Experienced Dissertation Writer | Researcher | Publication Journal Writer

How Long Do Your Academic Writing Services Take to Complete Projects?

Project time completion, including dissertations is determined by many factors such as the scope, complexity, and length of the project. However, the dissertation writer will estimate the on-time completion, and you will also discuss it with him.

Do You Have A Revision Package for any Dissertation that Doesn’t Meet the Threshold?

Yes, for any thesis, you will get an unlimited free revision package to meet your needs. This will be done by the expert. However, the dissertation writers on our site are well-versed with the craft and they try their best to meet all your needs to minimize revision needs.

How Much Do You Charge per Dissertation Writing Service?

The cost of a dissertation writing service depends on the deadline, scope, complexity, and discipline. However, our service is open for discussion. You will agree about the cost with the expert.

Can I Hire an Expert for a Publication Journal from Your Site?

Yes, we offer publication Journal writing services. We have experts well versed with different publication standards and they will help you.

Will I Get Periodic Updates on the Project's Progress?

In your private portal, you can ask for updates. However, the expert will keep on updating you and sending drafts of the work while also making any changes you suggest until the project is complete and you are satisfied.

Analyzing the Increasing Demand for Dissertation Writers Online

A dissertation is a long piece of research-based writing that is done toward the completion of a Ph.D. or completion of a master's. This might be the longest piece of writing you will do in your studies.

The dissertation writing process is draining and very technical. Not everybody can fully write their own research. That is why dissertation writers are in demand online. The hiring of a dissertation writer ensures that you deliver quality work on time.

Features of Well Written Dissertation

There are many online discussions about what a good dissertation looks like. Whether you are hiring a dissertation writer for your project or doing it yourself, below are the most important things to consider.

• The dissertation should have a great and well-crafted thesis statement or hypothesis: A great hypothesis or thesis statement sets the tone of the overall research. It guides the process and aligns your thoughts in a coherent manner.
• It should contain strong supporting points for the thesis or hypothesis: Each paragraph should start with a topic sentence that extends the discussion of the thesis statement. Also, a concluding sentence and supporting sentences inside the paragraph to build a strong logical discussion of the overall idea.
• The thesis should be structured well and in a logical manner: Make sure you keep the reader in mind while doing your dissertation. You should ensure that it is well structured and if you are using a dissertation writer, make sure he follows a strict structure.
• A dissertation should be free from plagiarism, grammar mistakes, and AI content: If you are using academic writing services or you have opted to use dissertation writers for hire online, ensure that they give you a plagiarism report, proofreading report, and AI content report. All of them should have a score of less than 10.

Qualities of a Dissertation Writer for Hire

If you want to hire a dissertation writer for graduate-level writing or thesis editing services, there are important qualities you need to check.

• Time management: A good dissertation writer should be an excellent time manager. He should keep updating you and submit the final project before the agreed deadline.
• Critical thinker: Writing a dissertation is not an easy task. It needs serious critical thinking and problem-solving skills. You should ensure the expert you are working with is a critical thinker.
• Research skills: Writing a dissertation is all about research. The dissertation writer should be well-versed in different types of research and be able to deduct viable information from research.

What You Should Do to Ensure that Your Dissertation Passes the Panel

After completing your dissertation writing process, you are supposed to present it to a panel of professors, and they should accept it for you to be graded. To ensure that your dissertation passes the screening of this panel, there are many things you need to consider.

• The Dissertation Topic: Make sure your dissertation or thesis topic is researchable, reasonable in scope, empirical, and logical. Read more about the dissertation topic (2).
• Literature Review: It should be analytical and not descriptive. Analytical means it should be written in a comparative analysis perspective comparing existing literature and not just summarizing the existing literature.
• Methodology and Data Collection Process: It should be logical and explicit on how the data was collected, and ensure it has a chronological order of how everything was done.
• Citing Sources Correctly: You must master referencing styles like APA, MLA, Harvard, and Chicago. This will help you to cite sources correctly and avoid plagiarism.

As you can see, the requirements for making your dissertation excellent are demanding. Ranging from excellent research skills, referencing styles, and formatting to data analysis, the majority of people lack time to complete all these.

As such, many opt for dissertation writers to help them complete this important paper of their studies.

A Sample Dissertation on a Given Topic to Show My Skills as a Dissertation Writer

Police Worn Body Cameras

Abstract:

Body-worn cameras are widely utilized in various states as an act of law enforcement. Critically in the United States of America, police body-worn cameras have been implemented to have control over issues related to police officers. Body-worn cameras and law enforcement are considered lean principles that are inoculated within the environment of police officers while they perform their daily duties (Hyland, 2018). These duties are required to have open and direct contact with the public they are serving. Thus, this creates an interest in having a suitable implementation of the police body-worn cameras that will strictly monitor every aspect of the actions conducted by these police officers.

