More handpicked essays just for you.
The role of technology in crime investigation
Positive effects of installing surveillance cameras
Use of technology in crime investigation
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
According to the New York Civil Liberties Union in four well-known areas of New York the number of public surveillance cameras has rose from 769 in 1998 to 4,468 in 2005. This seems like a huge increase but if you think about it really isn’t. In a period of seven years there were 3,699 new cameras, which lined the streets keeping the citizens safe. These cameras, which are all over the world cause no harm to anyone, all they do is keep us safe and help the authorities know when we are in need of help faster. People who are against surveillance cameras will say they are an invasion of privacy, but that is completely false. The cameras are only put in public places where there are large numbers of people. If you are in a large area with a lot of people you don’t have any privacy then ether. I think that surveillance cameras are a good idea.
Imagine yourself trapped in your house after an earthquake, or on your roof after a tsunami or flood, well if your state had public surveillance cameras you would be safe. Gregory P. Suhr, Chief of Police in San Francisco California stated that in...
Our current society is very much like Big Brother and 1984. The Federal government are not watching us through a telescreen but they are watching and going through our things. I know this because there is a Ted Talk that I watched about privacy and how the FBI goes through our emails, messages… etc, without our permission. To sum that up, in the article “Long Beach Police to Use 400 Cameras Citywide to Fight Crime,” in paragraphs 2 and 3 says that “Chief McDonnell is turning more than 400 cameras citywide as a solution to stop crime,... McDonnell has set up to tap into hundreds of privately owned cameras” to watch over the city and what goes around. Big Brother used telescreens to watch and hear everything, Chief McDonnell uses cameras to see everything that’s going on. My 4th teacher would most likely disagree with me, he is a LB police officer, so he knows having cameras to watch over the city is only making the city a better/ safer place.
Obama has already funded 50,000 cameras to be used for law enforcement. Skeptics argue that cameras would be useless and used to monitor the general population. The article is narrated by three individuals with different stands on cameras, two for the use of cameras and one against. They debate back and forth about effectiveness, trial outcomes, general public involvement and learning process related to cameras. This will help me see an argument against cameras, but also providing good information for the use of cameras.
“There are about 3 billion phone calls made within the USA every day” (Romano). Now picture you’re calling your friend on the phone. Sometimes we can take small privilege like this for granted. Now imagine that the government is listening to every single phone conversation that we make. Why wouldn’t this scare you? I know it terrifies me. Wiretaps are a problem that concerns every single person in the country. But it isn’t just wiretaps; with a program called Prism the NSA has obtained direct access to the systems of Google, Facebook, Apple, and other US internet giants (Glenn). Everything we search for on Google, every message sent or received on Facebook, every item purchased on Apple is all seen by the NSA. The government is overusing their power to spy on its citizens and it needs to stop.
Have you ever heard of the idea of body-mounted cameras on police officers? If not, David Brooks will introduce you to the idea that was discussed in an article from New York Times called “The Lost Language of Privacy”. In this article, the author addressed both the positive and negative aspects of this topic but mostly concerned with privacy invasion for Americans. Although that is a valid concern but on a larger scale, he neglected to focus greatly on the significant benefits that we all desire.
One of the sources used to disprove that body camera isn’t the answer includes Jamelle Bouie article, Keeping the Police honest. Mr. Bouie is the chief political correspondent at Slate who graduated from the University of Virginia with a political and social thought degree (Tumblr.com). His work consists of issues relating to national politics, public policies and racial inequality. His work has also been published in Slate online magazine, the New Yorker, the Washington Post and TIME Magazine (Tumblr.com). Slate is an online magazine that post about the news, politics, business, technology and culture (slate.com). In Jamelle article, Keeping the Police honest he talks about incidents where police officers were being recorded and took excessive
I feel body cameras will bring more awareness to police departments when it comes to the honesty in their staff’s action when they are unsupervised. They can be used as hard evidence in court rooms, to help make the correct judgment on the situations in question. A case of which Officer Michael Slager fell victim to when the courts later changed their verdict after being presented with a video of what really happened.
