Shaylor Christensen

Blankenship
English 2010
Police and Body Cameras

When it comes to police, many agree on their central purpose to serve and protect. This

has been their purpose from the beginning, and our police are held to a high standard. In a world

that has increased its use of technology, police work has a need to adapt with it. One of the ways

this has been accomplished is through the use of small body worn cameras by police officers. 9

out of 10 people support the use of cameras by police in a recent poll (Boone/Schneider). There

are many reasons for their use by our law enforcement, and those reasons will be examined in an

attempt to find out just how important they are to police, and how they affect the relationship

police have with their communities. There has been a rise in news stories and protests concerning

police work, and their interaction with citizens resulting in conflict. Many agree that body

cameras have a chance to improve these relations, but to what extent? There seems to be a

number of disagreements along the way.

One important reason for the implementation of body-worn cameras, is that it protects

both the officer and the citizen. By providing hard evidence of exactly what has taken place

during any situation, complaints about police have declined as well as their use of

force(Williams). If one knew they were being recorded, they may not be as physical with a

subject as they otherwise would be if they weren't on camera. It can be difficult to dispute what

has taken place in a given situation when one can just watch the video and gain a much greater

understandingI think more often than not, body cameras will exonerate law enforcement

officers, -Dr Burke (Bruinius). Police departments have begun to use these cameras in their

work, in order to create an idea of transparency, as well as trust. The Justice Department has

awarded $23 million to the development and expanse of body cams, during which President
Obama believed that the cameras were a marker of trust and transparency.(Bosman) On the

other hand, Eugene ODonnell, a professor at John Jay College and former police officer

encourages people not to work for a police department which requires body cameras. He believes

that if something were to go wrong, then that officer or his family could receive a lot of trouble

from numerous citizens believing you to be a murderer. In the case that someone was killed as

a direct result from interaction with police officers.

Those in support of the use of body cameras believe they can show the human element of

police work. As are all, people police officers are human. When they are called to a scene and

things heat up quickly, it may be difficult to understand their emotions, and what they are seeing,

hearing, and feeling during one particular event. But if they are wearing their camera, that

footage might do what it takes for others understand their perspective. They will do the job to

help others see the human side of police work, by helping you live how they live in the moment.

This is another of many arguments in support of the use of body worn cameras.

On the contrary, a professor of law at the University of South Carolina, talks about how

tools can be limited based on the job they are designed to perform (Nemitz). Through the view of

one body camera, anyone that watches will get exactly one perspective. Cameras can be limited,

both in quality of video and in other aspects of sense including sound(Goldstein). These body

cameras ultimately can be misleading, providing false information. Depending on the angle and

the distance an officer is from the person being contacted, one can get a completely distorted

view of the truth. These distorted views can bring bias into those who watch the video, and those

who could ultimately be making decisions in a courtroom. Depending on how one looks at these

cameras, they can either expose the truth, or completely mislead and change what really

happened.
 Once video has been recorded, policies on whether or not to release that video is another

challenging obstacle for any particular department. Police departments across the country have

released countless videos of tragedies that involve officers, one thing that is happening to combat

that footage, is the release of heroic police footage. In this effort, police are using this important

tool to improve relations between cop and citizen and help our image.(Bosman) Polarization

has become a large issue throughout the country, its easy to form an opinion of anything with

limited information. One aim of police body cameras is to reduce polarization, or to have people

choose sides based on their preexisting ideas and views of the police. Some would argue that

body cameras can help reduce this issue, while others believe that the video will just support

their original polar decision and cause continuing division. (Sommers) Between January and

October 2015, police had shot and killed 760 people, 49 of those were caught on camera and

only 21 were released to the public(Kindy/Tate). These numbers are not reassuring to people

looking for transparency.

When it comes to the release of footage caught by an officers body camera, many argue

that by releasing the video, they are violating certain elements of privacy. One lawmaker

representative George Faught said, The purpose of the cameras is to get a clear understanding of

what happens in a police encounter, not to expose people to pain they or a family member

suffered.(Williams) There are large disagreements on policy, whether or not these videos should

be a part of the public record. The laws and policies vary from state to state, and even from

department to department. Policy has become a point of debate among leaders. The selective

release of videos by police departments could have a bad effect on the overall transparency of the

department therefore causing people not to trust the police. The Obama administration granted

$41 million to help law enforcement in the purchase of body cameras, but gave little direction on
what should be made part of the public record once those cameras have been put to use

(Spivack).

As time has allowed technology to develop, bystanders and random citizens are able to

record with their cell phones. With this ability, bystanders would be able to record an altercation

with police and get that footage into the public allowing everyone to see this angle and drawing

conclusions based on what they see. Police departments want to be able to protect their officers

as well as their image. This is another reason for the use of body cameras on as many officers as

possible especially in the city of Baltimore (Spivack).