The widespread adoption of body-worn cameras in various states has contributed to multiple perspectives regarding body-worn cameras. Significantly, body-worn cameras have indicated a remarkable dedication to solving the issues related to police officers. The utilization of police body-worn cameras accompanies a clear elaboration of the benefits. Its benefits are also analyzed critically by developing ethical concerns that should be adhered to when implementing police body-worn cameras.

This paper presented different results that produce mixed negative and positive indicators concerning the implementation and use of body-worn cameras. This is analyzed through the budget incurred for the police body-worn cameras and the results derived from the utilization of the body-worn cameras in their respective places.

Introduction:

There is a remarkable transformation to cell phones and other technological aspects that have ensured people are connected twenty-four hours from online systems. There is a significant dependency of the nation on technology that has equally impacted all elements with the inclusion of the police department. Various advancements in technology have led to the introduction of multiple tools that have assisted the police department in addressing current security challenges encountered in society. "Police Body Cameras" is the essential technological tool that will mark a significant transition concerning the police's approach towards security matters (Alnaal et al., 2020).

Cameras are characterized as having beneficial characteristics that are not with criticism, and there is no significant impact that has been demonstrated to be caused to the police. Thus, clearly outlining the policies and guidelines is a crucial tool enacted in all police departments. Hence, police officers need to wear body cameras since they are a necessary instrument for protecting the safety of the public and the safety of the officers involved (Rowe et al., 2018).

Today's heated political climate and elevated race tensions further push the need for critically clear evidence of what happens in a day in the life of a police officer in the United States. A police officer and a criminal analyst would be the ideal candidates to interview for this subject.

Functions of Body Cameras

With proper regulations in place, body cameras are beneficial. They are considered necessary as they are accompanied by a significant impact of their functionality advantageous to the citizens. The core function of body cameras is to monitor the actions taking place where individuals who are fitted with them are located. With such kind of characteristic, body cameras have widely provided justice for various people who have been reported to be victims of police brutality and misconduct (Giardina, 2021). The functionality held within the body cameras of ensuring that there is justice to the victims is necessitated by having the cameras unnoticed and thus taking a clear view of every action.

Currently, most police officers have taken advantage of their power, thus imposing abuse on innocent citizens. Hence, the introduction of body cameras has ensured effective detection of such incidents in most parts of the nation. Body cameras have thus indicated secretly offering detection of such actions, thus reducing the time to solve various court cases.

The use of body cameras has equally stood out to be a key component in enhancing the law enforcement integrity act. Whenever a complaint is filed concerning misconduct by the officer, the body camera plays a crucial function that will ensure sharing of the footage's actual content of the footage thus fostering integrity and validation of evidence on various actions conducted by the police (Alnaal et al., 2020).

Generally, the critical function of the body camera is identified to be revealing activities that are more specifically performed by the police, who are given power but usually tend to misuse the power to innocent citizens. This function has equally become of great benefit to the entire police department.

United Kingdom's Experience of the First Use of Body Cameras

In 2005, the UK endorsed the first use of body cameras among its metropolitan police. The cameras that were used during this time were (BMVS) Body Worn Video Cameras. With the utilization of body cameras among the Britain police, most people came up with views that effectively gave a prediction of the experience that was encountered with the use of body cameras among the UK police (Lum et al., 2020). Concerning the victims whom the police have mistreated, there happily indicated that this was a suitable way to effectively show how the police can deal with different types of situations that they encounter in their daily lives. People in the UK had great anticipation of having the police comply with the guidelines on when the cameras should be used, but still, this could not indicate that it could be permanently switched to people to suggest that they were being filmed.

There was freedom and democracy within the UK operation of the body cameras where citizens could determine whether the camera could be switched on or off. This was not the case for the victims who were suspects, as the law demanded that they should be filmed throughout (Maskaly et al., 2017). Despite the positive reactions in the United Kingdom, some people claimed that the body cameras undermined trust. This was experienced by the officers who claimed that none of the police officers could continually put on the body-worn cameras due to the sheer amount of required data storage. This contributed to the debates over the body cameras whether they could be opened or deliberately turned off.

The situation indicated that fostering the wearing of body cameras among police officers could contribute to a problem where both the police and the entire public could continuously feel under suspicion, which is not sensible as this equally undermines trust in the society (Lum et al., 2020). Thus, the experience of the body-worn cameras in the United Kingdom contributed to a constant debate where a specific section could support the implementation, whereas others were against it as they marked it as a violation of human rights among the citizens.

