Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 41

The UK is recognised as a leading user of CCTV and the public are

used to seeing CCTV cameras on virtually every high street. Such


systems continue to enjoy general public support but they do involve
intrusion into the lives of ordinary people as they go about their day
to day business and can raise wider privacy concerns.
The potential value of public surveillance technology took on new
meaning last April, 2013 when investigators identified the two
suspects in the Boston Marathon bombing after sifting through video
images captured by the city’s cameras. The Boston bombers were
apprehended quickly due to surveillance cameras. Yes! All agree! No
dispute over how well the public cameras were on that day. Yet,
many lingering questions need to be answered now, since we have
time and opportunity to gather our wits and thoughts!

The related Policies – Who regulates and implements?


Who draws the line at what is public interest and just plain
harassment when a camera is placed. What about the
private camera placed on property with malicious intent?
Who regulates the camera on private property? Yes
surveillance cameras are important to deter crimes,
however it is important to note who is at the other end of
the camera? Who really is watching you? Who ultimately
views what the camera lens observes? Who decides when
a privately owned security surveillance camera is poorly
or maliciously aimed (when the camera is deliberately
pointed into the windows of a private residence)? Few
months back Delhi Metro CCTV footages were on YouTube
and also at some questionable sites. Who owns
responsibility for not misusing the data of public CCTV
surveillance? In short – who decides and regulates?
Are privately owned, operated surveillance cameras to be
treated the same way as public cameras? We also need to
draw fine lines about ‘Who really is watching you’? ‘Who
owns that camera anyway’? Big brother? The Corporates?
Or harassing neighbour? Who draws the line between
public interest and harassment? At the moment, nobody!
The camera could legally do what a peeping tom could not
do. They could peer inside of windows with the full
protection of the law on their side. If a person was
standing watching outside a window it could be a crime,
yet same person could place a surveillance camera then
remotely view a person within the privacy of their home.
Most important, it is not against the penal code.
If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to worry
about
When you’re in a public space, you’re in the eye of the
public. So what’s the difference in being watched by a
closed circuit TV camera? Even if you were caught picking
your nose the police aren’t going to arrest you for that and
no surveillance officer is going put it on national
television. Yes, a video surveillance camera in public
places is good. Helps in crime-prevention and works as
deterrence. Post crime investigation is easy and catching
culprits is easy for law-enforcement officers.
Raging debate on the subject at one of the web-site
revealed the results as follows-
Good idea? 62% Say Yes 38%
Say No

The arguments in favour


We should have surveillance cameras in public places
because they ensure public safety. Rarely will anyone
attempt to harm you when they know their actions are
being recorded on camera. Cameras keep you and your
personal property safe.
The police can identify criminals recorded with cameras.
Through surveillance cameras, the police can both prevent
crimes from happening and can quickly solve criminal
cases with material evidence. In addition, surveillance
cameras protect against property theft, and vandalism. It
is very difficult to get away with stealing something if
there are cameras filming you. Therefore, the thief will
often get caught. Surveillance cameras will catch the thief
before, or during the process of committing the crime. If
no one is aware of the crime until after it has been
committed, the surveillance footage is always a crucial
piece of evidence during a police investigation.
Surveillance cameras have, and will prevent many crimes.
Some people may say that we should not have
surveillance cameras in public places. They claim that
they invade privacy. That is false. Why be out in public if
you want privacy? Just stay at home. Surveillance
cameras are meant to keep you and other property safe,
not to stalk you. Cameras are there not to invade a
person’s privacy but to protect the public by deterring
criminal activity and by providing material evidence when
a crime has been caught on film.
Criminals are less likely to commit crimes in the area if
they know they’re going to be being filmed the whole time.
Things like shoplifting hardly seem worth it when pitted
against the possibility of going to jail.
We should have surveillance cameras Why not?
Having cameras in public places make people feel safe. If
people know that there are cameras around them, they
will most likely not do anything stupid! People feel safer in
the knowledge that a potential mugger or attacker will be
put-off by the presence of a camera. Cameras, through
video analytics, now have the ability to zoom in to reveal
someone’s identity which can be beneficial to crime
prevention when used in the correct way. The criminal can
be apprehended quickly. Especially in abduction cases a
video would be a great way of tracking down a person
quickly and maybe preventing a death!

The arguments against


It is an infringement on your civil liberties. Why film
innocent people doing nothing criminal in public places.
Next, they’ll be putting them in public restrooms.
Privacy Is Dead “Those who give up liberty for safety
deserve neither” – Benjamin Franklin. A camera
everywhere is not a deterrent as all that’s needed is a
mask. It will allow governments to watch us, which may
not matter now, but in the wrong hands, can be
catastrophic. We don’t deserve to be watched while living
our lives.
They don’t work. In New York a man got stabbed and was
left to die in front of three surveillance cameras. It took
the ambulances 2 hours to get to the injured man, and he
died before getting to the hospital. The surveillance
cameras did nothing to help the man.
I think this is an awful idea because if a window is open
somewhere, a person could look through and watch them
all the time so that is an invasion of privacy.
Police should be out on the streets trying to prevent
crime. CCTV cameras are just a less effective alternative
to having police walk the streets. CCTV cameras are just
there to give the public a false feeling of safety and are a
less effective replacement for policing.
The myth is that CCTV cameras prevent crime but the
reality is that they do not.
Internet connected IP cameras are of particular concern.
Such systems are more easily “hack-able” than a closed
circuit system.

