Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

10,000 Cameras Ineffective At Deterring Crime

Posted by CowboyNeal on from the clearly-we-need-more-cameras dept.

Mike writes "London has 10,000 crime-fighting CCTV cameras which cost £200 million but an analysis of the publicly funded spy network has cast serious doubt on its ability to help solve crime. In fact, four out of five of the boroughs with the most cameras have a record of solving crime that is below average. The study found that police are no more likely to catch offenders in areas with hundreds of cameras than in those with hardly any. Could this be an effective argument against the proliferation of cameras or will politicians simply ignore the facts and press ahead?"

3 of 414 comments (clear)

  1. TFA should've read ,,, by NemoinSpace · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    1 CCTV camera solves 100% of the crimes it records The article argues,the money could be better spent on more police. Do you think the police would even investigate the pickpocket crime the article depicts had it not been on video? Why are they using CCTV? Kind of expensive. How about crapload of folding@home cameras. Imagine a beowulf cluster of them! p.s. in the U.S. you could make a law that requires police to carry cameras instead of tasers. There. Now I've done it.

  2. big US cities by FudRucker · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    there are some bad ghetto neighborhoods in big US cities even the cops don't dare go in to...

    --
    Politics is Treachery, Religion is Brainwashing
  3. Re:Cameras don't deter criminals. by Pie-rate · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Price_floor
    For those who don't follow links:
    Price floors set above equilibrium market prices cause surpluses. A historical (and current) example of a price floor are minimum wage laws, laws specifying the lowest wage a company can pay an employee (employees are suppliers of labor and the company is the consumer in this case). When the minimum wage is set higher than the equilibrium market price for unskilled labor, a surplus of labor is created (more people are looking for jobs than can find jobs). A minimum wage above the equilibrium wage would induce employers to hire fewer workers as well as cause more people to enter the labor market. The equilibrium wage for a worker would be dependent upon the worker's skill sets along with market conditions.

    Minimum wage is a price floor, which increases the excess supply (read: poor people.)
    Not the answer to anything.