United States Demand for Body Cameras

The unprecedented demand for body-worn cameras by the United States was due to the interest of having thousands of border agents wear the body cameras following three official government documents. Also, the United States considered this as a significant operational change that could contribute to the increase of oversight of the border agents, thus helping in capturing criminal activities (Corley, 2021).

Hence, with the United States' interest, the body-worn cameras were expected to be rolled out in various parts of Texas and New Mexico; later, they could be expanded to Arizona, California. The interest of the border widely pushed the United States to have body-worn cameras where the country decided to deploy over 7500 body-worn cameras, and about 6000 would be into the field of war (Guariglia et al., 2019).

The concern of having the pro-immigrant activists welcome the increased oversight that will be necessitated by the body-worn cameras also generated the demand that was raised by the USA to have body-worn cameras to fight issues dealing with racism in the country effectively (Gaub & White, 2020). The United States also indicated that introducing body-worn cameras to the government will also contribute to a new insight into policies within the southern border where immigrants have been arrested for over 20 years (Alnaal et al., 2020).

Thus, the use of body cameras in this situation could offer valid evidence in criminal cases. This provides a clear illustration that the interest and the demand for body-worn cameras by the United States were due to the appeal of curbing issues dealing with border criminals and illegal immigrants who could enter the country without legal permission.

Additionally, the country was fighting against racism; thus, the introduction of body-worn cameras could curtail the continuity of these actions in the country.

Expectations of Police Body-Worn Cameras

The introduction of police body-worn cameras was expected to meet the demands of having accountability and transparency. The cameras were cited to have a positive contribution to various agencies in strengthening accountability and transparency. The cameras are expected to provide a video record of all activities that are conducted by the police. Thus, this will contribute to the necessity of ensuring that all operations performed by the police are transparent to the public, which will ensure that police accountability is strengthened (Lum et al., 2020).

On the other hand, body-worn cameras are expected to solve problems that may arise within the police force, and this will contribute to the increase of professionalism, thus helping various agencies improve officer performance. This will also ensure that the agencies have correctly addressed various structural problems encountered within the department. Moreover, the cameras are expected to necessitate reporting fewer complaints and encounters that are experienced between the officers and the entire public.

Additionally, the introduction of body-worn cameras was expected to reduce complaints and thus resolve issues related to officer-involved incidents. The accurate monitoring of police activities by the body-worn cameras indicates that every action the officers will be involved in will be recorded. Thus, this will reduce the time that is spent in cases that involve police officers in court. The cameras are expected to decline about 60 percent of complaints encountered daily around involving police officers. This will equally increase citizen satisfaction as they will have a clear record of what is done by the police officers while they are out for duty (Lum et al., 2020).

The introduction of body cameras will experience the contribution to the reduced number of complaints as they will foster good behavior from the police to the citizens, thus ensuring an improved relationship between them.

Las Vegas has widely been reported to have police officers who depict adherence to the requirements of body-worn cameras. There have been more than 3000 reports indicating non-compliance of the police to the expectation of body-worn cameras in Las Vegas. This has been depicted through a situation where they reasonably tend to believe that they are problematic, and now the camera is acting as a backup for the problems in Las Vegas, thus justifying the proactive stop (Giardina, 2021). However, despite the situation experienced in Las Vegas concerning body-worn police cameras, there is still an increasingly held-up solution to problems encountered among the police force.

Thus, the police-worn body cameras are a solution towards preventing police conduct, thus enhancing accountability. On analysis, the body cameras have indicated an impact on reducing officer use of force among the citizens, thus reducing negative complaints.

However, various technological factors have equally narrowed down various technological factors have equally narrowed down Advancements that are identical in technology have pushed the limitations experienced with body-worn cameras (Guariglia et al., 2019). Initially, the cameras experienced technical issues like malfunctions and the fast drying of the cameras. These advancements have generated a system that has suitably advanced these body-worn cameras and necessitated their use among various states. The promotions ensured a reduced malfunctioning of the cameras, thus boosting their power to perform their intended function. Also, technological advances have confirmed an improved camera storage capacity, thus necessitating comprehensive coverage by the camera.

Clear illustrations of the benefits that are accompanied by police body-worn cameras have contributed to several states mandating the use of these cameras. Colorado, Connecticut, Illinois, Maryland, New Jersey, New Mexico, and South Carolina (Alnaal et al., 2020). The mandatory enrollment of police body-worn cameras was due to the interest to guard and monitor every police activity conducted on the borders of these states. They were also interested in providing solid and unmistakable evidence to the court whenever a criminal case arises.