Governance and Governing Body


In the ensuing debates over privacy versus safety and
security, advocates on both sides would be wise to
consider the following guidelines –
• Responsibilities and Reasons: We need to consider
privacy issues when creating surveillance policies.
For one, cameras should avoid or mask inappropriate
views of private areas, such as yards and windows of
bedrooms or washrooms.
• Crime, Cost and Benefits: Public surveillance camera
systems can be a cost-effective way to deter,
document, and reduce crimes. For example the cost
savings associated with crimes averted through
camera systems in a city of USA saved over four
dollars for every dollar spent on the technology, while
another city yielded a 50 cent return on the dollar.
• Document and Publicize Policies. The law enforcing
agencies must formulate on how surveillance
cameras can be used and what are the disciplinary
consequences for misuse. Likewise, officers should
be thoroughly trained on these policies and held
accountable for abiding by them.
• Forecasting and Post-Event Investigations: The
usefulness of surveillance technology in preventing
and solving crimes depends on the resources put into
it. The most effective systems are those which are
monitored by trained staff, have enough cameras to
detect crimes in progress, and integrate the
technology into all manner of law enforcement
activities. Use of correct video-analytics can actually
raise alarms about crimes or accidents before they
take place. Correct management software will help in
tagging, archiving and retrieving the authentic data
for post-event investigation.
• Mix of Man and Machine: People should be out on the
streets and work-places trying to prevent crime or
losses. CCTV cameras are just a less effective
alternative to having police walk the streets or
security personnel on patrolling and physical
surveillance. As with any technology, the use of
cameras is by no means a substitute for good old-
fashioned ground work. The camera footage provides
additional leads in an investigation and aids in
securing witness cooperation. The video footage
serves as a complement to – but not a replacement
for – eyewitness evidence in the courtroom.
Yes, public interest and safety along with surveillance
cameras are here to stay. The need to draw definition of a
public camera for public interest v/s a private surveillance
camera placed for malafide intention must be addressed
quickly. Public surveillance cameras and civil liberties can
coexist if CCTV Systems are implemented and employed
responsibly.
There are many metro / mega cities in India going for City
Surveillance Projects, and, before implementing
authorities make a shemozzle of ‘policy vacuum’, some
regulatory mechanisms are needed to be put in place.

Transcript of Are security cameras an


invasion of privacy?
Pro
Security cameras cause irritation and discomfort since
we know that somebody is watching us. So we cannot
concentrate on our work fully. It makes us feel, that
they monitor us because don't trust us enough. With
that thought going on inside your head, it will be hard
to focus on the individual's work.
Con
Security cameras deters crime from happening.When a
vandal sees a camera watching him, he would most
likely won’t vandalize. Or when someone wants to steal
a car or rob a house, he will probably think twice before
doing so when he sees the surveillance installed.
Personal View
My opinion is that security cameras are not an invasion
of privacy since no one would want their crime
monitored by the security cameras. So, security
cameras will discourage the robbers or thieves from
committing crimes.
Are security cameras an invasion of privacy?
Introduction
Security camera: A camera that is used to prevent
crime and monitor certain areas

Privacy: The ability of an individual or group to seclude


themselves or information about themselves and
thereby, reveal themselves selectively.
Pro: security cameras are an invasion of privacy.
Con: Security cameras are needed to prevent crime.

Security Cameras and Privacy


In the fight against crime, police forces and governments are
increasingly using security cameras in public places. Some people are
opposed to this, saying that it invades our privacy. What do you think?

The individual has a right to privacy!


Security cameras have become ubiquitous in many countries. Whereas
before they appeared only in banks and at high-security areas, they are
now entering public places such as malls, streets, stadiums and
transport. Many people feel this affects their privacy. This essay will
examine whether the advantages of these cameras outweigh their
negative impact.
Surveillance cameras have several benefits. An obvious benefit is that the
police can catch criminals in the act, thus reducing crime. This will make
the streets safer for ordinary people. A more important point is that
criminals, particularly young offenders or petty criminals will be
deterred. They will not be tempted to carry out crimes, and thus society
will be a lot safer. Cameras are also cost-effective and unobtrusive.
Authorities do not need to spend large amounts of money on police.
However, security cameras are far from being a perfect solution. The
biggest objection concerns privacy. Many people feel that they should be
free to travel or move around a shop, mall, street or country without
being photographed or recorded. They feel that being watched constantly
is like being in a jail, and that ordinary people are losing their freedom
because of these devices. Another point is that although the police say
that only criminals have something to fear from the cameras, many
people do not trust governments with too much information. Corrupt
authorities could use information in the wrong way or twist it to
victimize some groups. Thirdly, cameras and computers can make
mistakes.
In conclusion, although there are definite advantages to using
surveillance devices such as cameras, we need to balance the need for
security with respect for the individual’s privacy and freedom. If we do
not trust the members of society, a situation like George Orwell’s “1984”
could be the result.

Ishwari said: (Jul 21, 2016)

From my point of view, the camera is good for security purpose at some place but as
everything. So there is also some drawback of having a camera is some sensitive pla
changing room in the mall or like any other place.

In world level, the cyber crime is increasing because of some bad guys, who are all le
data on the internet for some personal reason or to make money.

Rate this: +5 -1

Ruba.Tr said: (Jul 5, 2016)

Hai friends.

In my point of view, Security Cam is essential in present days. It's very used in ATM c
and etc.
Then, it is the best solution for avoiding crime. But, if affect the privacy of human.

Rate this: +12 -11

Anto Varghese said: (Jun 29, 2016)

Security cams are helpful. Because it reduces crime rate. And helpful for catch crimin
advantages, it violates privacy rate. And also the effectiveness of public security cam

Rate this: +10 -9

Paranjay said: (Jun 28, 2016)

According to me, security cameras should be used for the purpose of security which i
People use these cameras as a medium for convicting crimes. Also, the government
regulations regarding the use Security cameras.

Rate this: +12 -7

Diksha said: (Jun 23, 2016)

Security is needed in our day to day life, but it is also kept in mind that the privacy of t
interrupted by the system.

Rate this: +18 -8

Anurag said: (May 22, 2016)

ABOUT MY VIEW, we are going to future, we depend on the hi-tech world this is proo
become intelligent by using hi-tech equipment for doing their works very softly, so we
security cameras. As you know that policies want only proof i.e., we should use secur
offices etc.

The most important benefit is that it's very less cost and everyone can afford security
areas.
Rate this: +10 -12

Landon said: (Apr 18, 2016)

Security cameras are an invasion of privacy but I do agree crime is getting higher day
should be in very public places only not dressing rooms.

Rate this: +22 -7

Zahoor Ahmed said: (Jan 6, 2016)

Security cameras are invasion of privacy. Feeling someone watching you is not really
cameras are placed even in bathrooms and dressing rooms. You know that with secu
watching you, making you feel and not able to show your true self often. This can cha
sometimes it can make you feel nervous. I therefore say that "SECURITY CAMERAS
PRIVACY".

Rate this: +25 -12

Rahul Pingat said: (Jan 5, 2016)

I personally believe that security cameras are good enough. Everyone security & priv
prevent the crime on the spot. Security camera is need in every junction malls, public

Rate this: +18 -16

Dhanu said: (Oct 31, 2015)

I totally agree that security cameras are useful in many ways, for example for police m
But also they are harmful if people use it in a wrong way.

