CCTVs Don't Work in the UK 571
ShakaUVM writes "People who give up a little bit of liberty for a little bit of security deserve neither, the saying goes. But what happens when people give up so much liberty their entire country resembles an Orweillean dystopia — but the pervasive monitoring doesn't help to solve any crimes? That's what is happening in the United Kingdom today. While the Guardian tries to put a good spin on the entire fiasco, the fact remains that CCTVs only help with 3% of all street robberies, the very crimes they were supposed to be best at protecting.
Should England finally move to eliminate its troubling state surveillance program?"
Re:Exagerate much? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Another obvious Answer? (Score:5, Interesting)
Anyway, I grew up in Belfast. For those of you who are unaware, we've had a spot of trouble there over the last few decades. It's not as bad these days as it has been, but still to this day there are certain areas you simply don't go near in case something happens.
One of these "flash points" was just down the road from me, it was at a bridge that linked a Protestant estate with a Catholic one. Naturally, people who tried to cross this bridge were usually targeted by those waiting at the other side.
Unfortunately, there wasn't really an alternative route to get from one side to the other, that was less than 90mins in the opposite direction.
Naturally, there was always fighting and/or rioting on this bloody bridge (which went over a motorway - I'm sure you can imagine the potential risks of falling bricks and bottles there) and more than a couple of people got seriously injured on it - some even died.
Then one day they put a CCTV camera there. Actually, they put a big post there for the CCTV camera to be attached to and it IMMEDIATELY stopped nearly all violence on and around this bridge. Even before the camera was attached, it was enough to scare the little shits that started all of this away and now it's relatively safe to walk by there.
That alone is enough for me to have faith in the CCTV systems. They may not help in solving crimes, but they definitely do help PREVENT them, which I think is much more important.
This is just my experience, though, yours may differ.
Re:At the risk of being arrested... (Score:5, Interesting)
It's the same reason to be happy about RIAA strategy. They fail so badly their tactics will be much harder to use anywhere else.
Re:I have no problem with CCTVs (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:The elemental fallacy (Score:5, Interesting)
But they DO work in Philadelphia (Score:4, Interesting)
If it weren't for the cameras, the pigs would've denied everything [yahoo.com].
The debate, once again, should not be around a particular method of law-enforcement, but whether 100% effective law-enforcement is desirable...
It means, you can not exceed speed-limit by 1 mile/h, nor drop a candy-wrap on the street, nor ask for money on subway. You will also not be beaten by a cop, nor will they be able to treat fire-hydrants as special parking spots reserved for "the force". Etcaetera...
Do we want the laws obeyed and enforced 100%, or do we want to live some "wriggle-room" for the dystopian future, when it will be needed to fight some kind of oppression?
Heathrow (Score:5, Interesting)
At Heathrow, my laptop needed re-charging. So, I found a power socket, and sat down and started inserting my power converter/adapter into it. The thing looks like an ordinary wall-mounted brick adapter.
Within 5 minutes, I was surrounded by three guys in uniform asking me what I was doing.
I said I am just trying to charge my laptop.
They looked at the adapter, then at the laptop, then at my face. They just stood there looking confused not saying anything. I picked up my stuff, said thanks and just walked away. They didnt follow me or anything.
Weird.
Having surveillance is fine but having smarter people who know how to analyze what they see is even more important.
Re:Surveillance isn't really an impediment on free (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Uninformed paranoia, for the most part (Score:3, Interesting)
I'm not saying it's a true conspiracy born in smoke filled rooms over glasses of single malt, though it may be. Governments are entities of their own and act as such. They will continue to grow and try to take more and more power as time goes on. It's their nature. Only vigilance of a free populace can even have a slim hope of stopping that inevitable trend.
Re:At the risk of being arrested... (Score:5, Interesting)
I envision a system where every person has a personal recorder that they carry around, and all the output of public cameras is mirrored and shared in a fashion that made it difficult to tamper with. Something along the lines of Freenet, except simplified by the fact that you don't have to anonymize the sources.
Any time there was a contested event, it would be possible to examine the footage from the CCTVs and from the personal data recorders of both parties. Barring a sophisticated attack, this would give you the facts right away. And, if someone tried to tamper with the public record and there were any anomilies, then you could start looking at where they came from with lots of forensic data available.
