Ravi Chudasama
English 101: Surveillance Essay
Professor Goodell
20 October 2014 Super Bowl XXXV in 2001, where one hundred thousand fans passed through the gates not knowing that the surveillance cameras were digitally checking each and every one of them. The computers would scan their faces and check and cross-reference them with the computer files of well-known con artists, criminals, and terrorists. By using surveillance, this was able to identify any individuals who have a past of illegal activities. The individuals that matched the files in the police database were pulled aside and questioned. Out of the 100,000 fans at Super Bowl XXXV the surveillance cameras matched nineteen criminal faces. The public did not have any idea
…show more content…
The government is now putting cameras at stoplights and stop signs to protect people from traffic violators. Cities all over the U.S. are already using traffic cameras at intersections. Now, if a person runs a red light or is driving insanely fast, they can expect to be caught by surveillance and receive a citation. By setting up these cameras, people have a higher chance to drive safely, inevitably leading to fewer car accidents; even saving many peoples lives. When one becomes aware that these cameras are around, they are less likely to do something that might get them into some kind of trouble with the law. Security cameras not only catch criminals, but also help solve crime, as well as prevent it. Despite the benefits of surveillance cameras, many jobs have been lost to the technological advancements of …show more content…
Unfortunately, the use of surveillance cameras has taken the place of many individuals’ jobs. Rather than having a security officer observe a crowded area, busy intersection, or hiring a guard to keep watch over a business, it is more affordable and easier for companies to install security cameras, instead of hiring a person. Newer technology offers better, smaller, and more affordable cameras. It is cheaper to put up these cameras up than to hire more policemen and security guards. Security cameras are beginning to show up in libraries, schools, supermarkets, highways, subways, and even outside of changing rooms. Statistics from “The Fact that Mass Surveillance Doesn’t Keep Us Safe Goes Mainstream” shows that revenues for video security cameras have more than tripled from being around $282 million in the 90’s to more than $1 billion in 2000, and is still growing exponentially today. This growth of surveillance cameras has a direct impact on employment, but has been perceived as an invasion of people’s
Stew Leonard’s; technology has come to the rescue in the form of video synopsis. As explained on the BriefCam website; “in the synopsis stage, a very short Video Synopsis is generated from these objects and backgrounds. The synopsis video can be very short, a few minutes can summarize a full day as objects are shifted in time, and many objects are shown simultaneously even though they occurred at different times” (“White Paper,” n.d.). In other words a short summary of what occurred. This allows the security personnel to find the theft event, thereby reducing the investigative/review time of the video
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.
Although they can be easily tracked, people overlook the invasion of privacy possibility because of the convenience they bring to every day life. Systems like OnStar installed in cars have made the tracking of stolen cars practically effortless. Similar tools are being used by law enforcement, Penenberg stated “cell phones have become the digital equivalent of Hansel and Gretel’s bread crumbs” (472). He then goes on to discuss how in Britain in 1996, authorities installed 300 cameras in East London. Although this didn’t affect the terrorism, it did affect the crime rate which fell 30 percent after the cameras were put into place. Penenberg closes his essay by mentioning that the surveillance is not only used to watch the citizens but also for citizens to keep an eye on the government. Through his organization, relevant information, and professional tone, Penenberg creates an effective
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.
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.
If misused, body-cameras can be a violation of privacy. In order to prevent this, proper legislation needs to be enacted in order to ensure privacy rights are protected. The only policy related document regarding police body cameras is the “Guidance for the use of body-worn cameras by law enforcement authorities” which is issued by the Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada. This document discusses that rules should not be enforced only by local police departments, but for Canada as a whole. As this is the only document related to police body cameras, it is undoubtable that there needs to be serious legislation created. As it is suggested that body cameras pose as a risk for privacy rights, it is evident in order to implement them effectively, there needs to be regulation constructed. Body cameras can be an effective and useful tool, but without legislation, they can cause problems. Bruce Chapman, president of the Police Association of Ontario expresses, “We want to do it right. We don’t want to do it fast” when asked about the implementation of body cameras. While body cameras, are important to have in today's society, it is also dire to have it done properly. By enforcing strict guidelines, and documents addressing body camera legislation, it will ensure the process is done correctly. In order to implement body cameras properly, privacy rights need to be assessed. This process takes time, and proves body cameras need to be implemented at a pace legislation can follow. Thomas K. Bud, discusses the worry that privacy will be violated with body cameras. Factors such as facial recognition, citizen consent of recording, and violations of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms all pose as risks. While legislation has not matched their guidelines with modern technology, it proves how important it is to create new documents, in order for changes to be made. Therefore body
Body cameras can be major proof3 of evidence when things go wrong. The footage of the live cameras can have a major impact in the court because it would help with in the proof of evidence when it comes to an arrest. For example the Oscar Grant case, during the arrest the officer fired a bullet into the back of Grant, who was laying his face down and not using force during the arrest. Evidence came from a cell phone camera during the arrest. Body cameras cannot only help the person being arrested but as well help the officer themselves because it can show whos moraly right and
In his article, “Police Cameras Need to Protect Privacy, Too,” Michael Chertoff responds to the concerns of privacy. He acknowledges that criminal justice information needs good security because it is information about citizens, often at their most distressed and vulnerable. “Imagine if someone hacked and even edited video of alleged criminals before they were even charged or of child victims descri...
