Mayor wants street cameras

[Burninator]

Bronco calls for street cams

Closed-circuit TV cameras are a needed tool in the police arsenal, and at the very least should be the subject of a pilot project in crime-ridden areas downtown, Mayor Dave Bronconnier said yesterday.

Bronconnier said surveillance cameras would not be a cure-all, but complement the city's move last year to put 18 additional cops downtown and aid redevelopment plans for the beleaguered East Village area, where about 50% of crimes against persons occur.

I cannot see this really helping much. The crime will just move away from the cameras not disappear. Cameras help with prosecution not preventing crime. The cameras won't hurt anything, but I would like to see an increase with homeless services at the same time.

Thoughts?

[ricoFlame]

not too sure if it is worth the huge expense that surely comes with it. tough call because it would likely help out in some key areas.

[Canuck-Hater]

What a waste of my money.

[Top Shelf]

There are probably camera's all over the place already, so Canada's version of CTU can monitor all the traffic and zoom in on license plates of terrorists and cool stuff like that.

[JimmytheT]

Big Brother will soon be watching.

[MickMcGeough]

Originally Posted by Burninator

Bronco calls for street cams


I cannot see this really helping much. The crime will just move away from the cameras not disappear. Cameras help with prosecution not preventing crime. The cameras won't hurt anything, but I would like to see an increase with homeless services at the same time.

Thoughts?

So if more effective prosecution won't help preventing crime, what would? Other than putting a cop on every corner, that is.

I can't say for certain but I highly doubt its your average homeless people causing the problems. Although I agree that the money would probably be better spent on homeless services, specifically better addictions counseling and care for those with mental health issues.

[HelloHockeyFans]

Originally Posted by Burninator

Bronco calls for street cams


I cannot see this really helping much. The crime will just move away from the cameras not disappear. Cameras help with prosecution not preventing crime. The cameras won't hurt anything, but I would like to see an increase with homeless services at the same time.

Thoughts?

Well, I think by moving the crimes away (as you've noted), you'll have prevented crimes from occuring... in that area only obviously. Installing enough cameras in low-traffic areas where the crimes usually occur might be enough to cut down on the overall number of crimes commited as the number of unmonitored low-traffic areas will decrease.

They already do this in areas with a history of car theft, so I think it could work to deter other crimes from occuring as well.

[ken0042]

I'll be happy if they start off with places like LRT Stations.

[mykalberta]

I cant believe how dimwitted this guy can be. Should we not worry more about garbage recycling than damn CCT cameras durring this panicked age of Global Warming?

Its dispicable that Edmonton recycles <60% of its garbage and Calgary does less than 5%.

MYK

[Burninator]

Originally Posted by MickMcGeough

So if more effective prosecution won't help preventing crime, what would? Other than putting a cop on every corner, that is.

I can't say for certain but I highly doubt its your average homeless people causing the problems. Although I agree that the money would probably be better spent on homeless services, specifically better addictions counseling and care for those with mental health issues.

What was happening in England was that their crimes rates were not going down. But they were more successful with prosecution. People were so use to the cameras that they forgot they were there.

I know it's not the average homeless person. The police/mayor are saying that drug dealers are causing all the problems. But the drug dealers must be selling those drugs to someone. Which is probably other homeless people.

[Burninator]

Originally Posted by HelloHockeyFans

Well, I think by moving the crimes away (as you've noted), you'll have prevented crimes from occuring... in that area only obviously. Installing enough cameras in low-traffic areas where the crimes usually occur might be enough to cut down on the overall number of crimes commited as the number of unmonitored low-traffic areas will decrease.

They already do this in areas with a history of car theft, so I think it could work to deter other crimes from occuring as well.

The only problem is that there is so many low traffic areas that it would be a never ending problem of adding a camera here and adding a camera there.

Plus this happened near the homeless shelter, which I assume, is not a low traffic area.

[worth]

Big Brother indeed.

