CCTV Systems Role in Reducing Crime Essay

Although the cameras keep track of people for most of their lifetime outside their homes, the surveillance is necessary to regulate citizens and prevent them from doing criminal activity. Cameras control a large part of people’s lives, with purpose “to enforce good laws... to track the government’s political enemies, to gather ammunition for blackmail, and so on,” (Volokh 9). Cameras do not watch everyday activities to observe where one needs to go, but they are there to examine the cities for thieves and vandals. While these cameras appear in almost every part of the city, and people are unaware of what information of theirs is being taken away, the government or city does not scrutinize and judge people for everything they do. Unless a recent crime has occurred and the police requires its usage to track down the suspect, only then would a footage be released for the public regarding the criminal. Otherwise, other trivial and personal information about where one goes is not revealed. Whether the information is recorded or not, it does not affect the normal citizens who live in the area who have done nothing

Now : Surveillance cameras in most buildings (operated by businesses), and in some public streets (operated by police) to prevent crime. Although most of these cameras are operated by private businesses instead

In 2011, it was recorded that the city of London had the highest number of surveillance cameras per resident with 86.2 cameras for every individual. This caused the city to be named as one of the world’s most visually recorded cities. Most people believed that this would allow crimes to be resolved with ease, therefore leading to a decrease in the cities high crime rate. However according to the Metropolitan Police, for every 1000 cameras, less than one crime was solved per year. This lead to a mass debate as to the real use of the thousands of cameras being utilised around the city of London and the

Ron Clark describes situational crime prevention as ‘a pre-emptive approach that relies, not on improving society or its institutions, but simple on reducing opportunities for crime’. He identifies three features of measures aimed at situational crime prevention, firstly that they

I am always scared that my manager is going to look at the cameras after every shift and she would find a moment in which I was not working to my fullest potential, and would reprimand me. I also feel like surveillance systems can be used as a defense for the worker whenever they believe that or accuse a customer for shoplifting. All the worker would have to do is quickly go back and review the cameras before making their statement. If a customer feels that they are being harassed or discriminated by a worker, all the customer would have to do is make a request for the manager to review the surveillance tapes and then the customer’s claim will either be justified and taken into consideration, or it will be discarded. Cameras mounted on street signs can log cars by license plate number, scan facial characteristics, and take notes of vehicles repeatedly circling or driving above or below the speed limit. About two summers ago, my friends and I took a day-trip down to Washing D.C. I decided to drive down there since my car was the safest and out of all of the other cars, my car had the most gas in it. While we were down there, I accidentally ran a red

used to prevent more crime from happening in certain areas. Moreover, the cameras are used to

The presence of body cameras make the community that they are in a safer and better place. Body cams can make

They are not going to solve the problem. It is one of the steps.” Although I agree with Al Shipp’s point, I cannot accept his overriding assumption that cameras are not going to solve the problem. Cameras don’t necessarily mean no crimes, they are still going to happen, more are just going to get caught. Some people can know they are on camera and still choose to break a law or commit a crime. My view, contrary to what Shipp is arguing is that these cameras are catching people and decreasing the number of crimes. There would not be many crimes caught without these cameras and would not be proof of knowing who committed the crime.

First off, having street cameras all over town can be a very useful thing. In the article “Sonoma County, following a global trend, is focusing cameras on public spaces” by Paul Payne, Payne writes about a man that was caught on camera breaking the gate to a parking garage, by cameras in the garage. With law enforcement watching those cameras, police were able to arrest the man before he could even get into his car in the parking garage. "What's nice

the cameras that are used today are used to monitor people in a way of protection. For

And the benefits work both ways. The article also reported citizen complaints against police fell 88 percent after the department began using the cameras. The same article cites studies from the U.K., where body cameras are more widely used, that found the cameras “aid in the prosecution of crimes, by providing … uniquely compelling evidence.”

First off, wearing body worn cameras will provide better security to both police officers and civilians. In an experiment composed by the University of Cambridge’s Institute of Criminology (IoC), in which police officers in Rialto, California wore cameras as a part of their uniform for one year., results gathered from the experiment proved to be beneficial. According to the experiment, “... use-of-force by officers wearing cameras fell by 59% and reports against officers dropped by 87%...” (Lewsey). This proves that BWC’s have a positive effect on police

[http://crime.about.com/od/death/a/mitigating.htm] Another aim of sentencing is a Deterrence. The courts mainly try to deter two types of offences, such are mobile phone theft and drug/alcohol related offences e.g. burglary. The Criminal Justice Act 2003 has introduced minimum sentences to stop people from re-offending. e.g. if offenders commit two offences, they will automatically be sentenced to life imprisonment. The city centres are using a CCTV's to deter people from offending crimes such as violence, criminal damage and shop lifting. The main goal of this aim is to deter an offender from committing a future crime by fear of the punishment. There are two different types of deterrence; individual and general deterrence. The individual deterrence is trying to deter an individual offender, those they have already committed crime from re-offending in the future, by a prison sentence, a suspended sentence or a heavy fine. This is usually a harsh sentence for not serious offenses e.g In the case of R v Whitton (1985), where a football hooligan was sentenced to life imprisonment. This should stop other hooligans from re-offend.or in the case R v Hussain (Mohammed) [2005] CA a deterrent sentence was set up in relation

The focus of this paper will be based upon different crime prevention strategies implemented by members of the communities, local and government authorities.

Furthermore, Misuse of CCTV surveillance is not limited; Data Protection Commissioner Billy Hawkes revealed his office opened 783 formal complaints during 2010, with more than 400 cases related to data security breaches. This is how day by day use of CCTV is increasing and misuse of it is also increasing so it will be better to reduce usage of this CCTV. There are so many issue in more developed countries due to high use of surveillance technology An article title of BBC new on 6 December 2005 “CCTV staff 'spied on naked woman'” Two council workers used CCTV