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...
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.
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
This allows people to be recorded without their consent or even knowledge of the event when they are in a situation with an expectancy of privacy. In some cases this can be helpful when trying to catch a perpetrator however, it is still a violation of privacy. Freund also claims, “a person who is approached by a police officer wearing a body-worn camera cannot readily avoid having his identity recorded”(99). So, by the time a person was to realize they were being recorded, it would be to late for them to protect their identity, even if they had nothing to do with a crime or what was intended to be
Since their inception, police body cameras have been a controversial topic as many do not agree on their effectiveness and legality. To the trained eye, body cameras clearly have no negatives other than the sheer cost of their implementation. Some people, nonetheless, do believe that it is an encroachment of privacy for police to record private and/or public interactions even though it is purely legal. While that may be seen as a negative, it is wholly subjective and must be completely ignored when considering the factual analysis of police body camera use that is necessary to verify their validity. When only taking fact into account, there is no way to deny the nearly infinite benefits of body cameras.
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.
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.
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.
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
He then adds that not only does Newman have security cameras but the entirety of England has about 1.5 million police surveillance cameras, which is more than any other country. The essay is packed with statistics that allows the reader to put everything into perspective and make comparisons between our country and another which creates an easy informative
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
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...
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.
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.