Police body cameras could potentially eliminate police brutality, create a nation-wide sense of comfort and security, and create self-promotion opportunity for police officers. But, are these expectations of safeguarding realistic? Storing and analyzing the footage, alone, is an obstacle that creates issue with the body cameras, but on top of that, there are privacy policy conflictions, both for the police officers and civilians, and, as proven in the past, footage of police brutality may not bring justice to victims and their families (“Police Body Cameras”). Although the idea of having everything filmed seems like an easy solution to police superiority, implementing the cameras is not as simple as publically assumed. According to the article
…show more content…
Although the cameras offer footage to defend the victim (or police officer) in a brutality case, when are the cameras unnecessary and an invasion of privacy? If public access is permitted, what are the boundaries to protect the personal information of ones being recorded? “Without the right safeguards, there is a real risk that these new devices could become instruments of injustice” (Mendoza). According to the article “Police Body Cameras,” if anyone can access the footage, and the footage contains addresses, family life, or other sorts of private information of ones recorded, it could potentially put them in danger; this could cause victims to avoid police officer interaction, which leads to less crimes stopped. If public access is not permitted to the body camera footage, the footage is untrustworthy; “limiting public and media access to these videos undermines the very purpose of body cameras” (“Police Body Cameras”). Without access, the public could easily assume distortion and manipulation by the police and court systems. According to the article “Police Body Cameras Surfacing in Schools,” students and parents are concerned that, if police cameras are introduced into schools, how will the film be filtered? Students believe their self-images may be at risk if they are recorded in any manner and parents are merely discomforted by the idea of their child being recorded regularly. How far do body cameras need to …show more content…
Two tragedies specifically demonstrate scenarios where cops have gotten away with brutality, even when footage was available: Eric Garner and Rodney King’s deaths (“Police Body Cameras”). Police officers will always be favored “as long as they can convince juries they feared for their own or the public 's safety,” which has been proven numerous times to be simple (“Police Body Cameras”). The court systems favor the men and women “protecting” our country’s societies. Police investigations are done privately by detectives, who collect information and witnesses, and these investigations determine whether or not the police officer should be prosecuted; it is possible that these detectives input bias into the investigations (Katz 238). Although this is understandable and in some ways commendable, this favoritism creates an unfair standing for victims of brutality and will most likely never be
Although the cameras offer footage to defend the victim (or police officer) in a brutality case, when are the cameras unnecessary and an invasion of privacy? If public access is permitted, what are the boundaries to protect the personal information of ones being recorded? “Without the right safeguards, there is a real risk that these new devices could become instruments of injustice” (Mendoza). According to the article “Police Body Cameras,” if anyone can access the footage, and the footage contains addresses, family life, or other sorts of private information of ones recorded, it could potentially put them in danger; this could cause victims to avoid police officer interaction, which leads to less crimes stopped. If public access is not permitted to the body camera footage, the footage is untrustworthy; “limiting public and media access to these videos undermines the very purpose of body cameras” (“Police Body Cameras”). Without access, the public could easily assume distortion and manipulation by the police and court systems. According to the article “Police Body Cameras Surfacing in Schools,” students and parents are concerned that, if police cameras are introduced into schools, how will the film be filtered? Students believe their self-images may be at risk if they are recorded in any manner and parents are merely discomforted by the idea of their child being recorded regularly. How far do body cameras need to …show more content…
Two tragedies specifically demonstrate scenarios where cops have gotten away with brutality, even when footage was available: Eric Garner and Rodney King’s deaths (“Police Body Cameras”). Police officers will always be favored “as long as they can convince juries they feared for their own or the public 's safety,” which has been proven numerous times to be simple (“Police Body Cameras”). The court systems favor the men and women “protecting” our country’s societies. Police investigations are done privately by detectives, who collect information and witnesses, and these investigations determine whether or not the police officer should be prosecuted; it is possible that these detectives input bias into the investigations (Katz 238). Although this is understandable and in some ways commendable, this favoritism creates an unfair standing for victims of brutality and will most likely never be