AWD 3302: Project Files

Project 3

Student id: c12

To select another student or project, return to the Project Page.

View XML Source View Formatted File

Police Body Camera Requirement

  • Brent Christy
  • August 20th, 2016
  • Attention to: Carl Graziano, Chief of Police

Table of Contents

  • Introduction
  • Background
  • Purpose
  • Approach
  • Feasibility
  • Conclusion

ltr_int

Over the course of the past several years, there have been a large number of unfortunate situations involving police and their decision making throughout the United States. In some of the situations, the police made correct decisions in addressing a potentially violent situation. In other cases, there was blatant misuse of police power, which resulted in the death of innocent citizens. In many of these cases, the end result is a 'he said, she said' situation. Witnesses of the event will tell what they saw and the police officer will give his account of the event as well. There is no way to tell which of these accounts is correct, and the benefit of the doubt has generally been given to the police officer versus the average citizen. There needs to be a definite way for the correct and accurate story to be told, and that can be done by requiring police body cameras for all members of the Scranton police force[i.n.]. In addition to keeping officers in check, the cameras have a mutual benefit to police departments where the cameras can be used for performance evaluations and as evidence in court cases.

Background

In the city of Scranton, there are currently no body cameras implemented. The last public mention of adding body cameras to the police force for the city of Scranton came in 2014 when an article was published in the Times Tribune about the lack of budget for the cameras (Kohut).

Due to a number of incidents in the past several years, more and more departments are implementing body cameras with their squadrons. One of the most progressive cities in recent times has been the city of Los Angeles. Just two months ago in June, the city council unanimously approved an almost 70 million dollar budget to have body cameras on 7,000 police officers by 2018. Since the recent incidents in places like Ferguson and Baton Rouge, it is becoming more and more necessary for footage of questionable police situations to be available. This allows a correct representation of the incident without any doubts.[i.n.] The neighboring city of Wilkes-Barre is the 18th on the list of most violent crimes, and in many cases, police body cameras could be of use to depict what happened in these situations (Seibel).

Purpose

In the Winter 2017-18, the city of Scranton Police Department should begin to implement body cameras on all active police officers. The proposed system of body cameras will include cameras for all active police officers in the city. The system will provide assurance that correct police procedures are being followed in all situations. It will ensure that all police are operating with the public's safety in mind.

Approach

The initial plan for the system is to roll it out in several phases. This is how the city of Boston is planning on implementing their system and it seems like it would be a good idea to follow suit (Ransom). The first phase will be a test run for 15 police officers. The usefulness of the cameras will be evaluated in different situations including court trials and performance reviews. If the trial goes well, the program can be expanded to other officers in waves. The entire police force could be outfitted with cameras in two years. Each camera's battery would last a full 24 hour day and record to an SD card. The camera will be impossible to turn off[i.n.] and the SD card will be removable at the end of each day with the video stored for a week.[i.n.] If any complaints arises, the video of the certain event can be saved.

Feasibility

The main issue that has come up across police forces regarding body cameras has been the lack of budget space to purchase cameras. In order for the Los Angeles Police Department to implement their body cameras, they acquired a budget of $70 million (Elinson). This will provide cameras for about 9,000 officers. Scranton Police Department has around 200 officers, so the cost of the program should only be around $1.5 million.[i.n.] Despite the large cost, this is an important program that will provide a safer environment for everyone in the city. President Obama has mentioned on several occasions the need for body cameras and has requested federal funding to be provided in order to equip officers with them (Dann).

Socially, this should be a welcomed change in the city of Scranton. Having body cameras should help the citizens of the city feel safer. There is an obvious concern of people not wanting to be video taped, especially privately, but this should not cause a large concern due to the videos only being used as evidence in court cases or in police reviews. The videos would not be released publicly without people's identities being blurred out of the video. People may also be concerned with thinking that police could review tapes to look for illegal activities, but this would not be the case. Tapes would only be reviewed if a crime has been committed in the eyes of an officer. [i.n.]

Conclusion

Although Scranton is not a huge city with large records of police violence, body cameras are a necessity for all police. They provide two main purposes. They can ensure that police are handling situations appropriately and they can act as evidence in court cases where a defendant may be questioning the police's handling of the situation. Overall, the safety that the cameras will provide should outweigh the drawback of allocating funds to purchase the cameras. Many of the larger cities such as New York City and Los Angeles are implementing programs and it would be a good idea to get on the right side of this situation and acquire body cameras as soon as the budget will allow the city to.

References

Dann, Carrie, and Andrew Rafferty. "Obama Requests $263 Million for Police Body Cameras, Training" NBCNews.com. NBC News, n.d. Web. 20 Aug. 2016.

Elinson, Zusha. "Los Angeles Approves $60 Million to Outfit Police Force With Body Cameras." WSJ. Wall Street Journal, n.d. Web. 15 Aug. 2016.

Kohut, Joseph. "Local Police Departments Mull Body Cameras in Wake of Federal Funding Proposal." Thetimes-tribune.com. The Times Tribune, n.d. Web. 15 Aug. 2016.

Ransom, Jan. "Deal Reached on Body Cameras for Boston Police." BostonGlobe.com. The Boston Globe, n.d. Web. 19 Aug. 2016.

Seibel, Jacob. "Deadly 2013 Lands Wilkes-Barre on 'murder Capital' List." Thetimes-tribune.com. The Times Tribune, n.d. Web. 20 Aug. 2016.

Peer review

This particular proposal sounds a lot like a plea from the public for the city of Scranton to make changes in its law enforcement. Public initiative proposals are a means of communicating with government officials (or in this case police officials) the desires of the community, therefore yes, it makes sense to use this genre for the particular rhetorical situation. Language and word level choice are very appropriate for any adult reader, which is important for this genre since anyone could be reading it. However, I feel like you may be a little too factual for the genre. It is good to be professional and have irrefutable arguments in your proposal because that is what makes your proposal legitimate. In your background section I would recommend adding some personal notes about how body cameras could be of particular benefit to Scranton though since you’re trying to convince this particular department. Even if the purpose is for Scranton to take preventative measures and basically “get with the times” and follow the lead of other cities in the nation. You could also mention how it would instill a greater feeling of safety in the community and trust in police officers. Considering your audience is particularly important when you’re addressing your purpose as well. I think you might be thinking mostly about how body camera’s will affect the general public, but your audience is the police chief. I think you should refocus your purpose to also primarily state the benefit body cameras would serve to police officers in the “purpose” section. This would reposition your focus a little more strategically. Also, I like that you outline your scope very clearly, but I wonder if putting such a specific date on this proposal is hindering your argument. It might sound more persuasive and realistic if you give loose deadlines to support your plan to implement body cameras in phases. Instead you could say that these cameras will be implemented over a 2-3 year range so that there is flexibility in finding the funds for this. Despite your concerns, I think you use the schema very well and have a really strong conclusion. I wouldn’t recommend changing anything in your conclusion and instead adjust your background and purpose sections to reflect more on what is in your conclusion. You should absolutely mention that the safety benefits should outweigh the costs earlier in your proposal and talk about how it isn’t something that needs to be done immediately, but it is something that should be on the chief’s mind because it is important. You can also mention earlier that it would be beneficial for Scranton to follow to lead of cities like New York and LA because they have a successful model for what could be really important preventative measures in Scranton.

Instructor Note

Good work here--you might want to address some of the feasibility/benefit info in the early sections of the project and be more explicit about why in Scranton? Pay attention to the in-line comments I included above.