Recently, there have been many controversial events that have spiked aggression towards law enforcement and any biases they may or may not have regarding their actions. As a result, one of the many dilemmas being brought up is whether or not police officers are using their position of power to adhere to their own beliefs regarding those of a different race. In search of a solution to this rapidly growing issue, it has been highly suggested that the use of body cameras on all officers could significantly reduce the problem. This makes us ask the question that, Given recent events regarding police brutality and their influence on spiking racial tension, in what ways will the use of body cameras on all law enforcement officers benefit today’s society? Additionally, due to the fact that minorities tend to be members of the Democratic party while non-minorities tend to be members of the Republican party, the use of body cameras could also decrease the massive tension between political parties as a result of the decrease in racial tension. According to the Pew Research Center, Republicans have a significant lead over the Democratic party in the number of whites that associate with a specific political party, with the percentage of white party members that associate with the Republican party being 49 percent, while the percentage of white party members that associate with the Democratic party reach only 40 percent. (Smith). Additionally, it is also recognized that the Democratic party has an extremely large 80 percent to 11 percent advantage over the Republican party in terms of the number of blacks that associate with either of the two specific political parties, with the number of black Democratic party members reaching 80 percent, while the number of blacks that associate with the Republican party only reaching a measly 11 percent. (Smith). To raise the Democrats’ lead of a large minority demographic over the Republicans, they also have close to three-to-one regarding the number of Asian Americans associating with the Democratic party with 65 percent to 23 percent difference, and by more than two-to-one among Hispanics with a 56 percent to 26 percent difference. (Smith). Recent events regarding the actions of law enforcement, one of the most broadcasted being the Ferguson case, have been widely seen by minorities as extremely discriminatory, giving way to the increase in racial tension already prevalent due to the recent presidential candidates, most specifically Donald Trump, who was the most controversial presidential candidate during that time. The combination of the numerous reported incidents of police discrimination and police brutality, and Donald Trump running for, and later being elected as president has created a gap between minorities and non-minorities that has not been brought to light since the twentieth century. With the worldwide attention that the Ferguson case and many others like it have received, society has seen the formation of the Black Lives Matter movement which is in favor of the Democratic Party, the Blue Lives Matter movement which is in favor of the Republican Party, the minorities’ movement against Donald Trump and the Republican party as a result of the actions of law enforcement, and all of the aggression that has comes from the rise of party extremists as a result. With extensive research on the topic of body cameras as a potential solution to this issue, it has been found that a program initiating the use of body-worn cameras in law enforcement would benefit society by significantly reducing racial and political tension with constant video feed recording every detail of every potentially controversial case, while also allowing for potential improvements in the technology that would help prevent incidents from occurring altogether, through alternative use of the video feed that is being stored. Further research and documentation of the findings regarding this topic will also increase the interest of every person looking to find a solution to this unnecessary tension between races, and the tension between political parties that comes along with it.

One of the more obvious advantages of body-worn cameras being utilized by law enforcement is that there would be a constant video feed recording every detail of every incident a law enforcement official was called to. These cameras would constantly record and transmit what is recorded via law enforcement frequencies to a central station for storage and potential evaluation. (Wilson 89). What the mass recording and storage of these videos mean is that if an encounter with law enforcement were to be revisited years later, documentation of what happened would still be 100 percent accurate. In a recent transcript of the NPR South Carolina Public Radio’s “Morning Edition”, the hosts discuss how the mass recording of police encounters would be beneficial in preventing certain incidents such as the Ferguson case. (“Can Body Cameras ‘Civilize’ Police Encounters?”). In the transcript, the hosts discuss the idea that many people believe that the Ferguson police brutality scandal could have been completely avoided if the officer was wearing a body camera. (“Can Body Cameras ‘Civilize’ Police Encounters?”). If the officer at the scene was wearing a camera at the time, then the case would not have been relying on two completely different witness accounts as the only substantial evidence, but instead, there would have been a clear and definite account of what happened. The entire reason that the Ferguson scandal was so broadcasted and controversial was that it was a “he said, she said” situation in the sense that there was no concrete documentation of what events took place, and with the constant video feed coming from the cameras, there would have been no guessing on what events took place, because an accurate documentation of evidence would have been recorded and stored for further use if needed. The body cameras’ ability to solidify facts of a potentially controversial case would benefit society, by preventing these controversial incidents from occurring, which would in turn prevent a national uproar as seen with the Ferguson case. Since the incident allowed for multiple interpretation of facts, sides were formed that divided the black and white communities, and the political parties, which then later formed the Black Lives Matter and Blue Lives Matter movements. In a recent video posted by a popular news network discussing the benefits of body cameras in reducing tension among civilians and law enforcement, it was stated that, with the solidification of facts that body cameras provide, “[Body Cameras] will help the people to see that [body cameras] are good for the victim as well as the officers, because they would bring more accountability on both sides; therefore, [the people] won’t act so hastily when they take action against individuals” (CNN). This means that with the removal of any alternative interpretation of facts, the body cameras would consequently reduce future racial and political tension by preventing these controversial incidents from occurring, by preventing the backlash from civilians that causes the tension in the first place.

