Public surveillance.

Public surveillance.

Despite the recent discussions held over the usefulness of surveillance cameras, public surveillance is indeed doing precisely the opposite of what it was intended to do. 20% of Britain’s national criminal justice budget is wasted due to the expenses of the extensive video camera surveillance systems that aren’t making a significant impact on crime rates. Furthermore, just violating citizen’s rights on personal privacy and also has been seen to be abused by various individuals.

Surveillance cameras are a waste of resources, a violation of privacy, and are mostly used for the wrong intentions. Therefore they should not be installed in public places.

Millions of cameras are being installed in the streets and businesses of the United States to increase public safety. Millions of cameras are on the roads that are worth millions of dollars. In New York City, about 3000 cameras surveillance system cost more than $200 million to install. It is a significantly high number for such a piece of equipment. The funds that are being put into public surveillance could be put into good use somewhere else. When calculated from an in-depth perspective, it is found that though the camera has been advantageous in some ways, the advantages outweigh them.

“A study conducted in 2009 shows that one crime out of a thousand is being solved with the aid of video footage from the cameras,” this is according to Nick pickles the director of Big Brother Watch in Great Britain. It means that the government setting up surveillance is a waste of resources, and the number of crimes being solved by them is low. If the government decided to invest the money, it is spent on installing public cameras in other aspects of the public, and maybe more crimes can be solved. Therefore, one can argue that since it is not effective enough in stopping crime and theft, why does the government spend a lot on it.

Also, the use of surveillance is a violation of privacy. However, much it is argued that security cameras are here for our safety; it should also be put in mind that it is a violation of our privacy in public places. The united states constitution does not explicitly include the right to privacy. Still, the supreme court has said several times that the amendments to the Constitution implicitly grant the right to privacy. It is for this reason that public privacy is essential. When citizens are always watched by the public, they are more self-conscious and less free-wheeling. Individuals will start to be more careful about the books and periodical they read in general, they will begin to dress differently and act differently in public. It is clearly a violation of their public privacy rights.

Public surveillance is also susceptible to abuse. The other major problem that is created with the installation of surveillance cameras in public places is that its use will inevitably lead to misuse. For example, back in the ’90s, top-ranking police in Washington DC was found using the database from the cameras to gather intel on customers at a gay night club. With the intel, he picked he tried to use it to blackmail the customers who were in marriages. Another instance where this equipment has been abused is when the FBI conducted illegal operations to spy and harass political activists who were challenging racial segregation and the Vietnam war. Another example is when the database in Michigan Law Enforcement was used by the officers to help their mates and themselves stalk on women. This is another primary reason that piles up the argument that public surveillance is not a good idea.

However, as much as public surveillance has its cons, it also has a variety of pros too. One can, for example, argue that public oversight has been in the frontline in improving public safety. These cameras can be a way to keep an eye out for crimes. Statistics have shown that public surveillance does indeed reduce the crime rate. If a person knows that there is a camera within a particular area, the individual may be less likely to commit and offense. Aside from reducing crimes, it has also assisted in catching criminals. The footage captured in the cameras can be used together with facial recognition software to identify the perpetrators. Finally, public surveillance helps in bringing convenience to everyday life. Public cameras placed in stoplights helps prevent people from over speeding or running lights.

In conclusion, there is no balance in the benefits that public surveillance has over its disadvantages. The technology has the potential to change the core experience of what is now taking place in the public. However, the problems make it less profitable for the country’s use. It has wasted away a lot of funds that could have been used in other areas and has violated the right of privacy that should be there in public places. The user of the technology also carries the danger of being abused by its users. Therefore, it is clear that cameras should not be installed because the advantages that it has over the disadvantages is significantly small.