What Do You Think Of Big Brother? Not the T.V. Show
 

What do you all think about this happening to your Town or City :eek:

Video surveillance has doubled in the last five years: It is now
a $9.2-billion industry, and J. P. Freeman, a security industry
consultant, estimates that it will grow to $21 billion by 2010. He
predicts that ''pretty soon, cameras will be like smoke detectors:
They’ll be everywhere.''

I don't have a problem with it...if I want privacy I stay home...if it helps cut down on crime why not have cameras???

I read 1984 in high school. It's an interesting concept, but there will always be privacy in your own home unless you voluntarily give up that right. As for cameras in public. Go for it. There's people watching you anyway. Should help cut down on crime. My car was broken into a couple months ago during work. It's such an awful feeling. If the scumbag knew he was on camera, maybe he wouldn't have done it.

On a semi-related note, I'm a huge fan of the Big Brother tv show.

Criminals Not Deterred By Cameras
The failure of cameras to reduce crime (or fear of crime) is also reflected in how offenders view video surveillance. Two studies conducted, surveyed 181 armed robbers in prisons in New Jersey, Texas, and Illinois, and an additional
310 armed robbers in 20 state prisons in Maryland, Texas, and Washington. The researchers asked about offender planning, methods, and motives, seeking to determine what means were most effective in deterring crime.
In both surveys, camera systems and video recording finished in the bottom three in significance behind several other factors including an active police patrol, number of clerks, and number of customers. According to the study, “the robbers say cameras and videos aren’t effective and don’t keep them from robbing. We know that is true because people rob and kill in front of cameras.
One of the reasons they give is that they know that no one is watching at the time, and also they’re not worried about being recognized because they can just wear a disguise or get away anyway.”

while some crimes are certainly captured on film,
some law enforcement agencies appear to overestimate the
degree to which the footage helps law enforcement actually
convict criminals. In Maryland, for example, Margaret Burns,
a spokesperson for the state attorney’s office, told reporters for
the Washington Times that the office has not “found them to be
a useful tool to prosecutors . . . they’re good for circumstantial
evidence, but it definitely isn’t evidence we find useful to convict
somebody of a crime . . . We have not used any footage to resolve
a violent-crime case.” According to a study by the Maryland
state attorney’s office, of the nearly 2,000 arrests made on the
basis of video camera footage, the vast majority concluded in an outright dismissal or a conviction for minor crimes. The office is now questioning the large amount of taxpayer money spent on the program.

I bought some special spray paint stuff that reflects light or something but it renders the cameras useless. I put two coats on the license plate of my 14. So far, no tickets from cameras!

if its the same stuff used in Mythbusters, you are on borrowed time:D, but good luck with your continued success against the cameras:p.

we have a notorious red light camera; long, wide intersection that turn yellow to red quickly or so it seems:mad:, rather than do a stoppie I choose to pull the front and drag the tale no ticket for me- camera could not see the plate; it was back in May:p

Video surveillance cameras are a familiar sight at automated
Banking machines and other private businesses, but government-
Funded camera systems in public spaces are a recent
Development. Some jurisdictions experimented with surveillance
Systems in the 1990s, but several cities eventually rejected the
Systems because of their cost, ineffectiveness, and impact on
Civil liberties.
However, the events of September 11, 2001, radically changed
perspectives toward privacy and security and there is now a homeland
security bureaucracy that is flush with money and eager to
support the efforts of local governments to adopt new surveillance
technology. The Department of Homeland Security has offered
hundreds of millions of dollars in grants to local governments for
video surveillance cameras and systems.

While the federal government has been handing out money for
new surveillance systems, cities and counties throughout California
are grappling with the very real problem of violent crime
in their communities. Residents facing rising homicide rates
have demanded solutions from police departments and elected
officials. Security companies have engaged in active marketing
to capitalize on general concerns about safety and on the
resources available since September 11. Seeing new opportunities
to address the public’s fears—and using Department of Homeland
Security funding in some cases—the local government has
responded, in part, by installing surveillance camera systems.

I'm on the fence when it come's to cameras. They're only good if you get a good clear shot of some ones face,license plate personal attributes, etc, etc and besides the criminal is going to wear a mask or something to make identification nearly impossible.

I'm all for it, but is it really worth the big cost????? I also don't feel like coming out of my front door and see a camera across the street watching my every move either. So it all depends where you set these cameras up.