Discussion of Whether Police Officers Should Be Required to Wear Body Cameras

Controversies have arisen regarding the ethicality of police body cameras. The death of Michael Brown by the actions of a police officer sparked a movement that police officers should wear body cameras to record their interactions with the public. The paper will introduce the opposing arguments regarding the use of police body cameras in the field. This paper will also discuss key arguments commonly expressed from both sides. Specifically, many argue that body cameras are an invasion of privacy, abuse of power, and are a high expense for local police departments. The paper will also discuss the safety and awareness that body cameras provide for the public, as well as how they provide great evidence for trials and transparency/accountability toward police officers. 

Implementation of Police Body Cameras 

Police body cameras have been a controversial issue since its invention. The issue of police officers wearing body cameras began when eighteen-year-old Michael Brown was fatally shot and killed. The importance of the use of police body cameras is to present how modern technology affects the justice system. There are many differences of opinion on whether police body cameras should be an official requirement. I am going to argue that police should be required to wear body cameras because it ensures safety and awareness, provides evidence for trials and induces professionalism. 

Police Technology on Security Power and Finances 

Many may argue that police body cameras are a violation of conduct and are too expensive to incorporate into every department in the country. A common concern is that police body cameras are an invasion of privacy on citizens. According to Emmeline Taylor, “body cameras being used to intimidate and also record in high subjective areas and over-policed areas”. Police officers would intentionally go to a high crime area and wait for someone to say something that is against the law (e.g. drug deal). This would mainly pertain to undercover police officers because any person could notice a police officer in uniform and would not talk at all. Most individuals feel like once a camera is in front of them, they must start acting professional or otherwise it can be used against them. Police abusing their power has been a huge topic for the last couple of decades. According to Alex Sutherland, “suggestive of a reliance on force too often and excess of what is often required by police officers”. Police officers use too much force when trying to subdue a suspect, but the excessive force is not needed. If a suspect is cooperating with the police officer and following all the directions that are given, then there should be no need for the police officer to throw them to the ground or even start choking them. Unless the suspect is not cooperating with the police officer and is threatening to hurt the police officer then they have the power to do what they think is right to subdue them. Also, it is known that police officers use too much force on different races. Racism is still, in fact, one of the many issues for police officers because they either do not like the other races or do not see them as a human being just like the police officer. With the advancement of technology, it will be more and more expensive to purchase these newer gadgets for the police departments. Police leaders have other concerns to deal with such as including significant financial costs of deploying cameras and storing recorded data, training requirements and rules that must be followed to assure that body-worn cameras video cannot be accessed by inappropriate reasons (Miller, 2014). As technology increases it will cost the police departments more and more money for not only increasing their technology, but it will cost more to just keep the video in storage. Every police officer must have appropriate reasoning as to why they are willing to access to certain body camera video footage. Tampering with evidence is a criminal offense and it can get the police officer fired. 

Police Technology on the Integrity of the Justice System 

Many can argue that police body cameras are for the safety and awareness for police officers and citizens. It can also be used for evidence trials and maintaining a form of professionalism. According to Jay Stanley, “it can help protect police against false accusations against abuse”. Traffic stops can get violent if the suspect begins to start threatening the officer. As the police officer approaches the vehicle and starts speaking to the individual and then they happen to have a weapon on them and try to hurt the police officer. Having this body camera can show how the individuals face in case they happen to hurt the police officer and flee the scene. It can also show prove that the individual wanted to do harm to the police officer. Also, the body camera can proof that the individual was trying to make false accusations against the police officer, in order to get the police officer in trouble or even fired. This can prevent many police officers’ jobs from being compromised by the public. Having the recorded videos from the body camera can help show the court what exactly happened at the time of the scene. “Show more complete picture of the events that led up to critical moments like a shooting and may reduce visibility of suspects seeing officers turn on a camera and making false statements of having the video used in court” (Bakardjiev, 2015). Footage on the camera can show which people were involved in the shooting, who drew their guns first, who took the first shot, etc. Having these recorded footages would be a great learning opportunity for new upcoming police officers and they can review these videos and learn what to do in dangerous situations and what not to do. Also, if there was a case that happened a decade ago and the recorded footage was in the evidence locker. The police officer can be able to access that certain file and review the video to find any clues or leads for the case that was reopened. 

Transparency and accountability are what every police officer must follow whenever they put on their uniforms. Positive perceptions of body-worn cameras, not for the hope of technology will correct the police bad behavior but will make the public believe police are doing great at their jobs (Crow et al., 2017). Police must maintain a form of professionalism for any circumstance they will face and must use moral ethics in all their situations. People have been having trust issues with the police for a very long time. This is due to the public not having an eye on what police officers do on the regular. Having these body cameras deployed on police officers can show the public how the police officer acts in all circumstances. This is an example of how the people will start to gain more trust towards the police if not already. The people of the society should trust police officers for the hard work and safety they give to the people. Having these body cameras can prove to show that police officers are doing their jobs the upmost correct way. 

Conclusion 

Both sides of the controversy have hit multiple points from improving justice to privacy being violated. This argument is more in favor of police body cameras because it is not about the negative aspects of the technology devices, but it is because they ensure a more integral justice system and a safer community for people.