The long-running debate over whether or not to equip police officers with body cameras has raised many eyebrows. Many would believe that this would help everyone's cause. Not necessarily, because like many other controversial topics, this debate also has its drawbacks. Let's go back to 2014, when an unarmed African-American teenager, Michael Brown, was shot and killed by a police officer. After the tragic death of Michael Brown, many people took a stand against police officers who believe they are above the law. Additionally, as there has been a surge in shootings of unarmed civilians and police brutality, countless people have urged all police departments to provide body cameras to officers. Will body cameras be the answer to today's problems? Say no to plagiarism. Get a custom essay on "Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned"?Get the original essay Since 2014, President Barack Obama has proposed a $75 million funding bill to empower local police departments and states to provide body cameras to their officers, research has shown a dramatically low level of excessive police force and complaints against police officers. Studies have shown that police officers and individuals behave better when they know their actions are being recorded. “Accumulating evidence further suggests that individuals who are aware of being observed often engage in submissive or commonly accepted behavior, reinforcing the entity.” Additionally, part of the perceived benefits of providing body cameras to police are increased transparency, holding accountable for abuses of power, better police oversight, and interactions with citizens. Body cameras can also be a great benefit to police, as they can protect police from false accusations of misconduct. Additionally, police body cameras can provide evidence of real-time incidents that can exonerate officers or suspects of false allegations. For example, “In Texas, a police officer was fired and charged with homicide after body-worn camera video was released that disproved his underlying involvement in the shooting of an unarmed youth. » In this case, video footage saved a police officer from being convicted. Another case: “In Baltimore, Maryland, a police officer was suspended and two partners were placed on leave after they were caught on their body cameras planting counterfeit evidence at a scene of wrongdoing. » On the other hand, body cameras can also sideline bad and corrupt cops. Additionally, “in San Diego, California, the use of body cameras provided the foundational evidence to absolve police officers dishonestly accused of wrongdoing: the number of allegations of extremely unfortunate behavior appearing false increased by 2.4 %, and the number of officers excused for less serious charges was identified. lead, kindness, technique and administration increased by 6.5%. » Many would say that police officers should not be required to wear body cameras because they are too expensive and unreliable. Additionally, equipping police offices with body cameras is incredibly expensive, as departments not only have to budget for the cameras themselves, but also the equipment, preparation of information, reserves, additional personnel to process the video information and support costs. For example, to prepare "the Bakersfield Police Department, a total of 200 officers, it.