One major challenge in the implementation of cameras, is the fact that someone has to

pay for them. According to a magazine article by Rich Williams, each camera can be $300-

$1700(Williams). If every officer is eventually required to wear one of these pricy cameras, that

cost can be immense and place a large burden on all police departments. In addition to the

cameras, the storage of all data captured on them will cost money.

If all police officers were required to wear body cameras, its hard to know when and

where are they supposed to be recording. In this case, many people will disagree on the policy.

The chief of police in Minneapolis said, Many of our officers are using their cameras a lot, and

as they're intended to be used, but there are some officers, quite frankly, that are not using them

nearly enough.(Karnowski) This police chief is making his officers, use their cameras at many

more points during their shift. One of the purposes of the cameras is to record police officers

use of force, not only that but an officers use of deadly force (Lippman). Policies regarding

when an officer should begin recording, and what happens to that particular bit of film, differ

from state to state. There are certain states who will limit what their citizens can see as a public

record. At this point with those policies not universal across the country, things would be
released on a case by case basis. Those that have policies in place, wont share those policies

with the media as to hinder a public debate (Spivack).

By examining and researching the use of body cameras by police, there are many

different points of view that can be seen. In general, all can agree that they want to be able to

trust the police. They want police to respect them, and police officers want to be respected while

still being able to complete their job. The points of conflict start, when solutions are proposed.

Body cameras seem to be the most widely accepted way to increase accountability with police,

and many start to share their points of opinion there. They disagree on how accurate the cameras

can be at taking in a scene. They disagree on whether or not the public can see the videos caught

on camera. They disagree on when or where the cameras should be recording. The biggest

challenge ahead when it comes to police and community relationship, will be overcoming

differences of opinion when it comes to body cameras and their purpose. Each case provides

some insight into the nations progress toward two things, analysts say: bridging the gap between

police and their communities, and developing a culture of policing that merges the publics and

police interests (Mendoza).

Works Cited

Spivack, Miranda S. "Cop Videos: Public Record Or Not?" USA TODAY, 27 Dec. 2016, pp.

A.1, SIRS Issues Researcher, sks-sirs-com.libprox1.slcc.edu.

"Police Departments Issuing Body Cameras Discover Drawbacks." All Things Considered, 22

Jan. 2015. Literature Resource Center, go.galegroup.com/ps/i.do?

 p=LitRC&sw=w&u=slcc&v=2.1&id=GALE

%7CA398995476&it=r&asid=f845e6a72ba77f529c0973373a9aefbb. Accessed 7 Nov.

2017.

Williams, Rich. "Police Body Cams." State legislatures, Dec. 2015, pp. 16-17, SIRS Issues

Researcher, sks-sirs-com.libprox1.slcc.edu.

Karnowski, Steve. "Minneapolis Police Chief Tightens Officer Body Camera Policy." Post-

Bulletin, 26 Jul. 2017, SIRS Issues Researcher, sks-sirs-com.libprox1.slcc.edu.

Bosman, Julie. "Police Embrace use of Body Cameras to show 'the Human Side.." New York

Times, 28 May. 2017, pp. A.24, SIRS Issues Researcher, sks-sirs.com.libprox1.slcc.edu.

Nemitz, Bill. "Body Cameras Capture both Truth and Misperception." Portland Press Herald, 26

Feb. 2017, pp. B.2, SIRS Issues Researcher, sks-sirs-com.libprox1.slcc.edu.

Kindy, Kimberly, and Julie Tate. "Police Withhold Videos Despite Vows of Transparency."

Washington Post, 11 Oct, 2015, pp. A.1, SIRS Issues Researcher, https://sks-sirs-f

com.libprox1.slcc.edu.

Mendoza, Jessica. "US Takes New Look at Police Culture." Christian Science Monitor, 28 Sep.

2016, SIRS Issues Researcher, https://sks-sirs-com.libprox1.slcc.edu.

Boone, Christian, and Craig Schneider. "The Promise and Pitfalls of Cops and Cameras." Atlanta

Journal-Constitution, 24 May. 2015, pp. A.1, SIRS Issues Researcher, https://sks-sirs-a

com.libprox1.slcc.edu.

Bruinius, Harry. "Why Police are Pushing Back on Body Cameras." Christian Science Monitor,

30 Aug. 2016, SIRS Issues Researcher, https://sks-sirs-com.libprox1.slcc.edu.

Goldstein, Joseph. "Despite Trend, New York Police are Slow to Adopt Body Cameras." New

York Times, 04 Oct. 2016, pp. A.18, SIRS Issues Researcher, https://sks-sirs-

com.libprox1.slcc.edu.

Winton, Richard. "Police Settlement Boosts Debate on Access to Videos." Los Angeles Times,

20 May. 2015, pp. A.1, SIRS Issues Researcher, sks-sirs-com.libprox1.slcc.edu.