Newark and the Future of Crime Fighting 172
Posted
by
kdawson
from the bangalore-across-the-hudson dept.
from the bangalore-across-the-hudson dept.
theodp writes "Newark Mayor Cory Booker is betting that cutting-edge technology will reduce crime and spark an economic renaissance. From a newly opened Surveillance Operations Center, cops armed with joystick controllers monitor live video feeds from more than 100 donated cameras scattered across the crime-ridden city. The moves are drawing kudos from businesses like Amazon subsidiary Audible.com, which has moved its HQ to downtown Newark, where space is 50% cheaper than in Manhattan. But are citizens giving up too much privacy?"
Except, of course, cameras don't work. (Score:5, Informative)
Nope, they don't reduce crime. They don't even prevent them. They don't deter and they are pretty much useless.
CCTV cameras are everywhere in the UK, but, according to a recent report by the CCTV manager of Scotland Yard... They simply don't work, despite billions of UKP invested. You can read this analysis here [guardian.co.uk].
Putting real, flesh-and-blood policemen, on the beat is the way to go. Putting cameras (which hardly qualifies as high-tech anyway) don't work.
Re:"so this is how liberty dies, to thunderous app (Score:5, Informative)
They've had this in london for a while, and it's been a severe invasion of privacy.
And it cost billions of pounds yet doesn't help [guardian.co.uk] in actually fighting crime.
Re:the Square Mile of London (Score:3, Informative)
"London did have a real problem with terrorism: every few months the Provisional IRA would plant a bomb"
Mostly funded by "concerned" east coast Americans, see NORAID.
Gee thanks,
Alex
Re:Any numbers to compare? (Score:5, Informative)
The UK has the most camera's per capita, I think. Are there any numbers available on how much crime has decreased in those areas where the camera's are? Also how much have they incread in surrounding areas where they are not.
Crime doesn't move away when cctv's are installed. They simply have pretty much no consistent effects [bbc.co.uk] on crime rates at all. And they generally don't help with solving crimes [schneier.com] either.
I worked in Newark for 9 years (Score:4, Informative)
And these are going to be soooo shot out.
I give them about a week or two , now that people know about them.
Re:As someone who lives in the UK (Score:3, Informative)
Toni Comer [guardian.co.uk] was shown in CCTV footage being repeatedly punched in the face by a South Yorkshire PC, but the IPCC rejected [ipcc.gov.uk] her complaint of assault, presumably because she had the wrong skin tone.
So the cameras do occasionally pick up obvious misconduct, but good luck if you think anything ever comes of it.
UK Police often don't bother with CCTV (Score:2, Informative)
After finishing work one night, I came back to the bike park to find my bike missing. I found some 'bobbies on the beat' and reported it.
Anyway, I got a call back a couple of days later, asking if I could be any more specific about when it happened (I'd been on an 8 hour shift), as unless I could tell them the exact time my bike was stolen, they weren't going to bother checking the CCTV . .
I realise that police have more important things to do, but then what is the point of putting up security cameras overlooking a bike park if you aren't going to bother using them?
Re:Except, of course, cameras don't work. (Score:1, Informative)
CCTV absolutely DOES NOT work against burglary. You will find that most thieves aren't concerned with being captured on CCTV because they know that they won't be identified and even if they were that the police won't be able to find them. If CCTV deterred thieves then shoplifting would be down. Yet thieves will steal just about anything (laptops, TVs, etc) knowingly directly in front of a camera. The shops can show the police the footage but almost never does anything come of it.
Re:"so this is how liberty dies, to thunderous app (Score:3, Informative)
The study that you linked does not indicate whether the cameras help prevent crime - only whether they were used to help in convictions. A California study that I read seems to indicate that crimes at least move out of the range of cameras. Too lazy to Google it at the moment :)
Re:Any numbers to compare? (Score:1, Informative)
FYI, there are other newspapers available to read other than the Daily Mail.
You will not go to jail for the act you've described. Full stop. If you keep on hitting their comatose body with the bat until they are dead, then the situation is different.
Re:"so this is how liberty dies, to thunderous app (Score:3, Informative)
The study that you linked does not indicate whether the cameras help prevent crime - only whether they were used to help in convictions.
The first one I mentioned in this post [bbc.co.uk] does. It's far from conclusive though.
Re:Any numbers to compare? (Score:2, Informative)
Guns are not really an issues there was never much of a gun ownership culture in the UK anyway.
Not true at all. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2005/01/23/do2302.xml&sSheet=/opinion/2005/01/23/ixop.html [telegraph.co.uk]
In a material sense, Britain today has much less of a "gun culture" than at any time in its recent history. A century ago, the possession and carrying of firearms was perfectly normal here. Firearms were sold without licence in gunshops and ironmongers in virtually every town in the country, and grand department stores such as Selfridge's even offered customers an in-house range. The market was not just for sporting guns: there was a thriving domestic industry producing pocket pistols and revolvers, and an extensive import trade in the cheap handguns that today would be called "Saturday Night Specials".
The 2nd Amendment right to bear arms is copied from the English Bill of Rights 1689, as are many of the other "American" rights. Where do you think the various US states got their Castle Doctrine? [wikipedia.org] Seen many castles in the US recently?
Re:As someone who lives in the UK (Score:3, Informative)
If you read the linked article, she was drunk and epileptic rather than coked up, and officers trained in restraint should never, ever need to punch a woman in the face to subdue her (Sean Connery notwithstanding).
Now that the cops have pepper spray, there's even less excuse.
I'm in full agreement with spending the money on foot patrols rather than CCTV, especially round here where both the camera that covers our street and the ones in the neighbouring park are regularly out of action - happily Hampshire Police are getting more officers out on the beat and it's not before time.
Re:"so this is how liberty dies, to thunderous app (Score:2, Informative)
I live, teach and observe Newark daily. From my window I can witness a decay and despair that Booker and his team can only imagine. Whenever I travel abroad, I am perplexed as to why Newark, and other US cities, are in such awful conditions.
I also think the majority of Newark citizens are good, but have been worn down into behaving as if there were no rule of law.
Re:As someone who lives in the UK (Score:3, Informative)
Those who think that this could ultimately be a good thing from a civil liberties perspective - I know of no CCTV camera which has caught evidence of police misconduct, even when there is strong reason to believe that they should have done so. (Why this should be the case I leave as an exercise to the reader)
For example, the police murder of Jean Charles de Menezes [wikipedia.org] in the subway in the UK.
Re:"so this is how liberty dies, to thunderous app (Score:2, Informative)