Weren’t we all assured that surveillance cameras were going to deter crime and make our streets safe? We were also assured this wasn’t going to be an infringement on privacy.
One out of two ain’t bad, and at least the bad guys’ privacy rights were observed…
San Francisco’s surveillance cameras in high-crime areas do not prevent violent crime, according to a new study by researchers at the University of California.
Mayor Newsom began the program four years ago, but out of concern for people’s privacy, police are not allowed to monitor cameras in real time. Investigators must wait until a crime is reported before looking at footage.
So the authorities can’t watch the camera’s monitor and see a crime being committed and can only view the footage after a crime has been reported, that is if a victim lives to tell.
That’s effective.
Not that I am a fan of Newsom, what with his decisions in the past, but at least it can be said that privacy rights are being protected to a degree. That may mean nothing to the family who does have a loved one that ends up being murdered, but you do know that that ends up being a crime that always (okay, maybe not always) ends up reported.
I’ve always preferred a Colt or a Smith & Wesson to a camera for that task.
Newsom is an idiot wasting more tax dollars. If you’re on the street, you have no reasonable expectation of privacy. If you’re going to have the cameras, they might as well be used in a manner that actually accomplishes something.
Gavin Newsom is an idiot ANYWAY, it’s the same guy who said “whether ya like it or not, it’s gonna happen” or something like that, about Gay marriage being legalized…yick.
We’re 2 & a half hours away from ‘the city’ [SF]. We sometimes hear his “yammerings” and it’s not pleasant…