More eyes on crime
The debate a few years ago about surveillance cameras vs. privacy I think is pretty much over.
Surveillance cameras won.
That's a good thing, and the Eve Carson case is one reason why. The pictures of her suspected killers, widely distributed through the media, led to their arrests. They'll also help police put together a time line of events.
Private businesses have been using cameras effectively for decades. Many cities put cameras up in public places to deter or detect crime, but there's been resistance to this.
That's odd. If police are only too happy to have access to images captured by private surveillance systems, they should deploy their own where needed.
I'm not insensitive to the concern that cameras might provide a view into someone's home, a clear (or maybe blurry, depending on quality) invasion of privacy. But the benefits seem overwhelming. After all, not every murderer is stupid enough to stick his face in front of an ATM camera, but even clever ones risk being seen by street surveillance systems.
If surveillance cameras can keep streets, parks, greenways, parking decks and other public places safer, or help police catch criminals, I'm in favor. Is there any question anymore?
Comments (9)
To report abuse of the comment feature on this site, please use the feedback form at the bottom of any page.
Yes, I have a question, do surveillance cameras keep streets, parks, greenways, parking decks and other public places safer?
Posted on March 14, 2008 4:23 PM
Some cities think so, for example Washington:
http://www.examiner.com/a-1233884~DC_police_report_says_cameras_reduce_crime__some_remain_skeptical.html
However, I'm not sure there's a lot of objective data to prove it.
It seems obvious, to me, that more tools for police will enhance public safety if they're used wisely and fairly, but intuition is about all I can stake my opinion on at this point.
Posted on March 14, 2008 5:25 PM
I hate to be on the "other" side so often when privacy issues are discussed, but here I am again. Yes, it's fabulous that arrests (hopefully leading to convictions) were made in this heinous crime. Yet here I am again speaking about privacy rights and the slippery slope.
No one is upset when bad guys are caught, not even me. What I worry about is the misuse of surveillance of where I go and who I talk to and which bank I use, all recorded on series of cameras and when pieced together can give a pretty good picture of where I go and with whom I do business or anything else.
We live in too much fear and are too willing to give up what's precious to us as we succumb to that fear. One day, it's going to come back and bite us and we will have no idea where it came from.
Posted on March 14, 2008 5:46 PM
This issue has absolutely nothing to do with an individual's privacy rights.
NOTHING one does is public is protected.
One has no expectation of privacy in a public place where anyone can observe you.
If you don't want to be caught doing bad things, don't do them in public.
What part of PUBLIC do you not understand?
Posted on March 14, 2008 6:16 PM
What part of PUBLIC do you not understand?*jaycee
What part of "Orwellian" Police State do you not understand jaycee?
I'm not insensitive to the concern that cameras might provide a view into someone's home, a clear (or maybe blurry, depending on quality) invasion of privacy. But the benefits seem overwhelming.* Doug
Wow! Talking about tossing out the 4 th amendment in the name of the Orwellian Police state benfits?
NONE ARE MORE ENSLAVED THAN THOSE WHO FALSELY BELIEVE THEY ARE FREE."....GOETHE...."THEY THAT GIVE UP LIBERTY TO OBTAIN A LITTLE TEMPORARY SAFETY DESERVE NEITHER LIBERTY OR SAFETY."....BENJAMIN FRANKLIN...."THE COURSE OF HISTORY SHOWS THAT AS A GOVERNMENT GROWS, LIBERTY DECREASES."....THOMAS JEFFERSON...."DOES THE GOVERNMENT FEAR US? OR DO WE FEAR THE GOVERNMENT? WHEN THE PEOPLE FEAR THE GOVERNMENT, TYRANNY HAS FOUND VICTORY. THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT IS OUR` SERVANT, NOT OUR MASTER!"....THOMAS JEFFERSON
Posted on March 14, 2008 6:47 PM
How about GPS-linked ankle bracelets for all persons on parole? That puts the burden solely on the criminals, and might well check the odd crime or two. Knowing your whereabouts are monitored by a satellite, you might well think twice about your next criminal enterprise.
Posted on March 14, 2008 9:21 PM
Strange yesterday the NR had a LTE, (about the 100th on listening to terrorist) that bad. To day you want to have camera watch me play golf. That good! How come? Channel hoping, I caught some Fox News, one of thee guys they read out charges for 10 minutes, yet he was roaming the streets. The Duke men were jailed with out any evidence whats so every. Can you say Carolina justice. Jaycee you are right again, if you are not doing anything wrong, you have nothing to fear. Unless you are a Duke man, and its election year and the good ole boys need some votes. Brian I like your idea, however you must remember, you will be violating the criminals civil rights.
Posted on March 15, 2008 5:55 AM
Since much violent crime involves felons with stolen handguns, it seems to me that if you are going to use a reactive method to locate such crime, there is a better way that is less intrusive on our rights
http://www.shotspotter.com/?gclid=COyijpX8kZICFSZtkgodhGFimA
No, it won't bring back innocent victims, nor do cameras, but there is a good chance of catching the assailants.
And there is the added benefit of identifying who shot first.
Posted on March 16, 2008 11:50 AM
No, it won't bring back innocent victims, nor do cameras, but there is a good chance of catching the assailants.
And there is the added benefit of identifying who shot first. *JW Liles
Spotshoter was first use in Bosia during the Clinton era with USA sniper special forces teams. During this time, 42 so-called terrorists were taken out along with 67 innocent women and children. The weapon of choice was a fully automatic 50 cal sniper rifle with a range of 3 effected miles. The system was developed at MIT under a department of defense grant. The corporation handling the sales and training to the America sniper teams was a division of the Haliburton corporation. Recently the rights to the system were given to the Blackwater group under a agreedment that it can be use for private martial law orders within the limits of the American government and it's property. In short the system works with the so-call traffic cams as the eyes of the weapon system. So when you estalbishment control freaks run a red light, do not be surprise if you do not recieve a taffic ticket in the mail, but the proud new owner of a Swiss cheese SUV. For futher reseach on this matter,one can rent old ROBO cops flicks from Blockbuster.
Posted on March 16, 2008 5:32 PM