Rate this: +16 -13

Daisy said: (Sep 28, 2015)


From my point of view instead of investing money in such things we can spend the m
The crime rate has been increased even after installing such cameras. So its our own
and not through the others eyes and moreover I can't be myself in the presence of su
our privacy.

Rate this: +15 -11

Sahithi said: (May 5, 2015)

In my point of view security cameras are very important that we can find your requirem
and very important for police mans, malls, bus stands, railway stations. But some per
cameras for illegal works. But keeping eye-watch every where especially in some priv

Rate this: +25 -10

Santosh Kumar said: (Apr 12, 2015)

Every coins have two sides. Alfred Nobel would never have thought that how much de
invention. Dynamite were invented for construction but what we did.

In the case of 21st century's technology same thing is going on. How we are using the

- Well if we talk about the security cameras no question it will be helpful in every aspe
administrative places, the area which is more vulnerable, traffics etc. It gathers vital in

- The second thing it improve the efficiency of work by surveillance. Like in private or

Now I want to talk about the negative consequences.

The first things privacy. Recently in an incidence that happened somewhere in Goa in
resource minister Smriti Irani, she found a hidden camera in changing room. It souls b

Rate this: +26 -9

Sumaiya Fathima said: (Jan 2, 2015)

Hello friends, I am Sumi.


In my point of view, Security Camera is well and good thing in our society but some p
manner like hidden cameras in trial room hanger, mirror etc. , and hotel rooms. So pe
to this. To overcome this issue people who should use the cameras they need a autho

Rate this: +22 -9

P@1 said: (Nov 11, 2014)

In my point of view Nowadays Security cameras are doing great job. Because of the S
able to find the criminals, thieves etc.

-> Security Camera are need in every Junctions, Malls, Bus Stops etc. Then crime ca

-> But Some persons are using Security cameras for illegal works, so these security c
for all.

Rate this: +37 -11

Pragadeesh said: (Sep 28, 2014)

Hello friends My name is Pragadeesh.

I would like to share a fact that security cameras are useful to policemen's and other s
requirements. I encourage privacy should be there not only in mall's and other places
camera's should be there.

Rate this: +15 -9

S .T.Kavin said: (Sep 2, 2014)

According to my point of view all technology contain one good thing and one bad thin
good way it make good otherwise it get into wrong way so kindly use these technolog
the security camera in proper way we obtain more advantage.

Rate this: +18 -10

Vijayalakshmi said: (Aug 21, 2014)


Security camera is important in Public places like mall, ATM, railway station, bus stan
schools.

Rate this: +19 -14

Punter said: (Aug 11, 2014)

Hello friends. Now a days security cameras are solving most of the police cases. The
some cases. And in some cases they are useless just because of their low quality. Ju
else no use.

And one more thing is that we have to change the position of the cameras because fo
knows where the cameras are placed and a thief's can easily hide their faces. Put the
places where no one knows.

Rate this: +23 -9

Vzay said: (Jun 4, 2014)

According to my point of view security cameras plays a vital role in crime investigation
kidnapping cases. Especially now a days woman harassment and kidnapping cases a
controlled by increasing number of security cameras at public places where more peo

But apart from this security cameras are used by some rogues for illegal activities and
like they kept cameras in trial rooms and washrooms (especially in women) so everyo
this and keep yourself safe.

Rate this: +34 -7

Harry said: (Jan 8, 2014)

Hai friends!

This is my first post in 2014! I read all my friends opinions! Nowadays Security system
People moving every where in the world at any time.

Especially security cameras plays a remarkable thing in ATM center. Even though the
cameras, alarms are set in The ATM center, the incidents (robbery) are continuously h
there is no use of setting security cameras in ATM.

Rate this: +18 -26

Ravinder Nayak Iiitbasar said: (Oct 24, 2013)

Hello everybody,

As per my opinion security cameras are playing a vital role for the purpose of security
and a few disadvantages are there by the security cameras.

Advantages are : 1) We can identify the unauthorised activities which take place in pu

2) Many places like banks, hospitals, bus stands, traffic places are becoming safe wit

Disadvantages: Some people using security cameras are used illegally to get unautho

Rate this: +33 -8

Sri Krishna said: (Aug 20, 2013)

Hello every one,

Security cameras may not prevent the crime on the spot, but they can help the police
Sometimes it can be a strong evidence like in the cases of kidnaps. It is also useful in
employees are aware of they are being watched so that they can work without wastin
THis makes more discipline. But these must be done without knowing to the people. T
otherwise the suspects or criminals want make fun or make fools.

Rate this: +26 -4

M@Ll! said: (Dec 12, 2012)

Hi friends, in my opinion security camera's are required for any organizations, schools
that, with these camera's we can to controlled the unauthorized activities happened in
also protects ourselves from the anti-social things.

Thank you.
Rate this: +16 -10

Anamika said: (Aug 28, 2012)

I personally believe that security camera's are good enough. Frequently we watch ne
boned and all, having a security camera over such places as banks, ATM's help our p
forces to trap or monitor over these kind of people doing malicious act. But contrary to
security camera's are used in a wrongly manner as in malls people do cheap kind of t
changing room and all. This kind of behavior should not exist. Thank you!

Rate this: +59 -8

Satish Kumar said: (Jun 23, 2012)

Security cameras plays a keen role in our daily life, But in some hospitals, they are us
cameras are kept in patients room and are recorded live. In x-ray rooms, In cytology r
some times kept naked are been watched by every one, other than doctors, these cam
daily life. Without knowing we are watched naked by every one, try to avoid cameras
things because I myself am victim on such act by one hospital in Hyderabad. No one
responsible of such incident, till it happens to self.

Rate this: +47 -10

Khan said: (May 20, 2012)

Security cameras are mandatory in public places. Country germs like terrorists, thief e
this. But security cameras shouldn't be a thing or an article like pen cam, in the hands
create humors to the normal people. All that I would like to say is security cameras sh
sword to the media and public.

Rate this: +21 -6

Jyoti said: (May 4, 2012)

According to my views security cameras are necessary in every places to avoid corru
police force and other detective forces to find thief and criminals. Security cameras w
criminal activities.
Rate this: +19 -9

Sup said: (Apr 26, 2012)

Privacy is not at all affected by security cameras.


Basically security cameras help us to seek information about whereabouts.
It should placed in malls, market, public places. A security camera does not only help
working parents to know present state of their children sitting at home alone.

