The application of body cameras is a relatively new issue in the field of law enforcement. The advancement of technology in the past few years has been marked with additional methods of policing and additional use of technology used by law enforcement. The use of body cameras is a new technology that will be highly advantageous for police officers. Body-worn cameras come with several advantages such as the documentation of evidence, prevention and solving any complaints that have been raised by the public, and the strengthening of transparency and accountability. However, the application of body-worn cameras also raises a significant issue regarding privacy and trust. Body-worn cameras can undermine the privacy of individuals that want the information they present treated with confidentiality. The use of body cameras can also present issues of trust with the general community and the public at large. There are also heavy financial costs that come about with the application of body cameras and issues of whether the financial cost can be compared to the effectiveness of the cameras. The issue of the body-worn cameras is thus a policy issue which must be considered by closely analyzing its background, advantages and disadvantages, and identifying the best recommendations.
Background
The use of body-worn cameras has been a hotly debated topic for several decades. The first body-worn cameras were used heavier and were used in as early as 1998. They had the same functionalities similar to the current body-worn cameras which are being used by the law enforcement officers to record various interactions and to capture evidence of some of the crime scenes. The technology of body-worn cameras developed over the years and there are different types of body cameras that are made by the different manufacturers. The difference in the technology of the different cameras is based on their functionality. Some of the cameras can be worn on shoulders and chests while others are usually attached to glasses. Body cameras are today lightweight and can weigh between 2 ounces and 5 ounces or 55 grams and 140 grams (Timan, 2016).
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
The technical innovations that have been offered by the different body-worn cameras have also resulted in a difference in the quality of the cameras. Some body cameras have unique features such as having night vision, infrared, HD quality, different degrees of view, and fisheye lenses. Other devices enable the hardware of the body camera to interact with other devices such as wearable technology. Additionally, the development of technology has seen body cameras have automatic triggers. The camera can start recording a specific procedure or event in the event of opening a door, activation of a siren, or firing of a firearm.
Legal Issues and Progress
The National Institute of justices provided a statement detailing the policies, observations, laws, and the technology that local police officers should consider. The primer was released in the year 2012 and the state of Illinois became one of the first states that had a comprehensive set of rules regarding the use of body-worn camera and how to use it. There have been many individuals over the years that have been vocal regarding enacting body-worn cameras. Many individuals have noted that body-worn cameras should be implemented because they have the advantage of improving transparency and improving accountability among the public.
While the adoption of body-worn cameras has experienced significant legal progress. It has also experienced several legal issues which have hindered its progress and adoption. One of the factors that have hindered its progress deals with the fact about whether it can be considered effective compared to the huge financial costs that are required for its purchase. On December 2014, the then President Obama planned that communities should be reimbursed half of the costs of purchasing the cameras and storage of video. The plan required the authorization of Congress about $70 million over the course of three years that would help in the purchase of 50,000 recording devices (Smykla, 2016). This shows that there are huge financial costs that come about with the implementation of body-worn cameras. It is thus prudent for the Congress to act in a way that ensures that a sufficient amount of money is spent when purchasing the body cameras.
The use of body-worn cameras has also been widely adopted in different parts of the world. The United Kingdom started experimenting with body cameras from the year 2003. However, the United States has lagged in terms of research about the cameras. According to Ariel, Farrar, and Sutherland (2015) body-worn cameras were used to realize several advantages and decreased the number of complaints from about 0.7 per 1,000 contacts with the public to 0.07 per 1,000 contacts with the public. The technology has been gaining popularity as different individuals observe the advantages that come with the use of the camera. The cameras have gained a significant amount of credibility among both law enforcement officers and the communities around.
Regions that are highly populated and more prone to crime have increasingly adopted body-worn cameras. In the United States, there are several cities that have incorporated body cameras and have been using them for several years. Examples of cities that have effectively used body cameras include Arizona, California, and Los Angeles. There have been several studies about the use and effectiveness of body cameras which has been conducted in different places such as Washington D.C., Arizona, Texas, and California and the cameras have been found to be quite effective (Katz et al., 2015).
Alternatives
Advantages of Body-Worn Cameras
One of the advantages that come about with the use of body-worn cameras is the increased level of transparency and accountability. The cameras can record different incidences that occur. Some of those incidences can be controversial and require the use of accurate evidence. Body cameras have also been increasingly adopted because they ensure that operations are transparent to the public. This can be used to resolve questions that could follow after an encounter with a member of the public.
Body cameras can also be used to improve accountability by ensuring that officers always act in a professional manner. It can also help agencies evaluate and find ways that the performance of an officer can be improved. The application of body cameras would mean that there will be fewer complaints raised against the officer and members of the public. Everyone will be in their best because the cameras are running and every incident that is taking place will be analyzed in the future (Coudert, 2015).
