Security Cameras Controversy – Why Police Should Stop Carrying Guns?
Security camera technology is getting exponentially better every day. With automated smart cameras that can recognize faces, specific items, and behaviors security teams rely on them more now than ever. They are widely used to police big world events, such as the Olympics and. These days cameras are found almost anywhere both inside and outside. With improvements in wireless security cameras that can be placed just about anywhere you really cannot know for sure who is watching. There has never been more controversy over the continued installation of CCTV networks than now.
Many individuals are concerned that continued video surveillance poses a risk to their privacy. Some fear video footage will be accessed and shared with unauthorized users, voyeurs or individuals with malicious intent. Some radical groups promote attacks on installed CCTV networks and develop websites to teach techniques on how to destroy and vandalize cameras. These groups believe they do nothing to alleviate street crime and only divert limited police resource.
However, there are plenty of benefits and it may be the price that is necessary to pay for everyone’s safety. Footage from security cameras has aided police investigations of all kinds of criminal activity. Quick access to key video has allowed officials to recover stolen goods, and more importantly abducted children. The presence of cameras keeps children safe at schools, daycares, and at home with the nanny or while playing around the pool. It is an integral part of loss prevention and employee monitoring. They also assist with ensuring safe work practices at work sites.
Proponents against surveillance cameras argue they do not prevent or even reduce crime. They often cite the Brian Nichols incident at the Atlanta Fulton County where a female security guard was overpowered while under video surveillance. Nichols then went on a killing spree for 26 hours while police struggled to locate and apprehend him. This instance really points to human error and poor procedures. Had the security agents been focused on their job the incident may have been curbed or prevented altogether, furthermore if more advanced cameras utilizing imaging analysis been in place an alarm may have been sounded automatically. Other criticism might point to why a 51 year old female guard was left in charge of a male prisoner accused of rape. Consider an equally ridiculous argument. Perhaps if the deputy did not have a gun for Nichols to take the initial assault would never have occurred. In this case police should not carry guns at all.
From examples like this it seems clear that the problem is not the cameras themselves, but rather how they are used and regulated.
About the Author: Mike Ward is the owner and operator of Protection Depot, a leading online provider of wireless security cameras. For more information about security cameras please visit The Protection Depot.
Many individuals are concerned that continued video surveillance poses a risk to their privacy. Some fear video footage will be accessed and shared with unauthorized users, voyeurs or individuals with malicious intent. Some radical groups promote attacks on installed CCTV networks and develop websites to teach techniques on how to destroy and vandalize cameras. These groups believe they do nothing to alleviate street crime and only divert limited police resource.
However, there are plenty of benefits and it may be the price that is necessary to pay for everyone’s safety. Footage from security cameras has aided police investigations of all kinds of criminal activity. Quick access to key video has allowed officials to recover stolen goods, and more importantly abducted children. The presence of cameras keeps children safe at schools, daycares, and at home with the nanny or while playing around the pool. It is an integral part of loss prevention and employee monitoring. They also assist with ensuring safe work practices at work sites.
Proponents against surveillance cameras argue they do not prevent or even reduce crime. They often cite the Brian Nichols incident at the Atlanta Fulton County where a female security guard was overpowered while under video surveillance. Nichols then went on a killing spree for 26 hours while police struggled to locate and apprehend him. This instance really points to human error and poor procedures. Had the security agents been focused on their job the incident may have been curbed or prevented altogether, furthermore if more advanced cameras utilizing imaging analysis been in place an alarm may have been sounded automatically. Other criticism might point to why a 51 year old female guard was left in charge of a male prisoner accused of rape. Consider an equally ridiculous argument. Perhaps if the deputy did not have a gun for Nichols to take the initial assault would never have occurred. In this case police should not carry guns at all.
From examples like this it seems clear that the problem is not the cameras themselves, but rather how they are used and regulated.
About the Author: Mike Ward is the owner and operator of Protection Depot, a leading online provider of wireless security cameras. For more information about security cameras please visit The Protection Depot.
Labels: benfits, brian Nichols, controversy, law enforcement, police, Privacy law, security camera, watchdogs, wireless surveillance cameras
posted by Security Cams @ 2:50 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home