Rate this: +19 -14

Divya Jain said: (Apr 23, 2012)

No privacy is not affected by cameras. But there is a need of public camera in public p
In India terrorism increases day by day to stop this we need tight security.

Rate this: +18 -12

Uma said: (Mar 26, 2012)

I agree with the people those who are favour to security camera is needed in public p

I just wanna arise a question who says security camera affects the privacy. Where the
available?security cameras are available only in public places. So whats the need of d
public places.

No one would watch yu through this security camera untill yu behave differently or wr
which has security camera would definetly occupied by many people. Monitoring peop
person untill he/she behave wrongly.

Rate this: +50 -13

Lovey said: (Jan 28, 2012)

Every thing has 2 aspects :positive and negative both.

Having security cameras in public places can be an advantage to decrease the robbe
at public places. It an make the people working more attentive and active because the
captured in a camera.

Rate this: +29 -8

Kgees said: (Oct 10, 2011)

I think security very necessary at present time. Because increasing crime and terrariu
developed more. Then anyone can collect secret data from office then the camera giv
security camera is eyewitness.

Rate this: +20 -8

Ramya G said: (Sep 25, 2011)

Everyone needs privacy. Its a matter of oneself. In the recent past to control the robbe
misdeeds the advanced technology is made use. In every invention there will be disad
effect will be direct or indirect. But some times it doesn't matters as to protect ourselv
and banks by diverting the mind thief's will encounter robbery. In such situations, If the
installed it will be more useful. Meanwhile people use these security hidden cameras
keeping in dressing room,bath room or in bed room which will really makes the people
cameras should be used in proper way and it should not affect once character.

Rate this: +42 -7

Vikky said: (Jul 18, 2011)

Yep.. In my view, Security cameras are not much secure & it wont prevent any crimina
viewing live action.. To manage that sone officers will be appointed and all the officers
think security cameras are not much security.. Better appointing some higher official i
prevent/avoid criminal activities.. :)

Rate this: +19 -29

Annu Baranwal said: (May 8, 2011)


Security cameras are becoming a must for present scenario as, if the employees wor
Come to know about any lacuna in disciplinary measures they start paying less attent
security cameras are a must to make them attentive in there work and also for those w
and is very sensitive then use of camera is the best thing. But if talk about private plac
privacy of people it becomes a disaster to feel free and to do ones work properly. So i
understand the need of a camera in different places differently.

Rate this: +25 -6

Munikumar said: (May 8, 2011)

According my view security cameras are necessary. Security cameras are also some
there. Any technology peoples are not using correct way. The security cameras are al
wrong way. Every technologies should be used in correct way.

Rate this: +23 -8

Muthu said: (Mar 16, 2011)

According to my view, security cameras are not needed. Because it causes irritation w
is watching us. So we cannot concentrate on our work fully. It makes us feel, that they
involve ourselves in what we are doing.

Rate this: +21 -12

Lakshmangollapalli said: (Mar 7, 2011)

Security is impartant in every where now a days so secret cameras are using widely,
impartant.

Rate this: +15 -6

Nivetha said: (Feb 27, 2011)

In my point of view, security camera's are very useful for finding the thefts especially i
the camera in the office or work place it makes people feel that they have no privacy.
Also just keeping the camera is not use,it should maintain a good database and the c
high quality then only we can see the face of culprits clearly

Rate this: +24 -8

Barun Kumar Singh said: (Feb 27, 2011)

In the fight against crime, police forces and governments are increasingly using secur
Some people are opposed to this, saying that it invades our privacy.

Security cameras have become ubiquitous in many countries. Whereas before they a
high-security areas, they are now entering public places such as malls, streets, stadiu
people feel this affects their privacy. This essay will examine whether the advantages
their negative impact.

Rate this: +17 -8

Neha said: (Feb 24, 2011)

I think security camras are must be used in the area where it realy needs. It helps us
corrupted people. But as people do corruption they can also mess or change the origi
camera. It should be used personaly as in the jewellary shop, malls, big bazzar etc. O
camera must be used in the government office, it will helps much to reduce correption

Rate this: +19 -6

Sukiii said: (Feb 23, 2011)

According to my point of view, it would not help to avoid any bomb blasting or any terr
to prevent disasters. Then why should we? Especially in offices, this is not necessary.
affect than guys.

Rate this: +12 -8

Ombir Singh said: (Feb 21, 2011)


Yes, I do agree with above statment that camera's are something which is usefull till t
privacy.

Rate this: +15 -7

Divya said: (Feb 19, 2011)

Hi friends. I agree my friends view that based on the place security cameras should b
cameras are very helpful for finding the fact about any incident as the cases of robber
some of the places cameras are being misused. A few days ago many cases were fou
were used in changing room in some of the shops. So such people should be punishe
security cameras are helpful and sometimes necessary also.

Rate this: +17 -6

Achu said: (Feb 10, 2011)

It is sure that security cameras broken our privacy. But we think about the present situ
the need of security camera. There is a great chance to the presence of a terrorists in
By using security camera we can prevent such security problems. Our nations safe w
of our privacy. In other places such as shops, it is very useful to find criminals. So in m
are more useful.

Rate this: +22 -4

Naga Prasanna said: (Feb 7, 2011)

Yes. Security Camera plays a vital role. These Cameras are capturing what's going o
we are using these Cameras, there is no chance to do more mistakes. We use Came
happen mistakes. That's not small mistakes, i.e., murders.
If we use Camera, we easily find out where is the corruption happening? where is the
many things we know easily and punish that person also. That's help to remaining cri
that, but they have the fear to do like that...

Rate this: +13 -6

Raj said: (Feb 7, 2011)


Security camera is critical for keeping an eye on unethical and terrorist activity.

Rate this: +13 -12

Radhakrishnan said: (Jan 16, 2011)

According to my point of view, security cameras are one of the best solution to protec
factories, it is very useful for avoiding theft. In india there are few companies and offic
system, It can be apply in all the offices and the companies.

Rate this: +15 -8

Meerugu Ranjit said: (Jan 13, 2011)

security cameras are a must in public keep a eye on every one this formula works in r
response well they are well discipline they coperate well the chances of negilence is l
strictly well works wonder there are incendence when crimnical are caught in act caug
the law to decide it in a proper way, the incident in 26/11 where kasab was caught in t
about the privacy when they behave well in public they are not worried about privacy.