Additionally, other states are interested to soon employ the police body-worn cameras as mandatory. These states also include Texas, Arizona, and California, which is due to fighting against the continuity of racism within the population to enhance equality. Also, this has been necessitated by the claim of reducing citizen and police crisis, and thus police body-worn cameras will boost accountability and transparency from the police force to the population.

Cost of Police Body-Worn Cameras

There is a clear indication of many potential upsides to the implementation of body-worn cameras among the police. This is through the financial costs that are incurred towards the implementation of this program. Assuming the immediate upfront cost incurred while purchasing the body-worn cameras, additional back-end costs are encountered through actions that require maintenance of the body-worn cameras for a long-term period. Mainly, since there is a need to store data collected from the body-worn cameras, there is another cost incurred for purchasing devices that will be used to keep the videos recorded by the cameras (Matt Cagle, 2021).

This equals the subscription to which the entities are entitled to a cloud-based database those private vendors typically provide. In addition to that, another cost is encountered from significant administration associated with the development and management of body-worn cameras, procuring contacts, the equipment, and various policies set to maintain oversight over body-worn cameras.

The costs encountered by the deployment of body-worn cameras should trigger a careful consideration by the police executives and various officials concerning the needs and priorities. The cost consideration will be crucial towards deriving decisions concerning body-worn cameras and their implementation under policies about storage, retention, and the release of the videos that are considered critical decisions that will influence the community perceptions towards body-worn cameras to determine their accountability and transparency (Bowling et al., 2016).

However, with the tremendous cost incurred in implementing the body-worn cameras, there is no clear illustration of how the cameras have established a potential to pay themselves. Although their benefits are outstanding, this can indicate a positive payout to the cost incurred during the program's implementation (Guariglia et al., 2019).

The critical two purposes served by the police body-worn cameras suggest a potential payout of the cameras. The body-worn cameras have improved officer safety and communication when working in a stressful environment. Providing actual evidence of happenings around various places has also indicated a potential payout to the body-worn cameras.

Nevertheless, there is an increased interest in saving time, money, and storage space during the utilization of police body-worn cameras. Various technologies have been implemented to ensure that all these aspects have been achieved. With the interest of saving storage space, cloud computing has been necessitated to ease the amount of space required to store the large amounts of data collected by body-worn cameras (Matt Cagle, 2021).

This type of storage ensures that data is stored in cloud form, enhancing saving time during retrieval of data from the sources as the entities responsible will not have to seek the camera storage device to access the data. The introduction of cloud data storage has equally enabled saving of money that could be used to implement a storage device for each body-worn camera as all cameras that are issued to the police department are connected to the cloud system for data storage, thus saving high amounts of money that could have been used to purchase the devices (Corley, 2021). Additionally, significant companies working hand in hand with implementing body-worn cameras to facilitate cloud storage include; Amazon Web Services, Microsoft Azure, Google Cloud Platform, and IBM Cloud.

Body Camera Capabilities and Police Perspectives

Illustrations that effectively indicate the beneficial capabilities of body cameras have equally generated various perspectives from the police force. Since the cameras are set to monitor every action taken by the police effectively, some negative attitudes have arisen from the police department concerning the body-worn cameras. The ability of the camera to monitor and record each activity taken by the police has led to issues of trust among the police department and the entities that issue the body-worn police cameras (Matt Cagle, 2021). This has been indicated to be a lack of confidence in the police, and thus the police have a negative perception of the implementation of body-worn police cameras.

Moreover, medical costs have been at stake concerning the considerable investment impacted by body-worn cameras. Amounts spent on purchasing the cameras are equally high compared to those utilized in the medical field. The entire process involved in implementing the body-worn cameras concerning the medical cost indicates that the process is more expensive and thus affects the sector, which is the medical field that usually requires much funding due to its crucial impact on society (Guariglia et al., 2019). The police-worn body cameras have also impacted much stress on the police.

Since the police-worn body cameras are a form of law enforcement technique, it has created much pressure on the police, resulting in increased levels of destructive hormones, heart problems, and traumatic stress disorder. All these impacts contribute to additional medical costs to the police that the entities enforcing the law are not catered for.

There are additional issues that have equally contributed to negative perceptions from the police concerning body-worn cameras. The cameras are characterized by limited memory storage that cannot hold large amounts of data. This initiates fear among the police officers as all activities involved may not be recorded. Also, it interferes with their security as they are not assured of strict monitoring of the cameras as some information may be recorded due to insufficient memory (Matt Cagle, 2021).

Additionally, tunnel vision is another issue contributing to negative perceptions concerning body-worn cameras by the police. Since these cameras are attached to the police, it indicates that they are ever in motion, and there are some incidents where there might be a defective sight, and the camera cannot record what is taking place. This contributes to the loss of recorded information, and the camera's data cannot serve as clear evidence of the occurrence.

