Property crime sure but not violent crime. So it really depends on what they’re trying to stop. But I’m not of the idea that giving up our privacy to stop property crime is a good thing especially when there are better ways to address property crime that requires no one sacrificing their privacy at all
Internet cameras like Amazon’s Ring come at a high cost to our privacy.
www.nytimes.com
“It helps to look at the data. Some of the most comprehensive research to date on camera surveillance found that the presence of cameras led to a small reduction in crime. The study, led by a team of researchers at City University of New York, Northeastern University and Cambridge University, was a
40-year systemic review of the effects of closed-circuit television networks on crime trendsin countries like Britain and South Korea. Overall, crime decreased 13 percent in areas with CCTV.
Cameras, according to the study, were effective as a deterrent for crimes such as car burglaries and property theft, but they had no significant effect on violent crimes.
Alana Saulnier, a professor of sociology and a criminologist at Queen’s University in Kingston, Ontario, suggested looking at it this way: A person committing a home burglary is more likely to be conscious of a surveillance camera than two people fighting outside a nightclub.
“A camera probably isn’t going to be a deterrent to someone who is not going to be thinking rationally, if they were willing to be going through that kind of violence in the first place,” she said. “That’s why it could be useful in some contexts and less useful in other contexts.”
glad I got my shyt straight.... finally. But this is gonna get a whole bunch of people caught up.