Rate this: +13 -7

Pravin said: (Dec 20, 2010)

Security camera's are the best solution for avoiding any crisis or crime before it takes
advanced and stick to high technologies to be secure or otherwise these security cam
camera's should be hidden and it should be kept secret in area's where it is very impo
countries which follow a system in developing security of their country, they have secu
every corner and they been directly seen by the officers to avoid crime. The reason w
because of the fear by politicians of being caught.

Rate this: +14 -7

Happy said: (Aug 25, 2010)

Security cameras are very helpful. Sitting at a one place you can see what is going on
using it. Because of these banks ATM and other things are safe, if they get damaged
There use be must at petrol pumps and other places where security people can't stay

Because of these your privacy do not remains your privacy. Sometimes they can be p
think. They can be in hotel rooms, paying guest rooms and in malls trails rooms for re
making them publicly.

Rate this: +13 -7

Gowthami said: (Aug 2, 2010)

According to my view, security cameras are not needed. Because it causes irritation w
is watching us. So we cannot concentrate on our work fully. It makes us feel,that they
involve ourselves in what we are doing....

Rate this: +13 -9

Karen D'Souza said: (Jul 29, 2010)

Only if the cameras are under proper surveillance, will they be useful.. there should b
monitor things live. It may sound silly because may be crimes don't happen everyday
one happens so monitoring it all the time is essential..

If such monitoring takes place then security cameras serve the purpose, else it is just
security.. it does invade privacy and also doesn't serve the purpose if not kept under c

Rate this: +17 -4

Komal said: (Jul 28, 2010)

Yes security is good but it's only there where its necessary. We can see today's time p
ways they used there where is not useful like in hotels. Some privacy is necesary but
problems.

Rate this: +14 -6

Sreelakshmy said: (Jul 28, 2010)


I feel security cameras should be placed in appropriate places like crowded malls, bu
prompt places. but the cameras should surveillance with proper security.. moreover a
increasing day by day the importance of such cameras is coming to picture. By keepin
is not at all getting affected. Its all for our own security..

Rate this: +16 -5

Sudarshan said: (Jul 27, 2010)

Nowadays every where we are seeing activities like stealing, robbing etc, so i think m
will be definitely helpful. Even the existence of such cameras will make a thief mental
eventually will be caught.

But what i feel is cameras should be used in places where that are necessary, but in p
ultimately cause severe problems than to solve problems,and in the places like office
people cant give 100% when they are under observation.

Rate this: +13 -6

Naresh said: (Jul 27, 2010)

Securiy cameras are useful in public places like railway stations, bus stations, ..etc. B
immediate action, they are used after any crime happens for investigation purpose. B
where especially in some privacy places is not reasonable.

Rate this: +13 -4

Jaya said: (Jul 26, 2010)

I think so it is waste in most of the cases. It just affects the privacy of the people rathe
are not doing much....

Rate this: +13 -5

Swapnil said: (Jul 26, 2010)


Security cameras are good but they has to be viewed each and every minute of the d
we come to know after crime and most of the times we cant recognize face of the per
the person. Thus even security cameras are there one can do anything taking precau
way..

Rate this: +14 -6

Divya said: (Jul 26, 2010)

In my point of view Security Cameras must be available only in the place where it is n
myriad of activities that go on in a large metropolis. Hidden Camera Detector technolo
just like cameras so you can easily protect yourself from having your privacy invaded.

This should be something you think about whenever you use a public restroom, chan
video of that event could wind up on the internet being viewed by thousands of perver
ofcourse for womens it is acting like a bad watchmen apart from the real men.

Rate this: +15 -5

Emmanullah said: (Jul 26, 2010)

Security is the important factor in nowadays. Because the terrorism increase day by d
the guys with the help of some camera but camera can placed necessary places like
for the guys are misbehaved during some privacy.

Rate this: +13 -5

Mano said: (Jul 26, 2010)

Security is one of the major issue in current senrio. Using camera to monitor the peop
affect the Privacy of human. If they think. they watched by someone means they will n
will be like actree. We cannt able to get their orginality

Rate this: +13 -4

Anitha said: (Jul 25, 2010)


In my view of security cameras to say it has both positives and negatives.. though it is
used in colleges it makes us feel uncomfortable ... especially for girls it is a real distur
feel as though some one is having a watch on them..

Rate this: +17 -7

Sivaram said: (Jul 24, 2010)

According to my point of my view, the usage of cameras in the office is make the emp
reliable to their company and making so much irritation in the environment of the offic
to think free to deploy their innovative ideas for the developoment of the company.

Rate this: +12 -7

Aarti said: (Jul 24, 2010)

I feel security cameras are unavoidable especially at social places espacially at the pl
terrorist survelliance. When there is tight security den it creates a fear among crimina
However loose security boost confidence among criminals. So security cameras are g
depending upon the profile.

Rate this: +14 -5

Gopalsamy said: (Jul 23, 2010)

In my point of view security camers are necessary depends on location and environm
people who are right in their work why they bother about cameras. Depends on worth
need to safeguard their belongings so security alerts are needed.

Rate this: +13 -7

Prasanthi said: (Jul 20, 2010)

In my point of view security cameras are very essential in present world.It must have
cameras the owner will see and he recognises whether the employees in that garmen
not.
Rate this: +18 -4

Raj said: (Jul 20, 2010)

In my opinion security camera's are very usefull for everyone. If assume we have a ow
security camera's we can catch theves. Security cameras in offices are not must. Dep
can encourage.

Rate this: +13 -5

Maheshreddy said: (Jul 19, 2010)

In my opinion security camera's are very usefull for everyone. If assume we have a ow
security camera's we can catch theves. Security cameras in offices are not must. Dep
can encourage.

Rate this: +14 -8

Titan said: (Jul 19, 2010)

Yes security cameras is necessary but it has some privacy which means some person

Rate this: +13 -7

Ram Bhardwaj said: (Jul 17, 2010)

Yaah there is need of security cameras to be installed at different places...now a days


corrupted.We are doing crimes here and there so it may help us...besides this the oth
should take apropriate action against corruption.If we are not commiting any thing wro
with cameras...

Rate this: +15 -6

Krishna Ghosh said: (Jul 16, 2010)


Security cameras cannot prevent any crime. All it can help is to find out the culprit lon
already taken place. Many a times, the faces of the person cannot be even identified
Moreover, it requires maintenance and storage.
There is no mean to ensure that such a camera will not malfunction or cannot be dam
not even considered as concrete proof in court.