An analysis derived from various videos that have been recorded through the use of body-worn cameras has developed a variety of perspectives concerning the utilization of these cameras among the police. Explicitly analyzing the video that provided the case of George Floyd remarkably indicated an apparent interest of the citizens to have a mandatory implementation of body-worn cameras among the police to monitor events that are carried by the police closely.

Concerning George's video perspectives, body cameras are essential as they contribute to the accurate gathering of information per the incident. Thus, this acts essentially in the provision of evidence during court cases. They facilitate a clear indication of each activity that was conducted during the act (Corley, 2021). However, other people negatively respond to the coverage taken by the body cameras; this is because the court indicates that George was killed by underlying drugs and not the intensity of the knee that was impacted on him. Thus, the cameras may hinder apparent and actual information that may have been observed during the incident. Although people appreciate work done by the body cameras, they urge every police to monitor each activity conducted.

Video Evidence Used in the Court of Law

After gathering information and various coverages by the body-worn cameras, whenever an issue arises, the video serves as a piece of evidence in the court of law. These videos are usually used as evidence in the court of law if they meet the two basic requirements: relevance and authenticity. They are critical considerations of a video that is presented in court as a piece of evidence. Whenever a video is used in court as a shred of evidence, it serves as decisive evidence to the court. This is the significant reason behind the support of having police body-worn cameras (Braga et al., 2017).

Video evidence presented the actual happening of the scene, and this demands no validation of the evidence, thus saving time that is used in court and providing relevant information as per the issue in court, thus reducing time spent for gathering various evidence in support of the problem.

The utilization of the video as evidence widely depends on the forum under which the video is to be presented. In every jurisdiction, different rules are applied concerning the evidence submitted, which determines whether the proof will be admitted. However, when the video is presented, an advocate finds procedural rules that may be valid or vague. These demands contact of the proceeding to the lawyer to facilitate relevant information concerning the video (Braga et al., 2017). With the increase in police brutality, the interest in implementing police-worn body cameras has been on the rise, and this is to facilitate the provision of the essential information of the scenario. Additionally, this is essential to curb the continuity of police brutality among people.

Release Body Camera Footage to the Public

Whenever an incident has occurred involving police brutality, there is always a demand for the footage recorded by the body-worn cameras—this kind of pressure has impacted the citizens who wish to have justice done to the victim (Chapman, 2018). Various scenarios in the USA have equally remarked a binding force by the public to have recorded footage released to the public for further clarification of the issues that may have occurred. However, such pressure given by the citizens is turned down because considerations have to be adhered to before having any footage released to the public (Newcombe, 2021).

Whenever such measures are considered, much pressure is reciprocated from the people interested in developing an explicit consent of the actual happening during the issue. It is widely identified that a specified delay of body camera footage may potentially infringe on personal privacy. However, the public rarely understands this, as they are usually interested in accessing the footage and have explicit consent.

Despite the pressure impacted by the public concerning the release of any footage that involves misconduct or abuse, some jurisdictions have been put in place to provide the public access to the footage recorded by the body cameras. Other states have widely subjected all recordings done by the body-worn cameras to be strictly under the state's open law. The idea of having only the police department equipped with the body-worn cameras guarantees the police department the mandate to release footages that only involve critical incidents (Crowley & Hauser, 2007). This is with concern to have privacy maintained to the public due to the adherence to legal formalities established in every state. Hence having an extent to which a body-worn camera is released to the public is due to the consideration of legal aspects by the stakeholders, and this indicates that even if the pressure of the public impact concerning removing of footage, it may be turned down due to privacy and legal considerations.

Moreover, sometimes the situation may be extreme, and there is public outrage demanding the release of body-worn camera footage. Deriving illustrations from the Caledonia Police department, public anger is depicted, which requires footage. The footage entailed a traffic stop conducted by the Caledonia police department that contained allegations on social media that a police officer featured in the video placed a baggie in the backseat of the stopped vehicle (Newcombe, 2021). This action made the public demand release of the footage, and when there was no established response from the police department, there was a public outrage that forcefully contributed to the release of the video by the police department to the public.

Such issues are widely motivated by the slow response established by stakeholders in offering clarification concerning the identified body-camera recorded footage by the public. The slow responses to the demand of releasing footage involving police brutality and misconduct create poor perceptions by the people, who in turn move out to demand the release of the footage forcefully (Laming, 2019). These kinds of delays widely depict that either the police department does not desire to be accountable for the actions identified in the footage, or legal considerations are done to have a video released to the public (Crowley & Hauser, 2007). However, whichever reason is established concerning the delay of a demanded footage, it initiates negative perceptions to the entire crowd. Such issues usually trigger demonstrations from the public to forcefully access the footage from the stakeholders.