Total waste of money and an invasion of my privacy. Spend the money on cops and equipment other than cameras, which won't prevent crime, for cops and that sort of thing.

I'll be writing a letter later today.

[BlackArcher101]

Originally Posted by mykalberta

I cant believe how dimwitted this guy can be. Should we not worry more about garbage recycling than damn CCT cameras durring this panicked age of Global Warming?

Its dispicable that Edmonton recycles <60% of its garbage and Calgary does less than 5%.

MYK

Well, there are other problems beside global warming that need to be addressed now and then. Don't expect them to focus 100% of their attention towards global warming.

[mykalberta]

Originally Posted by BlackArcher101

Well, there are other problems beside global warming that need to be addressed now and then. Don't expect them to focus 100% of their attention towards global warming.

I would expect a mayor as left as this one to do at least something towards it rather than installing useless CCT cameras to capture crimes that cost more to convict than what they take away. Criminals arent that dumb to be conducting crime enough worth punishing in direct view of the CCT camera.

This is just another in a long list of expensive pet projects for this Liberal MP/MLA mayor in waiting.

MYK

[Bill Bumface]

Cameras do prevent crime. When the evidence gathered from them leads to prosecution, further crime originating from that individual is prevented.

[FireFly]

Originally Posted by worth

Big Brother indeed.

Total waste of money and an invasion of my privacy. Spend the money on cops and equipment other than cameras, which won't prevent crime, for cops and that sort of thing.

I'll be writing a letter later today.

How is it your privacy when you're out in a public area? What are you doing there that would be considered private?

Overall, I think it's a good idea to put in cameras in order to help prosecution... the more criminals are prosecuted the fewer there are on the street.

[worth]

Just because i'm in a public area doens't give the city or any government the right to monitor my every move.

It doesn't have anything to do with doing things that are private. It has to do with my basic right to freedom.

You are being introduced to the control grid.

There a thousands upon thousands of cameras in London. Nobody notices them anymore. Is this a good thing?

Why wouldn't these cameras lead to other things such as facial recgonition technology? Is that a good thing? Cameras scanning every person looking for the bad guys?

Next to be implemented: National ID cards. Lets implement those so wherever you go, you have to use it to gain access to a building. Therefore, you have to have a background check to get one and check out ok, criminals, terrorists etc will have a tough time with that.

Then lets implement microchip tracking. This way, we don't need cameras at all. We'll just chip everyone and we can track everyone with GPS and a computer. We'll know exactly where everyone goes 24 hours a day. Pay with your chip, do everything with your chip.

Extreme examples? Perhaps, but if you think the introduction of cameras to monitor people stops there, I have to ask, why would it?

What about x rays? Would people be adverse to that? We put xray devices on light poles to scan people to see if their carrying weapons.

It's all the same to me and I see cameras as the first step towards a worse tomorrow, but maybe thats just me.

[ken0042]

Some good points Worth. However I would say that we are already there. Between convenience stores, malls, ATMs, some LRT platforms, traffic cameras, etc, we are already being taped several times each and every day. The difference here is that this time it's the gov't who would have control over the cameras, and not some guy who owns the local Mac's.

That's why I'm Ok with it. And as I mentioned, my recent run in with being a victim of a crime makes me think I'd rather be taped every day than have to go through the whole process again.

[SpitFire40]

WTF, if there are camera's in the city how is that an invasion of your privacy?? You're in a public area.

So big brother will see you pickin your nose or something, big deal.

[Burninator]

Originally Posted by FireFly

How is it your privacy when you're out in a public area? What are you doing there that would be considered private?

Overall, I think it's a good idea to put in cameras in order to help prosecution... the more criminals are prosecuted the fewer there are on the street.

What was happening in London was that some of the cameras were able to look into people residences. And I think the government was not accommodating in moving them or repositioning them. With all this new technology of high resolution cameras and long range zooming, it would be impossible for these cameras to not have the ability to look into someones house.