cameras on street corners?

July 18, 2007 8:02pm CST
alright there is a plan to put cameras on all major street corners as an attempt to lower the crime rate... now is this an invasion of privacy, or a potentially life saving use of technology?
2 people like this
5 responses
• United States
5 Aug 07
If you are on a street corner, you are in public. Therefore, it can not be an invasion of privacy. I do not at all object to having cameras out in public- it can help bring criminals to justice. I WOULD of course object to having cameras in my house, but this distinction is easy to make.
• United States
23 Aug 07
*points up to my comment above* What about the abuse by the people in charge of the camaras, hun? We used to just fine without cameras as well. I mean..it's fine when its inside buildings and the owners put them there..but on the streets seems a WEE bit much. The people wanting to put cameras on the streets pretty much assumes that they'll be able to learn anything valuable from being able to see the crime committed. But i they're concealing their face and walking funny on purpose that pretty much gets rid of the advantage..plus once cameras are common place, criminals will have found ways to get around them..so if they really do detter crime tht much, it'll only last for a few years at most. But whenever an endeavor like this is announced, even if they say it's temporary it ends up lasting for a few decades..which of course leaves its only use as..abuse. So..you see my logic. Besides. There's something..incestuous about watching one's own citizens in a way, day after day..out of sight, on little screens. It's like saying, "Okay, police/government/security/whatever..you can stalk us. We trust you." I mean think about it. How is it any different than having a guy sit in the bushes in a public park and watch you sit and each lunch every day?
• United States
23 Jul 07
Where there is this type of power, there is always abuse of it. This should hot be permitted. It's putting a bandage on the problem. Instead of getting to the source of the problem, our weak minded government leaders rush to take away our civil liberties. I SAY NO TO THE CAMERAS.
• United States
5 Aug 07
Nobody has a right to not get viewed in public. It is not taking away civil liberty. What do you think small town gossip was back in the day, when a village only had 100 people or less? It cameras can deter or catch terrorists in the act, I say ok.
• United States
19 Jul 07
I think it is both. The cameras could save a life or at least record what happened.But it is an invasion of privacy.What if you are trying to get a surprize gift and you are on the street with a camera and something happens around you and you are filmed. There goes the surprize.
@xParanoiax (6987)
• United States
19 Jul 07
It's a proven fact that the cameras only deter the shyer lesser criminals and they actually attract more thrill-seeker, egotistical, and more intelligent criminals who would consider it a manner of pride, a challenge..proof of something to commit crimes with cameras around. Which does really only make things worse 'cause though it may or may not in actuallity lessen crime..but it increases the amount of unsolved crimes. People behind cameras are human. So it doesn't really increase the amount of lives saved by that much either.. It's kinda an invasion of privacy, yeah. You're in a public place, so 'technically' anything goes..but cameras everywhere has a huge avenue for abuse too.
@missak (3311)
• Spain
19 Jul 07
I think it is an invasion of privacy, I don't think it is an actual way to remove crime, but rather to put crime in the hands of the people that have the power. Imagine for example the camera operator has some mental illness and is following a girl through the city cameras, he would know exactly when it is safe to go and rape her.