Police Officers should Wear Body Cameras
Should people be held accountable? Of course they should! Let’s start with the Police.
It is estimated “As of 2013 a survey of nearly 500 police departments nationwide utilize body worn cameras, 88 percent of Americans supported the use of body-worn cameras” (Pearce, Matt).
Historically, A police worn camera is a small body camera that police officers wear on their uniform, sunglasses or even their helmet. The body camera is used to capture the officers point of view of the victims activity and also capture audio of the prosecutor’s days work, most have battery to last about 2-4 hours and others up to 12 hours the general range of cost for police body cameras is $200-1,000. A little bit on why police officers should wear body cameras. In our society today research shows that over 6,000 police departments and 30 states including the district of columbia wear body cameras in the united states “The Departments Of Justice” mandated that all departments should wear body cameras. Also as research shows that As Dr Barak Ariel says “Body worn camera has the potential to improve police legitimacy and enhance democracy, not least by calming situations on the front line of policing to prevent the pain and damage caused by unnecessary escalations of volatile situations” ( Telegraph, Reporter). As a police officer the excessive aggressiveness needs to stop and the brutality and the discrimination needs to end and he only way that can happen is with help from the Police Body Cameras.
Body cameras can provide protection as well as evidence for police officers, victims and accused individuals. The act of police wearing body cameras provide protection for police officers as stated…”decisions by officers in intense situations can be evaluated and reviewed” (Springer, U.S). This shows that if a police officer was being rude or being unfair or discriminating against the victim there is proven evidence of the police behaving inappropriately and should be gave some type of consequence or penalty as proven in the audio or video recording on the body camera as most people think there is a discrimination against the african american descent also known as “The Color Of Justice”. As Springer says… “recorded video evidence refutes false claim against officers”( Springer, U.S) This shows that police wearing body cameras provide protection because if the victim is saying that they did not do anything wrong the police officer has nothing to worry about because everything is shown on the camera which also can provide evidence of the incident. Another way shown that body cameras provide protection. Lastly as stated “…The technology stops officers abusing their positions and using excessive force when carrying out arrests”
( Telegraph, Reporter). This also shows protection towards the citizen because most officers tend to show more aggressiveness towards the victims and act like they don’t do anything wrong and most of the time the victims is innocent
Another reason why body cameras provide protection and also evidence for victims is because when a person is being detained they do not have the right to talk or giving there reasoning on the situation and most of the time police officers don’t have evidence of the victims wrong doings as stated “better prosecution; higher conviction rates and fewer trials and more pleads”( Swanson, Ana) This shows that this provides protection because there are fewer trials and more pleads which means there is evidence that the victim has done nothing wrong and the prosecutor must prove that the defendant committed the offense. Another supporting fact “eliminates victims from having to remember months later in a courtroom and could also prevent lies” (Swanson, Ana). This shows that body worn cameras provide protection as well as evidence because as it says in the text it can prevent lies which means if the defendant and the prosecutor are in a courtroom and there is suspicious activity there is evidence from a video recording of which the police officer has of the incident that the defendant committed the crime.
Although many disregard this and could see a negative outlook on police wearing body cameras many people think body cameras are useless because police officers are still going to act how they want. As a matter of fact, “body cameras…shows if officers reasoning was justified for arresting accused individual” ( Chimel v. California). Generally speaking this shows that if the prosecutor was going to disobey law such as not having a valid reasoning on why they are pulling you over known as “police misconduct” or any other crimes which basically is “violating the rights of citizens” there will be shown proven evidence from the body cameras which also can potentially result in the officer being forced to resign. “clears documentation of encounter with suspect” (Chimel v. California). Also if body cameras are useless why were the police force rates on victims two times higher? As stated ” before their introduction of body cameras for police the use-of-force was two-and-a-half times higher” ( Telegraph, Reporter) . Police officers are getting out of hand the officers need to work on being more understanding with the public and not take their job so seriously in little situations although we know that the officers are worrying about their safety and never know what the victims intentions are the police should be more understanding and take time out and evaluate the situation and give the victim time to speak instead of going to pull out there weapons and forcing them on the victim.