Rate this: +17 -5

Mekala said: (Jul 15, 2010)

Yes. Privacy is affected by using the security cameras. But it is going to be very irritat
somewhere else . Based on the place security cameras are being good. If we conside
security cameras more helpful to find the terrorists and watch their activities. So use i

Rate this: +22 -5

This week on the CNN website, there appeared an article


in which a noted law professor voiced his concerns about
the loss of our personal privacy and civil liberties
because of the increased number of surveillance cameras
cities are installing.( Neil Richards is a professor of law
at Washington University. He is the author of the recent
Harvard Law Review article, "The Dangers of
Surveillance.". )
The Boston Marathon bombings are setting off a series
of suggestions about how we fight terrorism like this and
one item that some people think will help is to install
more surveillance cameras in public areas. Professor
Richards says: “This would be a mistake. This would be
dangerous to our civil liberties.”
SUBSCRIBE
His reason for rejecting more cameras are that they are
expensive and require a healthy budget for repairs,
which may negatively impact monies needed for other
services like police, firefighting and schools. He also
maintains that cameras don;’t deter crimes. They simply
report them if they are in the right place at the right
time. Professor Richardspoints out that more cameras
and police would lead to a police state that Boston Police
Commissioner, Ed Davis says even he doesn’t want.
Richards is also reluctant to increase cameras on the
streets because with advanced technology that is now
available “such a system could conceivably give the
government increased power over us, power that could
be used not just to monitor, but in some cases,
potentially, to blackmail, persuadeor discriminate.
Less privacy, less civil liberties. Being constantly
observed might make us feel slightly safer, but this
would be only an illusion of safety. History has shown
repeatedly that broad government surveillance powers
inevitably get abused, whether by the Gestapo, the Stasi,
or our own FBI, which engaged in unlawful surveillance
(and blackmail) of "dangerous" people like Martin
Luther King Jr”
This is a rather contentious issue. We have to admit that
surveillance cameras definitely expedited the Boston
investigation. But do we want them everywhere? Is it a
privacy and civil liberties issue or just good proactive
security planning?

The Dangers of Surveillance


Neil M. Richards
Washington University in Saint Louis - School of Law

March 25, 2013

Harvard Law Review, 2013


Abstract:
From the Fourth Amendment to George Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four,
our culture is full of warnings about state scrutiny of our lives. These
warnings are commonplace, but they are rarely very specific. Other than
the vague threat of an Orwellian dystopia, as a society we don’t really
know why surveillance is bad, and why we should be wary of it. To the
extent the answer has something to do with “privacy,” we lack an
understanding of what “privacy” means in this context, and why it
matters. Developments in government and corporate practices have
made this problem more urgent. Although we have laws that protect us
against government surveillance, secret government programs cannot
be challenged until they are discovered. And even when they are, courts
frequently dismiss challenges to such programs for lack of standing,
under the theory that mere surveillance creates no tangible harms, as
the Supreme Court did recently in the case of Clapper v. Amnesty
International. We need a better account of the dangers of surveillance.

This article offers such an account. Drawing on law, history, literature,


and the work of scholars in the emerging interdisciplinary field of
“surveillance studies,” I explain what those harms are and why they
matter. At the level of theory, I explain when surveillance is particularly
dangerous, and when it is not. Surveillance is harmful because it can
chill the exercise of our civil liberties, especially our intellectual privacy. It
ialso gives the watcher power over the watched, creating the the risk of a
variety of other harms, such as discrimination, coercion, and the threat of
selective enforcement, where critics of the government can be
prosecuted or blackmailed for wrongdoing unrelated to the purpose of
the surveillance.

At a practical level, I propose a set of four principles that should guide


the future development of surveillance law, allowing for a more
appropriate balance between the costs and benefits of government
surveillance. First, we must recognize that surveillance transcends the
public-private divide. Even if we are ultimately more concerned with
government surveillance, any solution must grapple with the complex
relationships between government and corporate watchers. Second, we
must recognize that secret surveillance is illegitimate, and prohibit the
creation of any domestic surveillance programs whose existence is
secret. Third, we should recognize that total surveillance is illegitimate
and reject the idea that it is acceptable for the government to record all
Internet activity without authorization. Fourth, we must recognize that
surveillance is harmful. Surveillance menaces intellectual privacy and
increases the risk of blackmail, coercion, and discrimination; accordingly,
we must recognize surveillance as a harm in constitutional standing
doctrine.

Surveillance Cameras and the Right to Privacy


• Comment 8 Shares Tweet Stumble Email
#WIREFRAME:339-334 In its "Where America Stands" series, CBS
News is looking at a broad spectrum of issues facing this country in the
new decade.

Most law enforcement experts will tell you nothing beats having cops on
the beat when it comes to fighting crime. Police officers can't be
everywhere. Now, they don't have to be - thanks to some high-tech help.

Every minute a car is stolen. Every day across the country 44 people are
murdered and nearly 3,800 are victims of violent crimes. While crime
usually rises during a recession, that's not the case now. Nationwide,
violent crimes are down 5.5 percent. Crimes like murder declined 7.2
percent, robbery 8.1 percent, motor vehicle theft down 17.2 percent.

Law enforcement officials say the increased use of high-tech tools to


fight crime is a big reason why.

From the operations center of the Office of Emergency Communications


in Chicago "48 Hours" correspondent Erin Moriarty reports
officials keep watch over the 232 square mile urban area with a massive
network of cameras, creating a virtual eye in the sky. Officials refuse to
give actual figures, but some estimate the number of publicly and
privately owned cameras targeting Chicago to be around 15,000.

Nick Benton, a Chicago paramedic assigned to the operation center, said


they can "Zoom in up to 32 times optically, and up to 184 times
digitally."

"We can get license plates. I'm not going to pull up a specific license
plate," he added. "But yes, you can actually zoom in and very clearly see
their license plate."

Tell Us What You Think Send us an e-mail.

City officials were keeping a close eye on crowds gathering for a Tea
Party protest.

Can you pick out faces of those at the demonstration?

"We are very strict on how we use the cameras," Benton said. "We never
zoom in on windows when they are open. We will never look into
buildings and we are actually very careful if we zoom in on people's faces
specifically."

Jim Harper of the Cato Institutesays the problem with surveillance


cameras and technology is they have a spotty record of preventing crime.
Instead, he says they are an invasion of privacy.

People in most cities are probably captured on cameras daily, if not


multiple times a day," Harper said. "As these cameras network together,
and they as they are better capable at recognizing individual faces,
people will realize just how they are being watched."

