Why Police Officers Should Wear Body Cameras

The long hauling debate whether to equip police officers with body cameras or not has raised many of eyebrows. Many would believe that it will help everyone’s cause. Not necessarily, like many other controversial topics this debate also has its drawback. Let’s rewind back to 2014 when an unarmed African American teen, Michael Brown, was shot and killed by a police officer. After Michael Browns tragic death many people made a stand against police officers who believe they are above the law. In addition, as there was a spike of shootings of unarmed civilians and police brutality countless people urge for all police department to issue body cameras to officers. Will body cameras be the answer to the problems at hand?

Since 2014, President Barack Obama proposed a funding bill for $75 million in funding for local and state police departments to provide body cameras for their officers, research has shown a dramatic low of excessive police force and complaints against officers. Studies have shown police officers and individuals conduct themselves in a better way when they are aware of their actions being recorded. “Accumulated evidence further suggests that individuals who are aware that they being-observed often embrace submissive or commonly-accepted behavior, enforcing entity.” Furthermore, a portion of the perceived benefits of issuing police body cameras are improved transparency, holding those accountable for abusing power, better policing and interactions with citizens. Body cameras can also be a great advantage for policing as it can protect police from false accusations of misconduct. Moreover, police body cameras can provide evidence of real time incidents that can exonerate, police officer or suspects of false allegations. For example, “In Texas, a cop was terminated and accused of homicide after body-worn camera video surfaced which refuted his underlying articulation in the shooting of an unarmed youth.” In this case video footage saved an officer from getting convicted. Another case, “In Baltimore, MD, a cop was suspended, and two partners put on leave in the wake of being gotten on their body-worn cameras planting counterfeit proof at a wrongdoing scene.” On the other hand, body cameras can also put away bad and corrupt cops. Moreover, “In San Diego, CA, the utilization of body cameras gave the fundamental proof to absolve cops dishonestly blamed for wrongdoing – the quantity of extreme unfortunate behavior claims regarded false expanded 2.4%, and the quantity of officers excused for less serious charges identified with lead, graciousness, technique, and administration expanded 6.5%.”

Many would argue police officers shouldn’t be required to wear body cameras as they are too expensive and unreliable. Furthermore, providing police offices with body cameras is incredibly costly as departments not only need to budget for the cameras itself as well as for equipment, preparing information, storerooms, additional staff to deal with the video information, and support costs. For example, to prepare “the Bakersfield Police Department, a total of 200 officers, would cost an expected $440,000 in the primary year, and $240,000 in resulting years. Another downside individual would say to enforcing body cameras is the invasion of privacy. People are not okay with video of them going public. In Addition, many would argue the officers can turn off the body camera or blame it on a malfunction to protect themselves from self-incrimination in certain incidents. The idea of police work has officers interacting with civilians amid their most powerless minutes. For instance, okay feel good realizing anybody could demand to see video of an occurrence that happened inside your home? Or on the other hand film of you on the off chance that you've been the casualty of a wrongdoing? Will officers have the discretion to kill the camera in vulnerable or possibly threatening conditions? Or how officers build relationships with communities every day be jeopardized due to officers recording their encounters. Many questions left to be answered.

My stance on the whole debate is police officers should be required to wear body cameras. As there are many incidents where If a police officer was wearing a body camera there would be evidence of what actually happened. The footage from body camera can show first hand scenes. It can also deescalate high intense encounters between officers and civilians. Furthermore, video footage can speed up court proceedings by providing evidence, which can lead to reduction in court expense. I also strongly believe the proportion Is well balanced. For Instance, look at it this way not only can body worn cameras put away suspects and criminals however it can also put away or at least fire dirty cops. It’s not only one sided as it only helps cops it can go either way. For instance, police officer abusing their power or even excessive force to an extent. Not to mention the fact, the amount of deterrence body cameras brings for officers and encounters with the public.