Law enforcement agencies are improving public safety due to advancements in technology. If law enforcement builds a knowledge base of why and how police select, implement, and integrate new technology; how that technology is being used; and whether new technology improves policing in a meaningful way for both the agency and the community, technology can create transparency and citizen trust (Chapman, 2016). Body cameras, for example, can be used by law enforcement to clear themselves and potential suspects of false claims while also furthering community trust and transparency.
Technology can erode law enforcement because it exposes some of their unethical practices. Body cameras have recently revealed the actual outcome of police brutality or fatal encounters. In some cases, law enforcement officers were charged with crimes.
Because many new technologies were created to prevent and protect communities, technology clarifies the perception between public trust and public safety. According to a survey conducted (Crow et al.), the vast majority of respondents supported the mandatory use of body-worn cameras, believing that they would improve officer behavior while reducing citizen complaints. A majority of respondents agreed that implementing body-worn cameras would improve citizens’ trust in the police and their relationships with them. When crimes are solved, and ethical practices are followed, the community develops confidence in law enforcement’s ability to use technology.
Chapman, B., 2016. Research on the Impact of Technology on Policing Strategy in the 21st Century. Retrieved from http://www.ojp.gov
Crow, M. S., Snyder, J. A., Crichlow, V. J., & Smykla, J. O. (2017). Community Perceptions of Police Body-Worn Cameras: The Impact of Views on Fairness, Fear, Performance, and Privacy. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 44(4), 589–610. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854816688037
STUDENT REPLY #2 Tika Gray
Due to technology, citizens can see the full spectrum of how law enforcement does their jobs. The past few situations that were highly publicized in the news in the past few years have shown in great detail what actions law enforcement takes. Between body cameras, cell phone footage, cameras used to deter crime, and ring cameras, law enforcement is pushed into being transparent. As a result, the trust factor in certain situations will occur, depending on what the citizens see.
Law enforcement trust erodes when they hide or do not disclose information in certain cases. For instance, turning off body cameras while apprehending a suspect or using force by law enforcement. When the situation is dealing with the use of force, higher management of law enforcement does not promptly release the video footage.
The public during the time of an event wants to know what actually happened in a situation. Nevertheless, law enforcement would like to delay how fast and what is distribute to the public. The two parties want answers. Law enforcement will delay making sure that the facts are accurate; the public wants answers. Unfortunately, I do not believe the two will ever have a true balance.
the spread of diseases(vaccines.gov).Germs and especially vaccine preventable disease spread quickly, however when enough people get vaccinated the spread of diseases is limited.This means that the people unable to get vaccines will have partial protection(vacciens.gov). If someone happens to get the disease the chance of it spreading into a epidemic is decreased because it is harder for the disease to spread in a herd protected group. In order for herd immunity to work effectively, enough people need get vaccinated. In 2008, an outbreak of measles caused 48 infants to be quarantined because they were unable to get vaccinated. Theses infants were unable to rely on herd immunity because there was not enough vaccination in the community(NCBI). Vaccinations are important for herd immunity, in order to protect people who are not able to get vaccinated themselves. It is often argued that vaccines cause autism. Certainly if this was true it would be a valid concern. However, this argument has been debunked on multiple different accounts. The argument was started by a study published to the lancet in 1998 by , Andrew Wakefield, along with 12 co- authors. The study claimed “they found evidence, in many of the 12 cases they studied, of measles virus in the digestive systems of children who had exhibited autism symptoms after MMR vaccination.”(history of vaccines). Wakefield then went on to recommend replacing the combination MMR vaccine with single-antigen vaccinations given separately over time(history of vaccines). Now there was many problems with this study, the first being only 12 cases were studied. Anyone in the medical or science community knows that when accusations like this are released, it is supported by hundreds to thousands of case examples. The next problem with this case was Wakefield filed for a patent for a single antigen vaccine in 1997, like the one he recommended in place of the combination MMR vaccine (public health). More investigations were done on the study when it was found that Wakefield was paid money by attorney seeking to file lawsuits against vaccine manufacturers, he hid this information from the lancet(public health). While the skeletons of Wakefields motives were being discovered scientists all around were studding possible links between autism and vaccines. The paper was found to be fraudulent on many accounts. Firstly Wakefield was proven to be falsifying medical records and data regarding the data. Only two children showed autism like symptoms days after the vaccination while Wakefield recorded eight. Additionally at least two children in the case study had developmental delays noted in their records before the vaccines took place despite Wakefield claiming they were “normal” prior to the vaccination(history of vaccines). Additionally, numerous research has proven there to be no link was found between vaccinations, and autism. Furthermore ten out of the thirteen authors retracted their statements regarding the link. The editor of the lancet claimed that Wakefields studies were “fatally flawed” and the Lancet retracted the paper (independant). Finally, Britain’s medical council banned Wakefield from practicing medicine. On the accounts that the study was proven falsified, fraudulent, and ill-intentioned, it has been proven that vaccines do not cause autism. Vaccines have profoundly altered the everyday lives and health of the human race. The safety of vaccines is not questionable due to the constant regulation and research. The effectiveness of vaccines have been proven time and time again, and have even successfully eradicated a deathly and disastrous disease. Vaccines are not only still necessary but crucial for survival, without vaccines epidemics can occur quickly in a unvaccinated community, which unfortunately japan has experienced firsthand . Catching a vaccine preventable disease can be disastrous, if someone who catches the diseases is lucky enough to survive, they plausibly will be drowning in medical bills. Frankly choosing to not get a vaccine does not just affect oneself. People who are unable to get vaccines due to age, or medical reasons depend on everyone around them to get vaccinated in order to be partially protected. The ramifications of not getting vaccinated are sever, and ultimately lead to outbreaks, epidemics, and death. Although critics have argued vaccines cause Autism, the claims have been proven false. If valid research demonstrated, unknown information regarding vaccines, they would be taken into account and recommendations would be appropriately updated.>GET ANSWER