Police worn body cameras have been the latest development in monitoring police misconduct and deadly shootings. However long before this development, video recording from CCTV surveillance, dashboard-mounted cameras and cell phones helped in collecting evidence of police misconduct. The issue of body-worn cameras revolves around whether they will be useful in helping police officers stay accountable while on duty while at the same time, avoid infringing on citizens right to privacy.

With such concerns, there need to be better policies which will govern the use of body cameras to strike a balance on their application to avoid infringing on people’s right to privacy. Developing these policies is however tricky because of different variables in the police agencies in the United States. These variables are such as the different policies in these agencies, relationship between the police and communities they work with and policies on data. There are also concerns revolving around the costs of these cameras and data storage, given that not all surveillance collected may be of use to the police.

Thesis statement: The argument on body-worn cameras to improve police accountability is effective.

The purpose of this text is to analyze the suitability of body cameras and how effective they can be in promoting police accountability. The authors of the document start by assessing the extent to which body is worn have increased accountability, and argue that there needs to be policies to help improve the use of body cameras hence police accountability. It goes on to analyze the impact of surveillance and the cost it would have on privacy, in abide to see whether there are viable trade-offs that would make way for the use of body-worn cameras.

The audience of this is policy makers in police state agencies and the general public. The authors lay out an argument which would open a series of discussions on the viability of body-worn cameras and seeks to prove the fact that they would help in promoting police accountability. Some of the killings and police brutality witnessed in the past prove the fact that had police-worn body cameras, and it would have been easier to prosecute them on the grounds of using excessive force.

Kairos

The argument laid out above is timely. Police officers have for long misused their authority and mistreated people of color for no reason (Mateescu, Rosenblat and Boyd 125). The cameras and audio listening devices could provide more information on the reasons as to why police officers make some stops over others. Better still, body-worn cameras would give more insight on whether victims have falsely accused police officers or not. Besides, some police officers have been trying to cover up for their actions by lying in the reports they make because there’s no one, to tell the truth. To avoid this from happening, they need to use body-worn cameras to help them record events at a crime scene correctly to avoid misrepresenting their actions or those of the suspect.

Besides, during protests, criminals have been taking advantage of being invisible in the crowd to either steal or attack police officers, therefore putting the peaceful protesters at risk. Freedom of expression through peaceful protests have become the norm, and body worn cameras should help identify people who have criminal backgrounds in peaceful protests through facial recognition. Police officers can then keep a keen eye on their movements to arrest them in case they start breaking the law.  Advancement in technology makes this argument timely because body-worn cameras are a significant milestone in using technology to help law enforcement agencies do their work better while at the same time, helping them stay accountable.  Finally, the authors are analyzing the situation from different perspectives while opening up avenues for discussion on the best way to approach the subject. Such avenues are such as “assessing the stakes, scope of accountability and costs to privacy.” they are firm, and straightforward about the fact that the only thing needed is proper policies to guide the use of body-worn cameras (Mateescu, Rosenblat and Boyd 124).

Pathos

Government policymakers in police state agencies have witnessed police brutality, but some of them have been in denial. The authors use reference to people who have suffered unnecessary police brutality such as the drug suspect who cooperated with police officers who still beat him up and later reported that he was resisting arrest. The author’s point out that an incident where police officers shot a mentally ill man and the police chief argued that the shooting was justifiable. It wasn’t until the footage was uploaded on YouTube when people staged protests, and an investigation opened into the shooting (Mateescu, Rosenblat and Boyd 124). Such incidences have been going on for on for decades, and here the authors are trying appeal to the audience’s desire to see for suspects to be treated with dignity. Since the discussion is about body-worn cameras and how they can improve police accountability, the authors are placing a solution right in front of them to make them know that there is something they can do to make police officers treat suspects with dignity. The authors state it clearly that since we have body-worn cameras that police officers can use, there is something they can do about it.

Logos

The authors open their argument strongly, arguing that recording incidents of police misconduct aren’t new. It started with CCTV, dashboard cameras, and cell-phone cameras. It means that body-worn cameras have come to improve the situation since body-worn cameras bring together different features such as increased mobility, and the ability to capture both audio and visual data at the same time and continuously. Cell-phone cameras aren’t reliable because recording an incident depends on the and willingness of the phone owner to record it if they are present (Mateescu, Rosenblat and Boyd 122). It further argues that since the shooting Brown in 2014, there were different speculations on the circumstances surrounding the killing since there were no cameras to prove if the officers had used excessive force. The incident added more fuel to the discussion on why police officers need the importance of body-worn cameras to prove that they are doing the right thing when using excessive force. In addition, the authors pay more attention to how they lay out their argument since they are consistent in the facts they are providing such as the different incidences in which police officers have used excessive force and lied about it (Mateescu, Rosenblat and Boyd 124). The authors have gone ahead to support the ideas they have in mind with supporting arguments from other authors which helps them build a case for what they are talking about.

Ethos

The authors who wrote the text are credible people given that they are researchers at Data Society and Research Institute, US. The authors are also showing more than one side of the issue before arguing what they stand for on the issue of body-worn cameras. They have gone to great lengths to highlight what fellow researchers have written about on the subject to support their ideas. In addition, they have gone ahead and asked open-ended questions within the argument that leaves the reader room to think about what they are talking about without giving obvious answers. It helps them avoid coming across as trying to impose their ideas on the audience, instead, letting them think for themselves. The tone of the argument is firm, and the authors get direct to the point. Such a presentation makes them look credible because they are speaking with authority on about a subject they know well about.

It is only in the last lines of the conclusion that they state where they stand (supporting the use of body cameras to improve accountability in the police force.

Conclusion

The argument is good as it is. Effective arguments use each of the rhetorical strategies to appeal to different types of readers. In some parts, it is using empathy to make the reader feel how much difference a body worn camera would make. In others, it presents facts to appeal to those who want the authors to prove each claim they have made in the argument. The argument also appeals to Kairos by focusing on “It’s time to create policies on body-worn cameras” while appealing to the values and beliefs of the audience which are guided by equal rights for all.

 
Do you need high quality Custom Essay Writing Services?