Ethics of Police Body‐Worn Cameras9Having considered the values at stake, let us now considerthe teleological argument for the use of PBWCs:1)Using PBWCs brings about certain goods, including deterring undesirable behaviour such as policeuse of excessive force and spurious complaints against police, as well as certain bads, including harmsresulting from misuse and chilling effects; however, the good that employing PBWCs brings aboutoutweighs the bad.92)If the good that employing PBWCs brings about outweighs the bad, then there is an overallteleological reason for police to employ PWBCs.3)If there is an overall teleological reason for police to employ PBWCs, and no deontological reasonsagainst police employing PBWCs, which jointly override or outweigh the teleological reason toemploy PBWCs, then it is all‐things‐considered permissible and police ought to employ PBWCs.C)It is all‐things‐considered permissible and police ought to employ PBWCsunlessthere aredeontological reasons against using PBWCs, which jointly override or outweigh the teleologicalreason to employ PBWCs.In spite of its apparent simplicity, I believe the argument requires several comments and qualifications.First, the conclusion of the argument is conditional since this seems to me the easiest way to structure thediscussion of the moral permissibility of PBWCs, and because I do not wish to rule out at the outset thepossibility that a relevant deontological reason exists. If we wanted, we could easily create an unconditionalargument by adding the premise that there is no relevant deontological reason and revising the conclusionaccordingly. It makes no difference in the following whether we take the purpose of reviewing deontologicalobjections to be assessing the condition or a hypothetical fourth premise.Second, deontological reasons can directly outweigh the overall teleological reason, or they can override it.That is, a deontological reason might be thought to shift the balance of reasons against the permissibility ofusing PBWCs (outweighing), or to determine the all‐things‐considered permissibility of using PBWCsirrespective of the weight of the teleological reason (overriding). My phrasing is meant to capture both thesepossibilities, when they result in the balance of reasons shifting against the permissibility of using PBWCs.Third, premises 2 and 3 are applications of very plausible general claims in moral philosophy. I can think ofno reason why anyone would deny them, and I shall assume that they are true.