SME Interviews

An SME interview is an interview conducted after all subject matter. An expert interview will allow learning concerning a specific topic from known people who critically understand the case best. Thus, through the SME interviews, you can add depth content that will critically need you to stand out and get noticed (Newcombe, 2021).

Concerning the issue dealing with police body-worn cameras, SME interviews in law enforcement will include all police departments. Under this interview, the main problem arises with whether the police should put on the body-worn cameras or not. Deriving information from experts who deliberately provide analysis on issues related to the body-worn cameras where the problems are connected with the privacy of individuals will mark the essence of whether having body-worn cameras is the suitable method of curbing police misconduct or they have acted as a manner of privacy interference within the public (Guariglia et al., 2019). Most police officers depict a negative attitude towards police body-worn cameras.

Through the SME interviews, police have indicated a negative perspective towards body cameras as they indicate it is a form of mistrust in their duties and it widely interferes with their privacy. Even though police body-worn cameras are a form of law enforcement, it is not clear that the police are well convinced of working in such conditions where they are monitoring every action they take while on duty (Newcombe, 2021). However, different results have revealed the overwhelming impact of body-worn cameras as they have prompted consciousness in law enforcement. Thus, the police officers have indicated compelled change in police behaviors. Additionally, there is a clear depiction of increased conceptual awareness through the utilization of body-worn cameras on having procedural justice that has contributed to reducing police morale and the consequent emphasis on proactive policing strategies.

Concerns about Police Body Cameras

The development and inoculation of police body-worn cameras have contributed to face recognition software, one of the latest technologies that use artificial intelligence to detect and recognize an individual. The concern about facial recognition technology has contributed to much fear among people. This is due to the implants included in the process to accomplish the task meant for the software (Lexipol, 2017). The software has contributed to exaggeration and potential risks that impact the public's confusion about facial recognition software. With a clear illustration of the work conducted by body-worn cameras, there is a process of including the facial recognition software to facilitate complete detection of the person involved in issues that may arise.

However, various concerns arise due to the use of this software in the process of detection. Accuracy concerns and multiple implications of policymaking derive a variety of conclusions concerning the two. According to (Amber Widgery) the desire to have a compelling privacy conclusion to protect the privacy of individuals is critical. Whenever facial recognition software is used, it is essential to have personally identifiable information for the action to take place. For effective implementation of this act, there should be the consequent modification of technology that will adhere to the rules for facial recognition (Kissiah et al., 2021). Additionally, the management should meet the national legislation and the guidelines enacted with existing legal authorities concerning body cameras and facial recognition software.

The demand for improving these aspects through various concerns raised by the police is due to the desire to reduce exposure to the collected evidence. Thus, the rules are meant to maintain privacy and ensure that there is no violation of the privacy rules that may expose the evidence that can be used in the court of law. However, continuous improvement on algorithms used in the development of facial recognition software has consequently contributed to reduced risks encountered and bias.

On the other hand, there is no reprimand for body-worn cameras, and it will indicate an illegal act because there will be no accurate information recorded and abstained. This guarantees police body-worn cameras to be mandatory as it is the only suitable method that can be utilized to offer close monitoring on various actions that are conducted by the police (Chapman, 2018). Thus, the nature of law within the public indicates that the utilization of body cameras among the police should be reprimanded as they contain beneficial impacts that depict no harm is accompanied by the police body-worn cameras (Lexipol, 2017). Moreover, the cost incurred on purchasing the body-worn cameras to fit every police and have them effectively implemented into action is expensive. This is also accompanied by the maintenance aspects that should be adhered to the body-worn cameras, and this is essential to maintain their functionality while they are in use. Even though the cost incurred to the body-worn cameras is high, the advantage part of the cameras is essential and beneficial to the entire public where they are used.

Possible Solutions

According to (Amber Widgery), facial recognition software is accompanied by its valuable part, even though the act is admissible in court. There is no federal rule, not the supreme court, that supports facial recognition software. This has been identified due to the violation of privacy terms that should be critically observed within the public. Also, the facial recognition software is entirely biased, and this eradicates its value within society (Lexipol, 2017). However, despite its admissible nature, the police are allowed to use the software to generate admissible evidence to the court. Thus, to maintain the value and essence of the facial recognition software, they need to be adjusted and improved to effectively adhere to the rules of public privacy and ensure that the software is not biased anymore. This will validate its utilization within the public and thus necessitating its value.

