Dumbfounded!
I agree with another New Haven Register opinion!
text:
08/23/2005
EDITORAL Concern about cameras misplaced
New Haven Register Editorial
After bombers twice attacked London’s subways and buses in July, images from video surveillance cameras quickly identified the bombers. Surveillance cameras have been widely installed in public places in London and elsewhere in Europe for decades.
In the United States, in general, and Connecticut, in particular, misplaced objections about invasion of privacy and government intrusiveness have slowed the installation of equipment that monitors public spaces.The installation of cameras along the boardwalk, street and sidewalks near the West Haven beach has resulted in a drop in vandalism, drinking and loitering, police say. Regular beach-goers say they feel safer.The Connecticut Civil Liberties Union generally opposes such surveillance cameras. Roger Vann, its head, calls the cameras a "feel good, short-term quick fix." The objection, however, seems more rooted in a distrust of government than a tenuous claim about privacy in public places like the beach or street.Residents of neighborhoods plagued by gunfire, loitering or vandalism welcome these extra sets of eyes.Vann suggests more police officers as a solution. However, West Haven and other cities cannot afford to put officers everywhere.New Haven cannot place an officer at each intersection where traffic lights are routinely ignored. A 2002 study found that 426 cars ran the red light at one city intersection in just 24 hours. The city asked the state legislature this year to allow it to install cameras at traffic lights to catch those who run the signals.Other cities that use the cameras to issue traffic citations have recorded sharp drops in violations.The legislature did not approve New Haven’s request. Again, the civil libertarians objected. They were more worried about a lawbreaker’s claimed privacy rights than the life of a child crossing the street who could be hit by someone speeding through a red light. It is a dangerously misplaced concern.
text:
08/23/2005
EDITORAL Concern about cameras misplaced
New Haven Register Editorial
After bombers twice attacked London’s subways and buses in July, images from video surveillance cameras quickly identified the bombers. Surveillance cameras have been widely installed in public places in London and elsewhere in Europe for decades.
In the United States, in general, and Connecticut, in particular, misplaced objections about invasion of privacy and government intrusiveness have slowed the installation of equipment that monitors public spaces.The installation of cameras along the boardwalk, street and sidewalks near the West Haven beach has resulted in a drop in vandalism, drinking and loitering, police say. Regular beach-goers say they feel safer.The Connecticut Civil Liberties Union generally opposes such surveillance cameras. Roger Vann, its head, calls the cameras a "feel good, short-term quick fix." The objection, however, seems more rooted in a distrust of government than a tenuous claim about privacy in public places like the beach or street.Residents of neighborhoods plagued by gunfire, loitering or vandalism welcome these extra sets of eyes.Vann suggests more police officers as a solution. However, West Haven and other cities cannot afford to put officers everywhere.New Haven cannot place an officer at each intersection where traffic lights are routinely ignored. A 2002 study found that 426 cars ran the red light at one city intersection in just 24 hours. The city asked the state legislature this year to allow it to install cameras at traffic lights to catch those who run the signals.Other cities that use the cameras to issue traffic citations have recorded sharp drops in violations.The legislature did not approve New Haven’s request. Again, the civil libertarians objected. They were more worried about a lawbreaker’s claimed privacy rights than the life of a child crossing the street who could be hit by someone speeding through a red light. It is a dangerously misplaced concern.
posted by Skip at 8/23/2005 04:53:00 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home