This would have all sorts of rewards... we would be able to watch the watchers, and we would be able to clearly see those ill conceived laws that are being casually broken all over the place so we could remove them from the books. This would protect us from selective enforcement of laws that aren't meant to be obeyed, but only grant power to the rulers.
Interviews reported in the UK actually said... (Score:1, Interesting)
Also it isn't the police that decide where the cameras are put up, but the local councils. It is their money that is spent to put these things up.
Of course the police advise, but apparently so the reports go, there are more applications of Cameras that are rejected than approved by councils.
It seems that Mr and Mrs smith really do want their cameras up and about to make them feel safe.
you can listen to an interview here:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/today/listenagain/ram/today2_cctv_20080506.ram
(audio clip)
Re:At the risk of being arrested... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:At the risk of being arrested... (Score:4, Interesting)
Ironically [theregister.co.uk] it was so popular its viewing beat those of the last Big Brother series at some times of the day.
Re:Orwell... (Score:3, Interesting)
1) Government declares an unwinable war against a changing opponent and people listen - Yep. Some people still think that our original reason for invading Iraq was to bring democracy to the Iraqis.
2) Government demonstrates effective control over people - It's called "propaganda." I've seen far more of it in the US ever since 9/11.
3) Government enforces complete control of society and the media - Why do you think we have a "White House press secretary"? I'll grant that that isn't complete control of the media, but it sure is an effective filter. See also: Fox News
4) Abandonment of the rule of law when they choose - Habeas Corpus: gone. Warrentless wiretapping: still in force. Geneva Convention: what convention?
Re:At the risk of being arrested... (Score:2, Interesting)
My head asplode.
Re:But they DO work in Philadelphia (Score:4, Interesting)
Funny that this ridicules story is on the front page, while the reclassification of cannabis probably wont make it, that's much more infringing on civil liberties than videos of you when your in a public place.
Cannabis, as Class C was as illegal as it will be as Class B again.
All they're saying is they consider it more harmful today than they did yesterday, and that the courts are encouraged to mete out harsher sentences for supply, cultivation or possession with intent to supply. On PM this afternoon, it was said that possession of small quantities for personal use would not be dealt with harshly. (That would be down to the discretion of the police and courts.
As for CCTV, it's ineffective in the UK for several reasons. The images are generally too poor (blurred, dark and grainy) to be useful, and secondly, the police can't be bothered to look at the footage. It's "hard work."
Cannabis should be legalised. End prohibition of drugs.
CCTV is creepy. I'm sure there is a case for it in certain places under certain circumstances, but what we have now is illiberal, wasteful and almost totally useless.
Re:old ladies (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Exagerate much? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Another obvious Answer? (Score:1, Interesting)
Criminals eventually adapt to the situation and mug people where there is a "dead zone".
Once, some customers got rowdy at a local sports bar, and hit an employee that was trying to break it up. The employees happened to know they were in an area the cameras did not record, so they beat the customer until the police arrived.
Re:But they DO work in Philadelphia (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:At the risk of being arrested... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:At the risk of being arrested... (Score:3, Interesting)
the whole idea of on camera stops crime. Yep. sure do.
Re:Another obvious Answer? (Score:2, Interesting)
The amount of crimes prevented is unknown.
"For the most part CCTV did not produce reductions in crime and it did not make people feel safer."
Different study, cited here: here [bbc.co.uk].
Re:Mod parent UP (Score:3, Interesting)
Sane law will only happen when a systematic change forces all 101 of them out into the light at the same time.
The population is in a divide and conquer type situation, afraid to be the first to say "There's nothing wrong with that. I do that, my friends do that, and we're all good people". But if the right approach were taken, they would all be revealed at once, be startled by the fact that they outnumber their persecutors, and make real change.
Re:At the risk of being arrested... (Score:3, Interesting)
If it wasn't THOUGHT TO BE effective, it wouldn't be a big industry.
Fixed that. A good ad campaign can convince anyone that they really desperately need this new security device. Note that my wife's family used to go that route - alarm, cameras, the works. They thought it was great that they were protected from robbery and other unpleasantness.
Came a time that they decided not to bother paying for the thing anymore - still not sure why. Since then, they've been assaulted exactly ZERO times, their house has been broken into exactly ZERO times, they've had exactly ZERO encounters with criminals (unless you count the guy who mows their grass - my Mother-in-Law thinks he's the biggest scoundrel that's ever walked the Earth because he insists on being paid more than they were paying lawn-maintenance guys in the '40's).