With the increase of police brutality and misconduct within society, it is essential to have citizens' mandatory records. The compulsory record by citizens will ensure that there is close monitoring of the police by the citizens who will also end up change their behaviors and transform towards performing better actions to the public. The recording is vital as almost every court considers issues determined by the first amendment, where a right of recording is given to the citizens to record police officers whenever they are on their duties (Lexipol, 2017). Thus, with such interest, it is essential to increase state funding towards implementing body-worn cameras to offer close monitoring to facilitate a harmonious society for everyone. However, this should be given a trial period to determine its workability and functionality towards detecting such actions by the police officers within the organization.

The federal government and state should do funding of body-worn cameras. This is essential after a suitable analysis of the beneficial impacts generated from the successful implementation of the body-worn cameras by the police officer. There should also be alternative methods used after implementing these body-worn cameras to have a refund to the investment used to implement the body-worn cameras.

Ethical Concerns

There is a public interest towards the continuous fatal police of force in their respective departments. Thus, this contributed to the desire to have police body-worn cameras that would act as a tool of transparency and documentation to the interactions with civilians. The desire indicated by the public provides adherence to various ethical concerns in the society that are meant to be solved by the use of police wore body cameras (Braga et al., 2017). The level of transparency and accountability to the police department in the entire community is the primary ethical consideration given into consideration by the cameras. However, body-worn cameras have no desired confidentiality when they are used within the public. This is because the cameras do not provide a situation where individuals can effectively and openly express themselves because of the exposure given by the body-worn cameras.

Additionally, body-worn cameras have not shown any compliance with the HIPAA act. This is because they do not comply with the federal national standards that are meant to offer sensitive protection to the health information that may be disclosed without the patient's consent. Whenever police are at the scene where a patient is, the body-worn cameras may reveal the patient's information which is not good as per the HIPAA act (Braga et al., 2017).

Moreover, ethical concerns, voluntary and mandatory actions, the body-worn cameras are identified to be required. This is in adherence to the federal agents that require the police to wear the cameras when executing their duties. This is a mandatory action concerning the claims and complaints raised by the public about police brutality and misconduct. This is an ethical consideration as body-worn cameras have adhered to the new policy outlined in the code of ethics. Body-worn cameras are also an essential moral factor as they are utilized to release information to human resources for effective elaboration of the issues encountered with the public. The entire consideration of satisfying human wants and ensuring accountability and transparency in police officers' operations, body-worn cameras have been marked to effectively adhere to the code of ethics.

Budget

The cost per body camera is approximately $189. However, this should be given out to every police officer on duty to perform their intended actions effectively. The cost of maintaining the camera and the storage is cumulative, and they tally up to $739. Also, another charge is incurred to the administrative staff involved in the body-worn cameras, which is $197 (Braga et al., 2017). Despite the costs incurred, costs required to fulfill FOIA requests are offset by the requestor fees. Below is an illustration of the body-worn cameras budget in sample areas where they are implemented.

Implementation

The desire to implement body-worn cameras involves extensive explorations rather than disseminating and procuring equipment to the police officers. It is with critical concern that before the implementation program is done, an agency should develop a comprehensive plan that will effectively engage a broad group of justice stakeholders, the entire public. Concerning the implementation process of the body-worn cameras, a set of test subjects will focus on the strategies needed to deliver essential services concerning the desire to curb the spread of police brutality and misconduct (Kissiah et al., 2021). To have the body cameras implemented within desired states, there has to be a rollout plan that will adhere to the speculated rules. Such rules include the recognition of the power that is held by the body-worn camera.

Additionally, during this process, enticement of participation is critical when implementing body-worn cameras. An engagement platform is described as a more convenient way that the body cameras will thoroughly entice the participants to facilitate this action. Ensuring there is a promotion of effective communication with the entire public when implementing the body-worn camera that will fully address issues encountered by the public will equally promote this action. Significantly, enhancing the positive connection with the public and a good network is crucial as it will maintain the trust and desire to have a constructive implementation of the police body-worn cameras (Kissiah et al., 2021). Data collection is also an essential consideration when dealing with the performance of body-worn cameras. This process will be designed so that there will be suitable storage devices that will ensure no data loss and easy retrieval of the recorded data. The body-worn cameras will thus be implemented to effectively gather information by recording videos and having them stored in a manner that will ensure easy retrieval to be used as evidence. With adequate adherence to all these aspects, body-worn cameras will deliberately become a champion of change by effectively curbing all issues encountered in police services. This is through close monitoring of all actions that are taken when the police officers are on duty.

