Like Countable?

Install the App
TRY NOW

house Bill H.R. 1680

Should More Police Officers Have Body Cameras?

Argument in favor

Body cameras will help with evidence collection in addition to reducing the use of excessive force by police officers. It’s a positive for both the general public and for law enforcement officials.

MateoLowe's Opinion
···
04/10/2015
The body cameras can provide non-bias evidence by capturing everything that happens as it happens. The film evidence will be very useful in court and can help protect police officers and can help give us better understanding when a citizen is shot by an officer which unfortunately is an important issue today.
Like (149)
Follow
Share
Cary's Opinion
···
04/11/2015
Anything that will increase accountability and serve as a deterrent to excessive force is positive.
Like (90)
Follow
Share
Spider-Man's Opinion
···
05/15/2015
I say yes, but also retrain them and give civilians the right to hold a cop accountable if mistreated, or if they see the cop using excessive force to restrain them. But not before having video proof of the officers abuse of power. Like that one lady who had her phone smashed by that U.S. marshal. If I was there and civilians had the ability to restrain officers after doing something like that, I would have. Because he charged at her without even noticing his rifle swaying and because he destroyed her property.
Like (36)
Follow
Share

Argument opposed

Body cameras threaten the privacy of citizens and police officers — especially because there are no standard regulations (at the local or federal level) for how the camera data is stored, used, or destroyed.

Keegan's Opinion
···
04/10/2015
This would not solve the root of the problem - inadequate training in the use of force. We need to train our officers to not assume everybody is a threat and to treat the people they are trusted to protect as that - people.
Like (101)
Follow
Share
VACatholicKnight's Opinion
···
04/10/2015
I support cops using body cameras in order to protect the public and themselves. However, why involve the Federal government? Let the states and local governments deal with the issue.
Like (70)
Follow
Share
Tylersmith's Opinion
···
05/06/2016
This is a great idea, but should not be worked with on a federal level.
Like (24)
Follow
Share