While both dash cams and body mounted cams record interactions between police and citizens, “dash cam- eras are confined to places where cars can go, which are usually public places, such as roads and parking lots. A dash camera cannot easily record inside people’s homes and other places where there is a heightened expectation of privacy”(Freund 97). Thus, allowing body mounted cameras to record the more private aspects of a law enforcement related situations. Also “unlike body-mounted cameras, CCTV cameras do not record conversations”(Freund 98).This could deter people from going to the police when they witness a crime, because they are afraid of being exposed to the person who committed the crime, giving them the information needed if they choose to retaliate. Ebi, Kevin states that “sensitive information can 't get out if it 's never recorded in the first place,” so, if there is a distress call made to the police for help, there won’t be concern that the person in distresses voice, face or the inside of their home could end up on YouTube ("Body Of
Hazards pose risk to everyone. Our acceptance of the risks associated with hazards dictates where and how we live. As humans, we accept a certain amount of risk when choosing to live our daily lives. From time to time, a hazard becomes an emergent situation. Tornadoes in the Midwest, hurricanes along the Gulf Coast or earthquakes in California are all hazards that residents in those regions accept and live with. This paper will examine one hazard that caused a disaster requiring a response from emergency management personnel. Specifically, the hazard more closely examined here is an earthquake. With the recent twenty year anniversary covered by many media outlets, the January 17, 1994, Northridge, California earthquake to date is the most expensive earthquake in American history.
All the developed countries (developing countries are also in no way lagging behind) the incidence of the people being monitored under various surveillance systems is high of which closed circuit television system (CCTV) is gaining dominance. For instance, the UK has over 4.2 million of them, giving it a ratio of one for every 14 persons and the USA is reported to have been installing it on a rapid pace in every conceivable location as town centers, schools, public transportation systems etc with a spiraling budget estimated at $100 million. With the terrorists attacks looming large in the wake of 9/11 attacks and despite the killing of Osama Bin Laden, the trends are going towards more and more technology oriented surveillance methods. This has naturally caused widespread concerns about the privacy issues and necessitated more evidence based research to inform policy and practice.
Many people live in fear that they are constantly being watched. Michael Jackson sang it best in the 80 's by saying, "I always feel like, somebody 's watching me," in his hit song with Rockwell. That 's exactly what the NSA and other government organizations are doing today with domestic surveillance. Everywhere Americans go and every corner they turn there is a camera, and every website or email they send is being monitored closely. So what can society do about this? Educate others on the situation and stand up for what is right. Some people believe they must give up some freedoms for protection, but at what cost? What is happening in America is not what the founding fathers fought for. Domestic surveillance should not be allowed because
Surveillance is the monitoring of behaviour. In addition, surveillance system is the process of monitoring the behaviour of people, objects or processes within systems for conformity to expected or desired norms in trusted systems for security control (Cohen and Medioni, 1999). Video surveillance systems have existed 25 years ago whereby it started with 100% analogue system and gradually becoming digital system. The closed-circuit television (CCTV) camera is the most popular video surveillance because of its reliability and low price. The camera does not broadcast images but it records them, so that user can always check to see what occurred while they were away. It is widely used at public spaces and residences for security purposes.
The inevitable truth about our technological advances has become an ongoing controversial dilemma. It begs to question whether or not our technology is taking us closer to the world of Big Brother. It even subjects us to address all the pros and cons this said technology, as a whole, has to offer. These days when people talk to each other, some no longer share eye contact because they are too busy on social media, texting, checking emails, looking for the next big thing, and so forth. Many people are blinded by the fancy & entertaining applications, availability of gps, and most importantly, being able to surf the web at the palm of their hands, but little do they know that those
Video cameras are being deployed around the nation to help with crime solving, but some people are concerned about their privacy. Having cameras to monitor public areas have shown to be useful in situations such as identifying the bombers of the Boston marathon in early 2013. There have also been issues with these cameras however, as people are concerned they are too invasive of their privacy and have been misused by police officers in the past. Some people want to find a balance in using cameras in public so that they can continue to help with crime solving while making sure they are not too invasive and are properly used.
The increased presence of surveillance cameras is almost compared to George Orwell’s novel from 1984, where he imagined a future in which people would be monitored and controlled by the government. One question that needs to be asked is: do the benefits of law enforcement security cameras outweigh the negative side to it? Although the invasion of privacy is a serious argument against law enforcement cameras, it should be seen as a valuable tool to help fight crime. As long as surveillance cameras are in public places and not in people's homes, privacy advocates should not be concerned. There are many benefits to having law enforcement security cameras, which people take for granted, and are quick to point out the negative.
Since surveillance cameras have been invented for security reasons at shopping malls and stores they have also been place in public areas such as stoplights, parking lots, hallways, bus stops, and more.