death and police misconduct. B. Significance Body cameras may increase police accountability and protect them from accusations. C. Credibility: My interest in this topic is due to the latest deadly encounters with police officers and improving the communities’ safety.