bill Progress


  • Not enacted
    The President has not signed this bill
  • The senate has not voted
  • The house has not voted
      house Committees
      Committee on the Judiciary
      Crime, Terrorism and Homeland Security
    IntroducedMarch 26th, 2015
    The body cameras can provide non-bias evidence by capturing everything that happens as it happens. The film evidence will be very useful in court and can help protect police officers and can help give us better understanding when a citizen is shot by an officer which unfortunately is an important issue today.
    Like (149)
    Follow
    Share
    This would not solve the root of the problem - inadequate training in the use of force. We need to train our officers to not assume everybody is a threat and to treat the people they are trusted to protect as that - people.
    Like (101)
    Follow
    Share
    Anything that will increase accountability and serve as a deterrent to excessive force is positive.
    Like (90)
    Follow
    Share
    I support cops using body cameras in order to protect the public and themselves. However, why involve the Federal government? Let the states and local governments deal with the issue.
    Like (70)
    Follow
    Share
    I say yes, but also retrain them and give civilians the right to hold a cop accountable if mistreated, or if they see the cop using excessive force to restrain them. But not before having video proof of the officers abuse of power. Like that one lady who had her phone smashed by that U.S. marshal. If I was there and civilians had the ability to restrain officers after doing something like that, I would have. Because he charged at her without even noticing his rifle swaying and because he destroyed her property.
    Like (36)
    Follow
    Share
    It's a 2 waY street. It will protect the innocent and help convicts the guilty beyond a shadow of doubt!
    Like (29)
    Follow
    Share
    Nearly all areas of employment have security cameras fixated on their employees, cops should be subjected to this as well.
    Like (25)
    Follow
    Share
    This is a great idea, but should not be worked with on a federal level.
    Like (24)
    Follow
    Share
    I think at this point we know dash cams have helped. Body cams are needed. Both to protect civilians AND officers, in investigations and trials. More evidence is always a good thing.
    Like (20)
    Follow
    Share
    YES AND NO! I think it's a good idea, BUT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT SHOULD NOT INTERFERE IN STATE AND LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT POLICIES!
    Like (12)
    Follow
    Share
    Answer? Part of a solution first question where is the $$ coming from? CHINA?
    Like (11)
    Follow
    Share
    Body cameras can change the way law enforcement works. The use of technology like the one seen in this instance in Seattle is an interesting example to keep in mind. http://ow.ly/PiBit
    Like (10)
    Follow
    Share
    Part of the answer. Training and oversight needs increased.
    Like (5)
    Follow
    Share
    Given the current environment, we need these as safeguards to improve trust and relationships between law enforcement and communities.
    Like (4)
    Follow
    Share
    Believe it or not an increase of police officers and law authorities may assist with court trials and lawsuits as a form of primary evidence. Additionally, authorities must contain any necessary precaution for their safety, and the safety of the public as well. Body cameras would not promote abusive governmental power but it will visually display an urgency of a situation especially if there is two opposing arguments about what occurred during a traffic stop or any incident. These are government employees and the federal governments first priority is to keep the American people safe not contribute to bureaucrats to increase abusive legislation, not to grant amnesty to law breaking thieves but to keep US CITIZENS SAFE. By regulating body cameras on law authorities departments may look over these footages to greatly influence the quality of their employees service/exercise, procedure during emergency circumstances. It is self explanatory that this is not abusive power but if the American public has their constitutional amendment to film authorities then authorities have to right to this protection as well. Footage reveals proof in the pudding. When we have more proof for emergency circumstances then are safety is at a great status.
    Like (4)
    Follow
    Share
    While there are potential issues with privacy, studies show that there are significant benefits regarding violence to wearing these. Not just for public safety, but for the safety of officers as well, the camera is a deterrent. And having better evidence in court to ensure justice is a primary driver.
    Like (4)
    Follow
    Share
    Incidents involving officers and unarmed citizens across the country have shown that blind and free policing leads to the loss of innocent civilian lives. The use of body cameras has proven time and time again to reduce the number of hostile police arrests. A child will not reach into the cookie jar to steal a cookie before dinner if a parent is watching.
    Like (4)
    Follow
    Share
    Body cameras should be mandatory for all officers on duty, with serious judicial consequences outlined for those whose cameras "malfunction" or are turned off during incidents of police brutality or police killings.
    Like (4)
    Follow
    Share
    There will be less commotion and debate when cops' action come into questioning.
    Like (3)
    Follow
    Share
    I support this bill. Though, I question its degree of necessity during the election year. It seems like this bill is one of those which is designed to appeal to a certain base: lending support to those lawmakers who support it and being used as political ammunition against those opposed. The general thinking here seems to be if you oppose spending increases to law enforcement then you are "soft on crime." This to me is unfair and dirty political practice. Never mind how this ties into the discussion around the "war on drugs," but the fact of the matter is in the last 25 years as a result of the the US surplus military spending and the development of the Dept. of Homeland Security, much of the extra equipment leftover from the military operations has been repurposed to law enforcement agencies around the country with certain provisions. This includes light armored vehicles, body armor, high caliber rifles. To me this is a red flag. As Americans we should ever be wary against the militarization of police. However, I believe at its heart this bill does more to serve and protect the people than it does arm the police with another tool. To be passed, there should be specific language concerning where the money comes from to provide the body cameras and to which districts is it primarily directed. Areas with the highest rates of police brutality, low income areas, and areas with large ethnic minority populations should be highlighted for the project. Money should come from existing police budget and be held within the lines for annual general budget increases. Police get plenty of money to stop crime on the streets. I look at this bill as an opportunity to provide the people with the safety and peace-of-mind knowing that law enforcement is being held accountable in their approach to using force. These cameras are a valuable resource to be used as evidence in both criminal cases and cases brought against law enforcement for use of excessive force.
    Like (3)
    Follow
    Share
    MORE