Harper says the danger is when videos are released of individuals who
are not actually involved in a crime. Remember the nationally broadcast
video of a man changing his shirt - because officials first believed he
could be the Times Square bomber.

CBS Reports: Where America Stands

"There are no absolutes here," Harper said. "The cameras are helpful in
some instances - harmful in other instances if they've led us all astray."

But there is likely to be a demand for even more surveillance cameras.


Officials say the solution then is ever more sophisticated equipment that
catches criminals in the act.

911 operators in Chicago can turn on any surveillance camera within 150
feet of an emergency call. So when an operator received a call that a
Salvation Army bell ringer was helping himself to the collection bucket -
the cops were called in.

The brain of the video surveillance system is computer software called


"analytics." It allows operators to set up a virtual perimeter around
buildings. Once someone or something crosses a virtual line the
computer sends an alert to an official on-duty.

Chicago Police commander John Lewin runs the information services


department. He points to mobile cameras called PODS (police operation
devices) which allows officers to watch high crime neighborhoods in real
time. Using these PODS, police were able to catch one man as he
attempted to burglarize a home.

Moriarty asked, "Are you concerned that officers will rely too much on
technology and not do the regular foot work?"

"No," Lewin replied. "As with any technology, none of these things are
the magic bullet - pardon the pun. They are just going to be another tool
in the toolbox to help officers do their jobs."

The Fourth Amendment protects against unreasonable searches.


Americans will soon have to decide when this goes too far.

Big Debate: CCTV cameras - Tackling crime


or invading our privacy?
10:37 27 March 2013

A generic picture of two CCTV cameras on the side of a building in


central London.
The number of CCTV cameras being installed across the capital is
growing because councils are increasingly seeing them as a useful
tool in the fight against fight crime. But some organisations argue
they infringe our right to privacy. We asked the Mayor of Tower
Hamlets and a volunteer at a civil liberties organisation for their
views.
Tahmeena Bax, a volunteer at the Newham Monitoring
Project
Whilst most of us at Newham Monitoring Project
(NMP) would agree that safety is a priority, we
have doubts that increased CCTV is the way to
deliver this.
The cost to the community, both financial and in
terms of intrusion, is potentially high. The
question, therefore, is do the benefits outweigh the
risks? Through our work at a community level, we
come across divided views.
Support for cameras tends to come from those
frustrated with inaction over antisocial behaviour.
However, Newham already has 959 cameras – more
than Birmingham and Liverpool combined.
Despite this high figure, of the 32,809 crimes
recorded in Newham in 2012, less than one per
cent of arrests resulted from this network.
These statistics suggest that CCTV is neither an
effective deterrent nor a quick-fix solution.
Any decision to extend the surveillance of citizens
erodes the basic right to privacy.
A common argument in favour of CCTV is: ‘If you
are doing nothing wrong, you have nothing to worry
about.’
However, this does not answer the question: ‘If you
are doing nothing wrong, why are you being
watched at all?’
Some may argue cameras don’t discriminate in
whom they film.
However, at NMP, we receive frequent complaints
that cameras are installed in areas where
communities already feel unfairly targeted by
police or authorities and CCTV only serves to
exasperate tensions and increase alienation.
Our experience in supporting victims of crime
highlights the false sense of security CCTV
provides; footage is frequently too poor to identify
anything useful; police are often too slow to collect
CCTV (by which time the footage has been wiped);
or, in cases where people allege misconduct by the
authorities, footage has sometimes mysteriously
disappeared.
Improving safety requires addressing root
problems by strengthening communities, not
putting them under surveillance.

In Tower Hamlets, the council has been making


effective use of CCTV to tackle crime and make
the borough a safer place to live, work and visit.
Live 24-hour monitoring of the CCTV system by
council operators resulted in 837 proactive arrests
in 2012, and 907 in 2011.
A proactive arrest happens when a council CCTV
operator either alerts the police to an incident, or
leads the police to a suspect after hearing a call
out on the police radio and identifies the suspect
using CCTV at the time of the incident.
Hundreds more arrests take place as a result of
police officers reviewing video and suspects being
identified at a later date.
CCTV is one of the most powerful tools to be
developed during recent years to assist with
efforts to combat crime and disorder.
The council’s CCTV control centre opened in 2006
and has been developing rapidly since. There are
316 street cameras in the borough and 70 are on
view at any given time.
Last year CCTV footage was used to stop an
attempted murder of a man in Whitechapel. CCTV
operators reviewed more than 20 cameras to
identify three suspects involved in the incident
who were then quickly arrested. All three pleaded
guilty to GBH with intent and received long
custodial sentences.
Another success story involved CCTV tracking
down a vehicle carrying a huge haul of Class A
drugs and cash.
The use of CCTV may be a regarded by some as an
infringement of people’s liberty. The council is
committed to the belief that everyone has the right
to respect for private and family life.
In Tower Hamlets we use CCTV as an effective
security tool, to detect crime and provide
reassurance to the public.
In 2012, the police made 120 arrests for robbery,
three for attempted murder, and 30 burglars were
caught thanks to the excellent partnership working
with the council.
Using automated number plate recognition
technology, we have recovered just under a
£1millon worth of vehicles in two years and a total
of 93 stolen vehicles were recovered as a result of
CCTV.
How many CCTV cameras have you walked past today? If
you’ve been shopping caught a bus or train, driven anywhere,
or visited a new housing estate, you’ve probably been snapped.
Look out. Big Brother could be watching…

What Is CCTV Used For?


Closed Circuit Television is primarily used to prevent crime
(although critics say that criminals simply pick places which are
out of range), but CCTV cameras also been used by employers
wishing to check up on staff or ensure that customer service is
up to scratch. They may be an intrusion on privacy, but they're
now a fact of life.

Where is CCTV Used?


CCTV is permissible in public areas including shopping malls,
motorways and housing estates. CCTV cameras have become
more advanced in recent years and it can now isolate and track
identified targets, recognise number-plates, and eavesdrop on
conversations.

CCTV has spread in the last few years. CCTV cameras are
now used not only on motorways, where you’ll receive warning
about upcoming cameras, but also on cash machines, housing
estates, and car parks. Regulations require that, where CCTV
is used in a public area, there is a sign providing information for
contacting the camera operator. These signs should be made
visible when you enter a camera-monitored area.