Conclusion

In summary, the confirmed investigation concerning the use of body cameras within police officers has been identified to have a positive impact despite various allegations circulating the use of the cameras. Inmates and the public have a clear indication of the high number of misconduct issues involved within the police department. Several problems are identified to be related to the utilization of body-worn cameras, and the paper has critically addressed both positive and negative concerns that are raised concerning the use of police body cameras. However, there is an essential indication of the positive impacts generated out of the cameras as they have ensured that there is the delivery of crucial evidence to the court of laws that have equally reduced the time spent in court.

Additionally, both short-term and long-term problems have been in the mark of being solved through the implementation of body-worn cameras among police officers. Having a reduced number of claims through supported clear evidence gathered by body-worn cameras has increased accountability and transparency within the public. This is because the public feels satisfied as the body-worn cameras meet ethical standards and effectively provide a suitable solution for the ongoing problems generated by the police. Nevertheless, the huge budget that is incurred during the implementation and maintenance of the body-worn cameras has been marked to produce a consequent positive impact on society as they are implemented with the desire of settling issues that are encountered within the police department, and through the data collected, it critically indicates that there is a positive reward to the initial budget used for the implementation of the body-worn cameras.

References

• Amber Widgery, L. C. (n.d.). Body-Worn Camera Laws Database. [Link: source]
• Alnaal, M., Anderson, M. L., Brier, H., Campbell, M., & Wine, R. (2020). Transparency and Yielding of Law Officers Reform (TAYLOR) Act of 2020: Proposal for Police Reform. [Link: source]
• Bowling, K., Hamann, K., J. Ihlenfeld, W., Labahn, D., Lederer, F., Mack, B., Perbix, M., Prasad, R., Smith, S., & A. Toth, C. (2016). Video Evidence A Primer for Prosecutors. [Link: source]
• Braga, A. A., Coldren, J. R., Sousa, W. H., Rodriguez, D., & Alper, O. (2017). The benefits of body-worn cameras: New findings from a randomized controlled trial at the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department. [Link: source]
• Chapman, B. (2018). Body-worn cameras: What the evidence tells us. National Institute of Justice, December. [Link: source]
• Corley, C. (2021, April 26). Study: Body-Worn Camera Research Shows Drop In Police Use Of Force. NPR. [Link: source]
• Crowley, J. J., & Hauser, A. G. (2007). Evaluating whole school improvement models: Creating meaningful and reasonable standards of review. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk, 12(1), 37-58. [Link: source]
• Gaub, J. E., & White, M. D. (2020). Open to interpretation: Confronting the challenges of understanding the current state of body-worn camera research. American journal of criminal justice, 1-15. [Link: source]
• Giardina, D. J. (2021). Book Review: Cops, cameras, and crisis: The potential and the perils of police body-worn cameras. [Link: source]
• Goetschel, M., & Peha, J. M. (2017). Police perceptions of body-worn cameras. American Journal of Criminal Justice, 42(4), 698-726. [Link: source]
• Guariglia, M., Sheard, N., Cope, S., Wang, M., & Gebhart, G. (2019, September 5). Body-Worn Cameras. Electronic Frontier Foundation. [Link: source]
• Hyland, S. (2018). Body-worn cameras in law enforcement agencies, 2016. Washington, DC: US Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics. [Link: source]
• Kissiah, M., By, -, Kissiah, M., & Michael Kissiah is the owner of Brandy Lane Publishing. (2021, May 10). Police Body Cameras: Do They Reduce Complaints of Officer Misconduct? Private Investigator and Investigation Resources. [Link: source]
• Laming, E. (2019). Police use of body worn cameras. Police practice and research, 20(2), 201-216. [Link: source]
• Lexipol. (2017, October 13). Tunnel vision and chronic stress: How to manage your physiological responses. Police1. [Link: source]
• Lum, C., Koper, C. S., Wilson, D. B., Stoltz, M., Goodier, M., Eggins, E., ... & Mazerolle, L. (2020). Body-worn cameras’ effects on police officers and citizen behavior: A systematic review. Campbell Systematic Reviews, 16(3), Article-number. [Link: source]
• Maskaly, J., Donner, C., Jennings, W. G., Ariel, B., & Sutherland, A. (2017). The effects of body-worn cameras (BWCs) on police and citizen outcomes: A state-of-the-art review. Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies & Management. [Link: source]
• Matt Cagle. (2021, July 13). California Just Blocked Police Body Cam Use of Face Recognition. American Civil Liberties Union. [Link: source]
• Newcombe, T. (2021, April 26). Body Worn Camera Data Storage: The Gorilla in the Room. GovTech. [Link: source]
• Rowe, M., Pearson, G., & Turner, E. (2018). Body-worn cameras and the law of unintended consequences: Some questions arising from emergent practices. Policing: a journal of policy and practice, 12(1), 83-90. [Link: source]