In addition to preventing racial and political tension by ensuring that encounters with law enforcement do not get taken out of context after they happen, body cameras would also be more likely to prevent these controversial encounters to begin with. In the most recent edition of “Police Quarterly”, it is discussed that an additional benefit of utilizing body cameras is the idea that they would reduce tension by improving officer and citizen behavior. (Gaub). The findings of a national survey discussed in the periodical demonstrate that “over 80% of respondents believed that, when wearing [body cameras], police oﬃcers will behave more respectfully toward citizens and will use excessive force less frequently.” (Gaub 278). This concept is rooted in the idea that people generally behave differently when they have the knowledge that they are observed or recorded. They now know that any action they take part in that could potentially be seen as controversial and demonstrate a flaw in their character that they would not otherwise want to be seen is now being recorded as evidence, with the potential to resurface with negative consequences if a questionable act takes place during the time of the recording. This not only keeps the person of interest from acting out to the point of requiring additional police force, but it also helps prevent potentially false allegations made by those who the police are detaining. Additionally, the periodical also found that law enforcement officers had positive attitudes about the use of body cameras on duty, with roughly 77 percent of police officers agreeing with the idea that body cameras would make officers act more professionally. (Gaub 278). Police officers are meant to follow strict, civilized rules, ensuring the proper and lawful treatment of individuals, whether they are potentially dangerous or not. The issue with police brutality incidents is that in these cases, a member of law enforcement took advantage of those rules with the idea that they are superior over those that are in suspect, and the word of a convicted criminal may not be as believed as the word of an experienced police officer. No police officer is going to want to have any misguided actions they may have taken part in be discovered with fear that they would lose their position of law enforcement, so the body cameras would very successfully be able to ensure that the likelihood of these “rogue police” would be significantly reduced, resulting in better behavior. Better behavior on both the law enforcement side, and the civilian side, would be able to de-escalate otherwise controversial situations, protecting not only the officers, but the potential victims as well.

Furthermore, one of the major benefits of body cameras in addition to seeing immediate results lies in the growing potential of the abilities and uses of body cameras, and the ever-growing technology they come from that is constantly being updated and altered with new and increasingly more efficient ideas. With the growing field of technology, the uses and benefits of body cameras could be advanced far beyond the solidification of facts in controversial cases and improved behavior of individuals. In a book recently published by Grey House Publishing, the author discusses the potential benefits of certain types of surveillance by examining and evaluating specific programs improving these forms of surveillance. (Bello). When discussing body cameras specifically and the general capabilities that they have, Bello initially states, “Body cameras can constantly record and transmit what is recorded via law enforcement frequencies to a central station for storage.” (89). What the author doesn’t immediately say, is that the storage of the footage recorded by the body cameras opens an entirely new realm of possibility regarding more improved future use. (Bello). The first improvement to body cameras that Bello discusses is a startup program that would allow a facial recognition system to be placed in the cameras, known as the NGI system. (89). This would mean that every individual face recorded in every police encounter would be recognized and entered in to a system, and as the author states, would “record everyone for later identification.” (Bello 90).  Bello also states that this system would “[enable] officers to screen detainees and criminal suspects against a repository of Wanted Persons…and other persons of special interest for rapid identification.” (90). This facial recognition system would be able to advance the ability of body cameras to an entirely new level, allowing the cameras to detect potentially dangerous individuals before they even commit a possible crime. With the ability to detect these individuals simply by recording them on the body-worn cameras, law enforcement officials would be able to recognize a potentially dangerous situation before it even happens, allowing them to be more alert in the situation and possibly even prevent one altogether. In addition to the program enhancing the cameras’ ability to detect those on a wanted list, terrorist watch list, list of suspected pedophiles, etc., it is also mentioned that they would be able to recognize license plates as well, allowing officers to more easily recognize those with stolen cars. (Bello 90). Overall, the idea of potentially scanning individuals that could be on the Wanted Persons list and scanning license plates, in addition to recording encounters, would add the benefit of protecting not only officers, but also bystanders from other potentially dangerous individuals.