In this week’s reading assignment we learned about the four types of reinforcement used in behavior modification. The four types are positive reinforcement, negative reinforcement, extinction, and punishment. Positive reinforcement involves the use of some type of positive consequence given after a desired behavior is displayed. Negative reinforcement involves removing something negative after a desired behavior is displayed. Extinction is designed to weaken a behavior by either giving no consequence when the behavior is displayed. Finally punishment involves weakening a behavior by establishing something negative after the unwanted behavior is displayed or by removing something positive (Knicki & Williams, 2013).
There are an estimated 30 million surveillance cameras in the United States, proving to be a normal feature in American lives (Vlahos). This is no surprise because in the past several years, events such as the 9/11 attack and the availability of cheaper cameras have accelerated this trend. But conflicts have come with this and have ignited, concerning the safety of the people versus the violation of privacy that surveillance has. Although camera surveillance systems are intended to provide safety to the public, the violation of privacy outweighs this, especially in a democratic country like America.
There are some major upsides in having cameras in public places. In early 2013 two people set off bombs at the Boston marathon, which killed several people and injured hundreds. The city of Boston had cameras monitoring the streets, and was able to identify the bombers within two days. (La Vigne, Nancy) The FBI was able to catch them before they were able to carry out another planned attack in Times Square, which could have been much, more devastating. In addition to being able to solve crimes that have already happened by using cameras, we are also able to use them and the other technologies that go with it to prevent crime. The National Security Agency has reported that it has prevented several terrorist attacks since 2001 using new technology put in place to prevent the attacks. However, much of the NSA’s tactics have been criticized lately, though the majority of people still agree that it is worth it. Using cameras is also a cheap way to monitor an area. Having to employ several police officers to patrol an area can be expensive and those officers could be out doing more important jobs. When you have cam...
Having a network of cameras on every street in the city increases the chances of preventing a crime, along with the ability to capture a criminal on video. Some people argue that the cameras generate an overwhelming amount of evidence to sift through.... ... middle of paper ... ... However, because all this technology is relatively new, there are not really any policies that have been enacted yet.
In The New York Times newspaper, the author Kareem Fahim wrote an article called “Surveillance Will Expand To Midtown, Mayor Says,” back in 2009 the mayor of New York City Michael Bloom Berg reported that Homeland Security contributed $24 million to expand surveillance camera from Lower Manhattan to Midtown Manhattan. The new advanced technology cameras have capability to detect weapons through cameras. Therefore, the securities will be able to protect significant place located on that particular area such as Grand Central Terminal, Empire State Building and the United Nations. The police department can observe the public through a huge 40 foot screen videos maps. Moreover, the passage “surveillance cameras and the Times Square bombing” by William Saletan shows that surveillance cameras can’t eliminate crimes, but It able to reduce crimes. In May 1, 2010, a Pakistani/American citizen named Faisal Shahzad who set off car bomb in Times Square.
Basically security cameras are basically good and bad in all ways due to helping the public and bad for invading peoples privacy daily which would not surprise me that the government is also up to no good doing all of this but if it helps catches people who are hacking computers from other countries then oh well with that stuff. So in all ways they are good and bad for most public areas besides stores and high criminal activity area parking lots for the US otherwise crime will not stop for the people in the US and privacy will keep being invaded as long there is crime.
“Each light has a different preset wavelength designed to detect hair, fibers, and body fluids at crime scenes, these lights allow a crime scene to be processed faster and more thoroughly than ever before.” This technology is speedy and can help locate the whereabouts of criminals. The use of in-car camera systems has become very popular, especially by law enforcement. These cameras are used to record traffic stops and road violations of civilians. “From the time the first in-car cameras were installed to document roadside impaired-driving sobriety tests, the cameras have captured both intended and unintended video footage that has established their value. Most video recordings have resulted in convictions; many provide an expedited means to resolve citizen complaints, exonerate officers from accusations, and serve as police training videos.” Photo enforcement systems helps to maintain road safety by “automatically generating red light violations and/or speeding summons and as a result to greatly improve safety for the motoring public.” (Schultz,