Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

City-Owned Surveillance Cameras

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • City-Owned Surveillance Cameras

    I know some people are against it, but city-owned & operated surveillance cameras are an amazing tool for law enforcement. 30+ cameras now exist in what is called the "Safezone" of Downtown Minneapolis. The safezone is pretty much the entertainment district of downtown. Minneapolis has plans on installing cameras all over the city, mostly in high crime areas. Thanks to the wonder of youtube.com, I am able to show an example of how the MPD utilizes the cameras. Watch the video, then throw in your two cents regarding the use of public surveillance cameras being used as a crimefighting tool.

    Watch the Video
    Last edited by davis002; 07-21-2006, 06:08 AM.
    "To win one hundred victories in one hundred battles is not the highest skill. To subdue the enemy without fighting is the highest skill." Sun-Tzu

  • #2
    What happened the rest of the assailants escaped arrest. Its a good system if they could speed up response time and go in tighter on the faces.
    "Get yourself a shovel cause your in deep Sh*t"

    Comment


    • #3
      I have no objections to cameras being used in public places. There is no expectation of privacy when you are out in public. They are really useful in high crime areas and, as this video showed, result in arrests. In the past this crime would have gone unsolved and the perp would have added to his "rep" for being such a bad dude.

      The drawback comes in the necessity of having the systems actively monitored and having units available to repond to situations.
      "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." -Aristotle

      Comment


      • #4
        Nice video... I like how all his home-boys just kept walking off when the cops grabbed him.
        "Alright guys listen up, ya'll have probably heard this before, Jackson vs. Securiplex corporation; I am a private security officer, I have no State or governmental authority. I stand as an ordinary citizen. I have no right to; detain, interrogate or otherwise interfere with your personal property-... basically all that means is I'm a cop."-Officer Ernie
        "The Curve" 1998

        Comment


        • #5
          I used to be a police dispatcher and we had cameras in our "hot spots" throughout the city. It worked out well, IMO.

          Comment


          • #6
            Montreal is expanding the use of cameras in certain areas. One of the first places they were used was on a street known for high drug use. Since the cameras were installed the drug users & dealers have moved onto nearby residential side streets. Not exactly a better situation.

            From personal knowledge. Cameras do not prevent crime. If monitored they might decrease response time. A recent study in Britain (which apparently has the most public cameras) agrees with my belief.
            I enforce rules and regulations, not laws.
            Security Officers. The 1st First Responders.

            Comment


            • #7
              The more cameras the better as far as I'm concerned. I hope the practice of using cameras for traffic enforcement will increase too.
              Security: Freedom from fear; danger; safe; a feeling of well-being. (Webster's)

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Mr. Security
                The more cameras the better as far as I'm concerned. I hope the practice of using cameras for traffic enforcement will increase too.
                I disagree. In NY, you need 2 speed verification methods in order to issue a traffic ticket and only 1 can be electronic. There's no human trained in speed estimation to verify the ticket before it's issued.

                For example, I got a letter in the mail from E-ZPass stating that I drove through the lane at 23 MPH. I never go through faster than 15 MPH. There's your error right there.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Many years ago Quebec had ohoto radar. They stopped using it when the points system came in for the drivers licenses. The tickets were mailed to & points were taken off of the OWNER of the car not always the driver.
                  I enforce rules and regulations, not laws.
                  Security Officers. The 1st First Responders.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Many years ago Quebec had photo radar. They stopped using it when the points system came in for the drivers licenses. The tickets were mailed to & points were taken off of the OWNER of the car not always the driver.
                    I enforce rules and regulations, not laws.
                    Security Officers. The 1st First Responders.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Jackhole
                      I disagree. In NY, you need 2 speed verification methods in order to issue a traffic ticket and only 1 can be electronic. There's no human trained in speed estimation to verify the ticket before it's issued.

                      For example, I got a letter in the mail from E-ZPass stating that I drove through the lane at 23 MPH. I never go through faster than 15 MPH. There's your error right there.
                      Jack,

                      NYC issues tickets using time-activated cameras all the time for people who run red lights. I'm all for this type of enforcement.
                      Security: Freedom from fear; danger; safe; a feeling of well-being. (Webster's)

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        I swaid previously that I have no problem with cameras in public places, especially in areas of high crime to aid police in enforcement. I did also say the difficulty comes in monitoring and having units free to respond.

                        But, to traffic cameras. I lived in an area in California that used cameras at traffic intersections to catch those running the lights. Funny how a year after they were installed it was determined that the company contracted to operate the system was found to have shortened the timing of the yellow lights, from what was legally required, in order to push up the number of people being cited. While this may not have directly profited the companies bottom line, it would indirectly when they used the "effectiveness" of their system in promotional campaigns to get other cities to buy into their system.

                        I know years ago when I worked in Maine you could take the toll road and it was not unheard of for a driver to get cited when he paid his/her toll at the exiting end. Since the distances were known and the ticket timestamped.....

                        For now I'd rather leave it to the leos to enforce traffic laws.
                        "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." -Aristotle

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by aka Bull
                          I swaid previously that I have no problem with cameras in public places, especially in areas of high crime to aid police in enforcement. I did also say the difficulty comes in monitoring and having units free to respond.

                          But, to traffic cameras. I lived in an area in California that used cameras at traffic intersections to catch those running the lights. Funny how a year after they were installed it was determined that the company contracted to operate the system was found to have shortened the timing of the yellow lights, from what was legally required, in order to push up the number of people being cited. While this may not have directly profited the companies bottom line, it would indirectly when they used the "effectiveness" of their system in promotional campaigns to get other cities to buy into their system.

                          I know years ago when I worked in Maine you could take the toll road and it was not unheard of for a driver to get cited when he paid his/her toll at the exiting end. Since the distances were known and the ticket timestamped.....

                          For now I'd rather leave it to the leos to enforce traffic laws.
                          Ideally, that is the preferred method of enforcement. However, with rampant disrespect and outright contempt for authority, there's no way for the police to effectively enforce traffic laws. There are too many other crimes that require priority and too few LEO's to police it all.
                          Security: Freedom from fear; danger; safe; a feeling of well-being. (Webster's)

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Mr. Security
                            Jack,

                            NYC issues tickets using time-activated cameras all the time for people who run red lights. I'm all for this type of enforcement.
                            Since when is a "failure to obey a traffic control device" ticket a speeding ticket?

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Jackhole
                              Since when is a "failure to obey a traffic control device" ticket a speeding ticket?
                              Since when did I say that I was only referring to speeding?? My post said, "traffic enforcement." That includes running lights. Good grief!
                              Security: Freedom from fear; danger; safe; a feeling of well-being. (Webster's)

                              Comment

                              Leaderboard

                              Collapse
                              Working...
                              X