Although there are countless benefits that come with the implementation of body cameras, there are also well-argued drawbacks as well. In a recent publishing by the North Carolina Conference of District Attorneys, the most significant drawback discussed is the large and ongoing financial investment that a program implementing body cameras would require, with prices ranging from $119.95 to $1,000.00 per camera. (Macari 4). Additionally, with the mass amounts of data that would need storing, there would need to be not only a method of storing the seemingly endless amounts of data, but there would need to be additional employees hired to oversee the data storage as well, costing even more money. (Macari 5). Not only is this threat of a financial burden scaring off potential supporters for a program initiating the use of body cameras, but another significant concern being raised is the obvious intrusion of privacy rights of not only the individuals being recorded, but the officers as well. (Macari 3). Macari addresses this concern by asking the question, “Do officers notify video subjects that they are being recorded.” (6). According to the author, while some states require that an officer with a body camera should notify the individual being recorded that their actions are being documented on camera, some states, such as North Carolina, do not require it. (Macari 6). It is easy to see how refusal to notify an individual that they are being recorded could be viewed as a violation of one’s privacy, especially when the individual may reveal confidential information. The combination of the financial burden along with the possible violation of privacy rights that body-cameras present could potentially prevent the otherwise beneficial program from being initiated nationwide.

Even though there are drawbacks that come with the use of body-worn cameras, there have been multiple trial runs and program-wide implications of the technology that have demonstrated the true effectiveness of the cameras, which many believe to outweigh all the costs. For example, a recent trial conducted in Mesa, Arizona evaluated 100 officers in the Mesa Police Department who began to use the cameras during their encounters over a 10-month period. (Ready, Young). According to the study, Mesa Police officers wearing the cameras experienced a 60 percent drop in complaints due to better behavior of both the officers and those being recorded, compared to a 36 percent increase in complaints for officers in the same department who did not wear the body cameras. (Ready, Young). Regarding other studies concerning the improved behavior of the individuals being recorded, the Phoenix Police Department conducted an experiment over a period of 15 months, where they evaluated 56 officers who used the cameras, and 50 officers who did not. (Gaub 279). When discussing the findings of the study, Gaub states, “Treatment oﬃcers experienced a 23 percent decline in citizen complaints, compared with an 11 percent increase for comparison oﬃcers,” proving once again that the cameras are substantially effective at minimizing tension, and preventing potential controversy. In addition to the small studies conducted, the Los Angeles Police Department has initiated a program-wide use of body-cameras, where every officer has been accompanied with a body camera on all their encounters. (ABC news). After initiating the body-camera requirement, the cameras recorded an incident involving LAPD officer Ray Tensing, where he fatally shot an African American man during a traffic stop, when the suspect tried to escape and proceeded to drag Tensing with his car in attempt to run him over, according to Tensing; however, video evidence later revealed that the suspect, although making an attempt to drive away, did not drag the officer with his car, and appeared to make no attempt to run him over. (ABC news). Without the use of body cameras in this circumstance, this incident could have been widely misconstrued, and similar to what happened with the Ferguson case, could have caused a national outrage, spiking racial and political tension once more. The use of a body camera not only prevented this outrage, but in doing so, successfully fulfilled the overall purpose of initiating body cameras, in the sense that it benefitted society as a whole by preventing racial and political tension while also protecting the victims of such incidents.

In conclusion, as seen by the previous examples implication of a program initiating nationwide use of body-worn cameras in law enforcement would be extremely beneficial in providing a much safer environment for law enforcement officials and any potential victims of police brutality. Even if some may disagree with the idea due to potential financial burdens, revisions could be made so that video evidence raising no questions or video evidence that was controversial, but has since been completely settled, can be deleted which would prevent spending on excessive data storage. Additionally, for those who are concerned with privacy rights, it could be made mandatory for all police officers to notify their suspects that they are being recorded, in order to prevent the accidental recording of irrelevant and confidential information. Overall, body cameras would not only would it have an immediate effect on benefitting society, given the nation’s current standpoint on racial intolerance and police brutality, but as seen by the upcoming upgrades of the product, it would also continue to benefit society in improved and more effective ways.