Body worn cameras increase accountability by ensuring that everyone conducts themselves in their best behaviors. Cameras will encourage those that are being recorded to be alert and not to do anything that could be used against them by the law. Negative encounters between the law enforcement officers and the public are thus likely to reduce with the implementation of body cameras. Additionally, law enforcement officers will be more aware of their behaviors and will not make use of force when performing their work. The public should thus feel less threatened by law enforcement officers because they will know that the officers will also be acting in their best behavior.
The application of body cameras can act as a useful training tool that improves the performance officers. Footage that is gathered from body-worn cameras can also be used for scenario training, evaluate the officers based on their performance when they are in the field, and to be used for the identification new areas that require training. Additionally, the use of body-worn cameras can help police agencies to raise their performance and standards. This can help improve the effectiveness of the officers as they perform their daily activities.
Body cameras can be used to solve several issues regarding the interaction of law enforcement officers with the public. Law enforcement officers that engage in misconduct or abuse their authority can be captured from the incidences or occurrence of events that occur in the footage. In case of frequent or repeated incidences or complaints by the public, the officer can be investigated by analyzing the video footage. The video camera will be able to capture any incidences of profanity, threats against the public, or verbal abuse on the part of the officers. In case the officer acted correctly in a specific incident, the camera should also be able to capture this. This can act as an easy and straightforward way to capture footage and to solve various issues.
Body cameras are also advantageous because they can be used to record and document evidence. The evidence captured by the cameras can be used in a court of law and for further investigations. This can be used to provide a detailed record of arrests and interrogations and to have the videos act witness to the crime scenes. Gathering of evidence in specific crime scenes such as accidents is usually sometimes difficult. The use of body cameras that have automatic triggers will ensure that evidence is documented in case of any incidences.
The evidence provided by the body cameras is advantageous and a highly reliable source of evidence. Gathering evidence from other sources such as witnesses can come with several challenges. Witnesses, victims, and police officers that encounter life-threatening circumstances may not always remember the specific occurrence of events. There could be confusion and conflicting reports when witnesses and victims are asked to repeat accounts of events in a statement. Body-worn cameras are able to capture everything that occurred around the incident. The police officer can move around the scene of an accident or crime and interview different people. The body cameras would be important in documenting and preserving the information gathered accurately.
One of the main reasons for the overwhelming support of body cameras is that they will be used to protect both citizens and officers. There is an increasing concern over the corruption of law enforcement officers and this can lead to mistrust between police officers and the community around. Some of the advantages of body cameras include protection of the police, protection of the citizens that interact with the police, and equal protection of the citizens and the police. Security and technology are constantly evolving and have the main aim of protecting both the citizens and police officers.
Potential Risks and Disadvantages
While the adoption of body cameras can appear as highly advantageous, there are several policy issues that should be considered before they are used and applied by the officers. The policy issues that should be put into consideration include community relationships, privacy, and departmental affairs. Law enforcement agencies which adopt body-worn cameras should first analyze how their policies can intersect across larger questions.
Privacy Considerations
One of the issues raised by body-worn cameras deal with the issues of privacy. The increasing use of technology and cameras over the past few years has changed the way people view privacy. Almost every major incident today is caught on camera. However, there are several issues regarding privacy rights when filming anything. The topic of privacy rights has not been fully developed by the legal system.
Body-worn cameras raise a privacy issue because they can record the audio and video or capture close-up images. Capturing images this way allows for their use in other factors such as facial recognition technology. Compared to dashboard cameras, body cameras provide the ability to record individuals in private homes and to even film situations that could be considered sensitive.
The issue of privacy with respect to body cameras also goes beyond the actual record to how the footage should be stored and used. There are concerns whether the agency will keep the video indefinitely especially when it contains confidential information. Many people have concerns that the collected footage should only be viewed by specific individuals. The confidentiality nature of the video can make it inappropriate to have it posted online.
Interactions with Community and the Public
Policing goes above simply offering security services since it involves maintaining a good relationship with the community. The police rely on partnerships with the community in order to address some of the issues of crime and disorder. A high level of trust should thus be maintained between the law enforcement officers and the public. The application of body-worn cameras can hinder the positive relationship that police officers may have with the public. The cameras can make the public feel that they are being watched consistently or that the law enforcement officers do not trust that they will act in an honest and truthful manner. Trust between police officers and the general public is built through the making of good relationships. However, body-worn cameras come from a position of mistrust and can hinder the relationship with the public.
