The Use of Body-Worn Cameras and Tasers by Law Enforcement

The U.S. has implemented the use of tasers and body-worn cameras to minimize the use of lethal force by police officers. Several police departments have established policies to ensure minimal injuries to the law enforcement personnel and citizens. The organization believes that the application of these devices is less dangerous as compared to paper spraying and batons (White et al. 267). The integration of these elements promotes fewer injuries and transparency within the institution. 

Advantages of the Devices

The reduction in the use of force and injuries among civilians is the primary achievement of body-worn cameras and tasers (Ariel et al. 510). The devices have also improved the conduct of the police officers; whereby, the officers apply the law to interact with suspects. Due to the given transparency, civilian complains have also reduced due to improved trust between the department and community members (Terrill et al. 504). The approach has also improved the attitude of police towards the population as well as the better relationship among the involved parties.

Disadvantages of the Devices

The use of tasers has adverse cognitive effects on both the police and civilians. The direct contact with electric currents may affect the physiological functioning of the body and may result in some forms of disabilities (White et al. 267). The application of body-worn cameras may also infringe against the privacy of both the suspect and the law enforcement personnel (Ariel et al. 529). The aspect reduces the right to freedom which is a crucial bill of rights.

Impacts of the Excessive Use of Force by Police

The excessive use of force reduces cooperation between the police and community members; thereby, reducing their ability to reduce crime (Frank, Charles, James, and John 560). The approach also reduces transparency, trust, and dependability on the law enforcement agencies.

Limitations and Rules in case Body Cameras Become Universally Mandatory

The recommendation on the universal application of body-worn cameras includes intensive training of officers to ensure appropriate use of the devices without violating privacy. The department will also require the police to keep the cameras on during duty to enable proper supervision of events. An independent agency will be the custodian of the records to prevent bias and better provision of justice.

Works Cited

Ariel, Barak, William A. Farrar, and Alex Sutherland. “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 (2015): 509-535.

Frank Klahm IV, Charles, James Frank, and John Liederbach. “Understanding police use of force: Rethinking the link between conceptualization and measurement.”Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies & Management 37.3 (2014): 558-578.

Terrill, William, et al. “Examining police use of force and citizen complaints.”Policing: An International Journal 41.4 (2018): 496-509.

White, Michael D., et al. “Examining the effects of the TASER on cognitive functioning: findings from a pilot study with police recruits.”Journal of Experimental Criminology 10.3 (2014): 267-290.