Study: Surveillance Cameras Don't Reduce Crime
September 24, 2007 2:53 AM
comment(s) - last by
CCTV image of a pickpocket
(Source: Evening Standard)
The use of CCTVs continues to be a hot political debate in the U.K.
The city of London has more than 10,000 closed-circuit television (CCTV) cameras deployed around the city, but the use of the controversial technology does not help solve crime, according to several local politicians.
All cameras installed in London cost taxpayers an estimated £200 million -- approximately $400M USD -- with politicians arguing the city has to re-evaluate the way they are used. According to research provided by the British Liberal Democrats political party, the city districts with the most CCTV cameras also have the worst rates of solved crimes.
"Our figures show that there is no
link between a high number of CCTV cameras and a better crime clear-up rate
," said Dee Doocey, Liberal Democrats spokesperson. "Boroughs with thousands of CCTV cameras are no better at doing so than those which have a few dozen."
Numbers provided by Doocey indicate only one in five crimes are solved in all London boroughs.
London's Scotland Yard is implementing several new procedures to try to improve the effectiveness of the 10,000 CCTVs in place in all 32 London boroughs.
"Although CCTV has its place, it is not the only solution in preventing or detecting crime."
The United Kingdom currently leads the rest of Europe in number of CCTVs in use, with more than one million already in use. The technology has drawn a lot of criticism from some politicians and privacy advocates in the U.K.
A quick Google News search for "CCTV" will indicate a number of British news stories that show how CCTV evidence is being used in criminal cases against suspects. For example, CCTV several school children were caught brandishing an AK-47 on a train station platform. The CCTV cameras also helped police identify London tube-train bombing suspects after the July 7, 2005 attack.
This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
RE: Worked for me
9/24/2007 11:15:05 AM
If the RFIDs were only active when I was outside and if they didn't track your movements unless they had a good reason (i.e. they have to get a warrant), then no, I wouldn't mind it at all.
If I'm in public, I have no privacy. Even if I think no one's around, someone could be looking out their window at me. An airplane could be flying overhead with a camera. My point is that a reasonable expectation when I'm outside is low to no privacy.
RE: Worked for me
9/24/2007 11:15:35 AM
Oh, and just to follow up, they wouldn't need RFIDs. Just use the GPS in cell phones.
"It looks like the iPhone 4 might be their Vista, and I'm okay with that." -- Microsoft COO Kevin Turner
Creationists are Mad About Google Doodle Depicting Evolution
November 24, 2015, 8:48 PM
DHS and TSA: Whoops, We Missed That 73 Airport Employees May be Terrorists
November 19, 2015, 2:16 PM
Star Wars Spinoff Film "Rogue One", Theme Park Attractions Announced
August 17, 2015, 12:20 PM
SpaceX Falcon 9's Seventh Supply Mission to ISS Ends w/ Fiery Stage 1 Explosion
June 28, 2015, 1:10 PM
Cool Science Video: Glowing Millipede Prowls the Nevada Desert
May 18, 2015, 12:00 PM
Newly Discovered Costa Rican Glass Frog is Kermit's Doppelgänger
April 22, 2015, 11:26 AM
Latest Blog Posts
Sceptre Airs 27", 120 Hz. 1080p Monitor/HDTV w/ 5 ms Response Time for $220
Dec 3, 2014, 10:32 PM
Costco Gives Employees Thanksgiving Off; Wal-Mart Leads "Black Thursday" Charge
Oct 29, 2014, 9:57 PM
"Bear Selfies" Fad Could Turn Deadly, Warn Nevada Wildlife Officials
Oct 28, 2014, 12:00 PM
The Surface Mini That Was Never Released Gets "Hands On" Treatment
Sep 26, 2014, 8:22 AM
ISIS Imposes Ban on Teaching Evolution in Iraq
Sep 17, 2014, 5:22 PM
More Blog Posts
Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. -
Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information