| |
To Surveil or Not? That Is the Question
by possibly noteworthy at 11:42 am EDT, Sep 4, 2006 |
The District has just launched a host of aggressive anti-crime measures following a crime wave that left 14 people dead in the first 12 days of July. Police have been put on six-day workweeks , and detectives are being added to target violent offenders ; the city has installed the first of dozens of surveillance cameras in high-crime neighborhoods ; and it has modified the time of its youth curfew, now making it illegal for anyone younger than 17 to be out on the street after 10 p.m. But do such measures really work? Jack Levin, director of the Brudnick Center on Violence and Conflict at Northeastern University in Boston , weighs in on the key provisions of the District's emergency crime bill and some other crime - prevention techniques .
|
| |
RE: To Surveil or Not? That Is the Question
by Decius at 11:21 pm EDT, Sep 5, 2006 |
Some object to the presence of cameras based on misplaced concerns over privacy and civil liberties. But they should be reminded that the Mall, for example, is a public space, and a police presence there is just as likely as a camera to limit privacy.
No. Police are not always looking in every direction and they do not have a perfect memory. Furthermore, it sounds like they have about the same impact as police presense... Of course, the more invasive measure is preferable because its cheaper... I'm glad to hear him discredit youth cerfews though. |
|
|
|
