Don't Condemn CCTV's Fight Against Crime Date: Thursday, July 03, 2008 Source: The Guardian Unlimited

Bruce Schneier argues that "pervasive security cameras don't substantially reduce crime" (CCTV doesn't keep us safe, yet the cameras are everywhere, June 26). However, I believe, it is the technical issues and poor image quality that are behind the lack of confidence in CCTV in Britain. Schneier says: "Lighting is bad and images are grainy, and criminals tend not to stare helpfully at the lens." However, it isn't only the quality of image that is poor; zoom range and installation positioning appear to be sub-standard on the whole. A CCTV system might be pointing in a direction that is obscured by an object, be liable to vandalism or not even cover the crime hotspot. "Overall, CCTV cameras aren't very effective," Schneier claims. But hang on, let's not tar the entire industry with one brush. Just this week, officials from Bath are boasting that at least one arrest a day is a direct result of CCTV evidence. I believe much of the current criticism lies in private CCTV. Private systems, which police also use to help solve crime, vastly outnumber public-space systems. The problem is that the former are not regulated and need not be installed and positioned on the basis of crime statistics and risk assessments. Many of these private CCTV systems produce images that aren't of high enough quality to be used as prosecutable evidence. This results in low figures for crimes caught and solved. "Most CCTV footage is never looked at until well after a crime is committed," Schneier states. True, but if private systems are installed and regulated to the same standard as public-space systems, we may see a distinct rise in the number of arrests. And if criminals are aware that CCTV units are working and produce prosecutable evidence, they are less likely to commit an offence. The Guardian unlimited Courtesy of SecurityOracle.com - The Secury Industry's Portal