anotherlimey

But did it save the girl..... NO.

It stopped someone re-offending, which is great of course, but it doesn't deter others.

Unless you're very insular protecting your family is more than just putting one child molester behind bars.

Partystar

No, I don't really trust the states. I just know that when I was living in Banbury, England, I was being watched all the time as there are cameras everywhere. I never felt threatened & I remember an incident where they worked very well...

I saw an old friend in town & stopped to say hello. We were talking for a while, when her boyfriend (a heroin addict) showed up, he had been in Blockbusters which was on the other side of the road. He got a bag of Revels out of his pocket & started eating them. Less than a minute later, a cop car pulled up & arrested him! Louise just sighed & sat there while they took him away. They drove away, I was very confused about what had just happened. She said he had stolen the sweets & then pointed up at the camera on the corner of a nearby building (which I had never noticed before) & said 'I did warn him!'. I was gob-smacked!!!

Elvira

AGAIN: This is not just about cameras.

Read 1984...

Partystar

I didn't say it was the be all & end all, but it's a start. Anything that will help make this a safer world for everyone is great in my book. There needs to be many forms of protection for us, I think police & cameras are a good start.

anotherlimey

Just wait until they want to put them in public toilets to protect against rapists.

Partystar

I understand that, just giving an example of something I remember with regards to cameras, which is part of this topic.

britontour

If most crimes are due to poverty and to feed drug habits, then these are desperate people who don't give a toss if there is a camera watching them, so it certainly won't prevent crime.

Anyway stick on a mask and hey presto, I'd like to see the face recognition work on that.

Angry White Pyjamas

Although CCTV has been shown to reduce (you will never eliminate) crime in city centers where it is OVERT. Unfortunately the criminal element simply move on to an unprotected area. Or wear baseball hats to cover their faces ala Chavs.

Where it is most useful is in protection of private property and can be used as evidence against your average shoplifter etc.

Manc

Question

Speed Camera's, what's their aim?

A) to cut down on speeding traffic / accidents
B) Indirect tax and revenue raiser.

Partystar

I've heard people say it's A, but I feel it's both A & B.

Manc

It is certainly not A.

more accidents occured due to people slamming on. Indeed it was such a problem that the EU passed a mandate requiring all camera's to be painted flourescent yellow so they could be seen further away.

Speed humps are just as good at slowing people down..........so why the need for camera's if the answer is just A?

fatbrit

Which is back to the argument we had during the death penalty debates. The only way you can control crime totally is with a totalitarian regime. If you don't choose to live under such a tyranny, the next best thing you can do is to prevent people becoming criminals with measures such as equality of opportunity, reducing poverty and education.

anotherlimey

There aim was probably using B to pay for the cameras to help reduce A.

Unfortunately the Government fell for the salesman's pitch and now we have cameras that have moved speeding drivers to other parts of the road.

I don't believe you can use speed cameras effectively unless you either have them everywhere covering all roads, or you have more mobile cameras that are easily moved.... which is where satellite tracking will come in - which is a whole new can of worms.

anotherlimey

You might be onto something.... I never got robbed in Cuba!

<-- added for Echelon's analysts.

Angry White Pyjamas

Depends.

To a lot of coppers its A. To a lot of authorities its more B. Some police authorities get the revenue from the cameras directly (Notts springs to mind) and they have the most strictly enforced and widest coverage. Other forces pass the revenue onto central govt.

Originally the GATSO was introduced as a means of providing supporting evidence for moving traffic offences. Did you know that in the UK speeding is only 1 of 3 crimes that require corroboration? Whether that be a radar, camera another officer or your own speedo in the police car (and no, it doesnt have to be calibrated beyond normal requirements). The other two crimes, by the way, are perjury and treason.

Unfortunately govt and inparticular the accountants therein cottoned onto the fiscal potential and insisted the police applied it in ways they never wanted to.