Many individuals that may want to share confidential information may want to do it without being recorded. The presence of the body-worn camera can thus limit the individuals that may want to go forward and share information. Any piece of information that has been captured on footage can later be used as a source of evidence. Someone that would like to share information secretly may not do so with the body camera in place. Body-worn cameras can thus hinder the evidence gathering process among law enforcement officers.
Another primary concern of body-worn cameras is that they could erode the trust that has been developed between the officers and the senior management. Officers could view the cameras as a signal that the managers and supervisors do not trust them. They could be worried about the supervisors using the cameras to track every movement of the officers. Officers that use the cameras can thus feel an increasingly huge amount of pressure with the implementation of cameras. The amount of pressure that officers face can resultantly interfere and undermine the work of the officers.
Financial Issues
Body-worn cameras can provide several benefits to several law enforcement agencies and this comes at a huge financial costs. Apart from the initial purchase costs, the footage recorded will require storage of the data, managing the videos, disclosing sections of the videos to the public or court, and application for training officers. Body worn cameras have had a poor adoption as a result of the financial costs that are associated with the use and operation of the equipment.
Law enforcement agencies have also faced huge financial challenges over the past few years with budget cuts. Budget cuts have meant that law enforcement officers should reduce their staffing levels. Justifying additional spending on cameras when some officers do not have jobs can be somewhat unrealistic. There are several other financial requirements that could appear to be more pressing for law enforcement officers.
Recommendations
The analysis of body-worn cameras shows that they have several advantages. Some of the advantages related to the cameras are that they can be used to improve accountability, transparency, and gathering of evidence. These advantages are some of the most critical issues that law enforcement officers face. The adoption of body-worn cameras can thus be used to significantly improve the work of law enforcement officers. The officers should be able to perform their duties with a greater deal of effectiveness and efficiency. The recommendation is thus that body-worn cameras should be increasingly implemented by various law enforcement agencies. However, there are potential policy issues that could arise as a result of the implementation of the cameras.
As body-worn cameras become increasingly implemented, law enforcement should be aware that they should balance both the need for transparency in different police operations and the need for privacy for the general public. They should also ensure that the documented footage presents accurate documentation of the evidence that was collected and events that occurred. While body-worn cameras can be easily implemented, law enforcement officers are the central users and the individuals that retain the footage. Careful decisions should thus be made by the officers regarding when to activate the cameras, how long the data which has been recorded may be retained, and limit the individuals that access the data. Privacy considerations also mean that the law enforcement officers should be able to control all the external and internal requests made by different individuals to try and access the footage.
One of the challenges that face body-worn cameras is that they can interfere with the intelligence gathering process of law enforcement officers. Policies should thus be made to ensure that the cameras can be turned off when the officer is speaking to an individual that wants the information shared to be private and confidential.
The benefits and effectiveness of body cameras should be compared to the associated financial costs. Body cameras come at a huge financial cost and it is important first to ascertain that their adoption will be effective in solving crime and realizing other benefits in a specific area or region. Before implementing body cameras, the potentially criminal activities in the area should first be investigated. The area should then be analyzed by considering whether the implementation of the body cameras can be used to solve some of the problems. In case most of the previous cases could have been handled better with the cameras, then the cameras should thus be implemented in the given region.
Conclusion
Body-worn cameras are an increasingly new type of technology that can be applied to ease the work of law enforcement officers. The adoption of the cameras is a policy that should be addressed keenly by looking at its potential advantages and disadvantages. From the analysis, body cameras have the advantage of improving transparency, accountability, and evidence-gathering. However, there are potential disadvantages to the adoption of the cameras because of policy issues. Some of the issues that should be addressed are privacy concerns, trust issues and interaction with the community and public, and financial considerations. The different policy concerns and issues should be well-analyzed and put into consideration in view of the potential advantages.
References
Ariel, B., Farrar, W. A., & Sutherland, A. (2015). The effect of police body-worn cameras on use of force and citizens’ complaints against the police: A randomized controlled trial. Journal of quantitative criminology , 31 (3), 509-535.
Coudert, F., Butin, D., & Le Métayer, D. (2015). Body-worn cameras for police accountability: Opportunities and risks. Computer law & security review , 31 (6), 749-762.
Katz, C. M., Kurtenbach, M., Choate, D. E., & White, M. D. (2015). Phoenix, Arizona, smart policing initiative: evaluating the impact of police officer body-worn cameras. Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Assistance, US Department of Justice .
Smykla, J. O., Crow, M. S., Crichlow, V. J., & Snyder, J. A. (2016). Police body-worn cameras: Perceptions of law enforcement leadership. American journal of criminal justice , 41 (3), 424-443.
