Why Police Officers Should Wear Body Cameras
Many have raised eyebrows about the long-running argument over equipping police officers with cameras. Many people believe it will be beneficial to everyone. This debate is not without its flaws, just like other controversial issues. Remember 2014 when a young African American, Michael Brown, who was unarmed, was killed by a cop. Many people have taken a stance against police officers, who think they are above the laws. As a result of the increase in shootings of civilians who were not armed and brutality by police, countless people have called for police departments to provide body cameras to their officers. Body cameras will they solve the problems that we face?
Research shows that excessive police force has plummeted since President Barack Obama’s funding bill of $75 million was proposed in 2014. This funding will be used to equip local and state law enforcement departments with body cameras. Researchers have found that individuals and police officers behave more responsibly when they realize their actions will be recorded. The research shows that when people are aware of being observed, they adopt a more submissive behavior. Police can benefit from body cameras as they can help protect them against false allegations of misconduct. Police body cameras are also a great way to provide real-time evidence that could exonerate a police officer, or a suspect, of false accusations. The video footage was used to save an officer’s life in Texas. Body cameras have also been used to remove corrupt and bad cops. Body cameras have also been used in San Diego to help clear corrupt cops.
Many police officers would say that body cameras are not required because they cost too much and are unreliable. Body cameras are expensive for police offices to purchase. They must also budget for additional costs, such as the cameras and equipment as well for storing the videos, staffing, preparing reports, etc. Preparing “the Bakersfield Police Department” with 200 officers will cost around $440,000 the first year. This is followed by $240,000 each subsequent year. A person would also say that a body camera law is a violation of their privacy. Video of people is not acceptable. A lot of people would also say that the officers are able to turn off or disable the body cameras, or even blame the malfunction on the device itself, in order not to be implicated by themselves. As part of their work, police officers must interact with the civilians at their weakest moments. You might feel relieved to know that anyone can demand video footage of a crime committed in your own home. You could also be filmed if you are the victim of an offense. Will officers be able use their discretion in threatening or vulnerable situations? It could also affect the way officers establish relationships with local communities. There are many unanswered questions.
In the debate, I think police officers should have to wear bodycams. It is true that there have been many incidents in which a bodycamera would provide evidence. Body camera footage can provide first-hand accounts of events. Using body cameras can help deescalate violent encounters with civilians. In addition, video evidence can be used to speed up the court process, resulting in a reduction of court costs. The proportion is also balanced in my opinion. Consider this example: body-worn cameras can not only be used to catch criminals and suspects, but they can also be used to fire or even remove dirty cops. This is not a one-sided thing that only benefits cops. It can be used in either direction. In some cases, police officers may abuse their authority or use excessive force. Body cameras are a great deterrent for police officers and public encounters.