How CCTV Technology Is Developing


Like other forms of technology CCTV is becoming more and
more advanced. Work is underway to enable CCTV cameras to
recognise types of behaviour that have been associated with
criminal activity. This catalogue might include, for instance,
shouting, pointing, or erratic driving. Cameras are already able
to recognise an individual face and track it; the camera will
communicate with its network in order to track one person as
far as the network reaches, which has raised the hackles of
some privacy advocates.

What are your Rights Regarding CCTV?


Quite simply, you have no right to prevent cameras from
recording your movements and behaviour. The camera’s owner
is permitted to install one or several cameras and keep an
archive of footage that may include you, but (s)he may not use
the footage to obtain information about you personally, or to
observe your behaviour.

The Data Protection Act


In 1998 the Data Protection Act outlined the responsibilities of
those using CCTV. However, because the DPA was designed to
protect individual privacy, its guidelines do not apply to all
CCTV cameras.

Provided you can show that you are not using the camera to
analyse the behaviour (and invade the privacy) of any one
individual, then you are entitled to put a CCTV camera
anywhere on your premises. If, for instance, the owner of a
small newsagent installed a CCTV camera above the till and
recorded everything to a tape in case of robbery, this would not
usually be relevant to the DPA as it does note violate privacy.
In a domestic context, invasion of privacy is in fact not an issue
that affects privately owned CCTV. It is only an 'offence' under
the Human Rights Act and that act only applies to the State. i.e.
The Government, local government, police, parish councils,
Health Care Trusts etc. In other words, an individual cannot
infringe the human rights of another individual - in this case, the
right to privacy.
A common scenario of privacy invasion using CCTV is when
someone uses CCTV cameras to view their neighbour's
property. As this is not actually an offence, the police will
usually have to resort to using the Harassment Act to resolve
the matter.
However, where CCTV cameras are installed specifically to
monitor behaviour, identify potential criminals and track
individuals, for privacy purposes they must be registered with
the Information Commission. These cameras are subject to the
DPA.
The DPA ensures that footage is reasonably captured and kept;
it should be viewed by a designated staff member and not
made widely available. The DPA also requires that the footage
be made available to its subjects, where appropriate, and if
requested. If you have installed CCTV cameras that will be
subject to the DPA (i.e. you’re capturing information of certain
individuals) then you can read the Information Commission’s
Good Practice Guide online.

Disorderly behavior on Wausau's 400 Block is has some


people saying they feel unsafe. But would public security
camera work as a possible solution to combat loitering
and day drinking?

"I've seen drinking, I've seen fights. I've seen guys bad-
mouthing this one and the other one is bad-mouthing back
and stuff. And I just feel that something has got to be done
to straighten it out,” recalled Dennis Peterson of Wausau.
And Peterson isn't the only one noticing. The city of
Wausau has been hearing complaints ever since redefining
the block. Patrol Captain Matt Barnes said they are
collecting that information, but often can't take immediate
action.
"We get people that a day or two later tell an officer or call
the police department 'This was my experience down
there,' and it's very difficult for us to retroactively go back
and address that disorderly behavior that they saw and try
and identify who that individual was,” explained Barnes.
Police are working with the city Public Health and Safety
Committee to find a solution. For the next year, the
committee is asking police to have a stronger presence on
the 400 Block.
 
"Not that we're sending people down there to ticket, to
ticket, to ticket, but if someone does something wrong,
then the law has to step in. So having the presence of the
uniforms, Cpt. Barnes felt, and we agreed, was a good first
step,” explained the committee's Vice Chair, Romey
Wagner.
Captain Barnes agrees, but said it's not a solution
because the department doesn't have the staffing to have
an officer there all of the time.
"The reality is we can't have a police officer or community
service officer 24 hours a day, seven days a week be down
in one square block of the city. We don't have the
manpower to do that,” he said.
That's where the surveillance cameras are being
considered as a solution. City's like Madison already have
cameras in they city's busiest areas. Madison Police
Captain, Carl Gloede said Madison went through similar
problems with its high-trafficked areas 12 years ago.
"Fights, disturbances, there were some stabbings, some
'shots fired' calls... That's when our officers would get
there. Nobody saw anything. Nobody was willing to provide
any information and the likelihood of resolving those
incidents was very minimal because we weren't getting
the cooperation,” he said.
Gloede said whether or not installing cameras was an
invasion of privacy was the city council and public's
biggest concern.
"The counter to that is in a public space, everything we do
is being observed whether it be on camera or by other
people, so what we're doing is public,” Gloede said.
Madison Police had one year to prove the value of the
cameras to the city council. Police assured the council the
cameras would only be place in spaces deemed public and
be pointed in highly trafficked areas as well as roads.
Gloede added they found the cameras to give a clear
picture of what happened or at least give a direction and
timeline of where suspects where, helping to clear up
some hear-say. Now, there are about 150 cameras
throughout the city.
Capt. Gloede said they've been instrumental in solving
crimes. He says the 2012 Monte ball case is one success
stories. In august, the Badger running back was attacked
while walking back to his apartment from downtown with
his friends at night.
"Utilizing the cameras after getting some basic witness
statements, we were able to find the descriptions of the
suspects on a multitude of both city and private cameras
and were able to identify them,” Gloede stated.
In Wausau, Captain Barnes said that's how cameras would
be used. He said he would expect the patrol lieutenants to
monitor the cameras while in their office, as is already
done with parking structure, city hall, and police
department cameras.
City-County I.T. Commission Director Gerry Klein said if
surveillance cameras do come to the 400 Block, the plan
would be to install five high definition cameras similar to
ones the city already uses in its buildings and structures;
they would include three fixed, and two with the ability to
pan, tilt, and zoom. He said in separate projects to provide
internet access for the city and county, conduit wires and
optic fiber has been put in place throughout the city over
the past five years during road construction projects,
which would make the process of putting in new cameras
simpler than if those connections were not already in
place. Klein added new light poles would also be put on
the square, as the current ones would not be high enough
to give a good vantage point for a camera.
Cpt. Barnes and the committee also believe it will deter
disruptive behavior.
Romey Wagner said since NewsChannel 7 placed a camera
overlooking the 400 Block, some people have shied away
from hanging out at the 400 Block. And for those that act
up, rewind is only a click away.
Klein said the estimated costs of those is $30,000. Data
storage estimates have yet to be determined, however
Klein said to keep with state standards, they would likely
keep general footage for 120 days and pricing would be
similar to that of the new body cameras the police
department are currently testing.
Stevens Point also has surveillance cameras in its
downtown.