The Pros And Cons Of Police Body Cameras

Police body cameras are quickly becoming a hot topic both in Congress and in articles. There are several opinions on them, but one thing for certain is that they have their benefits and limitations. Three authors use various rhetorical strategies to convince their audience that body cameras should or should not be used.

"Cameras in the Station House" is a peer reviewed article written by no ordinary authors. The contributors and reviewers of this article consist of a state chair man, a criminologist, and two university professors. This article is written by experts of the topic which makes their opinions more reliable and each author's occupation is listed in the article so the audience knows they are reading expert views. Diction play a
Hughes starts out with an anecdote of his typical day and thoughts he experiences due to the camera. For themselves, the audience can feel what it is like to wear a body camera because of the descriptive anecdote that they feel a part of. Hughes then states that he is trying to understand why President Obama wants all police officers to wear these cameras. Not only is Hughes filling the public in on some background information, but he gains credibility for stating the opinion of our President, whose opinion if highly valued by many, and disguises this technique by saying he only wants to understand it. Hughes also reports a great collection of opinions from various, relevant groups. There is a thought on police body cameras from a civilians and police officers' thoughts. All of the opinions Hughes mentions are in favor of police body cameras and there are few arguments against them, besides cost and how they are not always filming or positioned correctly, mentioned. This is done on purpose by Hughes so that the audience has no alternative views to consider and read evidence supporting only one side to body cameras. However, this is not the most useful technique because Hughes can come off inconsiderate of other views or as if there is evidence against body cameras
Justin T. Ready and Jacob T.N. Young start their article by listing the benefits of police body cameras to exclude the assumption that they are completely against body cameras. Immediately after, they explicitly state that they are academics and have been studying body cameras for years. This gains them high authority because their views can now be considered exerts' views by their audience, the public. The tone shift from considerate to assertive was quick and was done to convince the audience that these myths are no light issue and must be analyzed. Throughout the majority of the article, Ready and Young address three myths that are mostly logical fallacies. Addressing such fallacies gains credibility for the authors as they thoroughly explain the mistake in each view that the public has most likely not yet considered or noticed and open the public's eyes to the logical explanations. To support their arguments as they combat each myth, Ready and Young have primary evidence from sources they themselves have interviewed. Having logistical evidence helps them to show the validity of their arguments has been proven true. However, the third myth addressed sounds extremely similar to the first myth and just sounds as though the first myth has been