Newark and the Future of Crime Fighting

theodp writes "Newark Mayor Cory Booker is betting that cutting-edge technology will reduce crime and spark an economic renaissance. From a newly opened Surveillance Operations Center, cops armed with joystick controllers monitor live video feeds from more than 100 donated cameras scattered across the crime-ridden city. The moves are drawing kudos from businesses like Amazon subsidiary Audible.com, which has moved its HQ to downtown Newark, where space is 50% cheaper than in Manhattan. But are citizens giving up too much privacy?"

Comments

and here you will find

[circletimessquare]

the opinions of the typical slashdot demographic:

1. middle class to upper middle class
2. suburban, or if urban, living in a low crime area

meanwhile, if you actually go to newark, and ask a sampling of residents their opinion: cameras, gunshot microphones, etc.: that's 100% welcome for them. its funny how the constant threat of violence reorients what your concepts of freedom and invasion of privacy mean. ie, to mean: freedom from street violence, and no invasion of your privacy by street thugs

i hate to say it, but a lot of what slashdotters consider to be the real debate on the concepts of freedom and privacy is actually a luxury that the poor of the world would consider alien. the hackneyed line "he who would trade liberty for some temporary security, deserves neither liberty nor security" is frankly, wrong. not morally wrong, logically wrong. for without security, a lot of that which you take for granted, including your entire ideological and political agenda, would not be possible. you can't educate, you can't earn a good income, you can't have peace of mind, you can't have civilization and progress without security

security is the foundation of society. societies with low crime and high security and societal stability have higher incomes and greater standards of living. please get the cause and effect here right: security makes this possible. a lot of money does not make crime go down. pushing crime down, makes standards of living go up. you simply can't build the more involved societal environments necessary for higher riches. you must have law and order, or society will break down in economically measurable ways, and in measurable quality of life ways, including respect for your rights and freedoms

how do you make poor areas of the world rich? the first thing you do, is you give them a highly secure environment. and in a society with high security, other freedoms and higher concepts of civilization can begin to be addressed. the concepts the average slashdotter concerns themselves with when thinking about freedom and privacy are impossible to address in a society without any security. the security must come first. please recognize that: security comes first, is of paramount importance. its upon that foundation of security that makes the debate, that you consider of paramount importance, even possible. the truth of course is that your entire ideological and political agenda fall secondary to the need for a high security environment

many of you disregard and belittle the concept that makes your entire mindset possible. you forget your foundation, and thereby serve to undermine your own set of concerns

now mod me into oblivion and consider me a fearmongerer and freedom destroyer. go ahead, shoot the messenger. i am merely describing common sense attributes of the realit you live in, but you don't like to hear it

i don't care if you reject this message. the average slashdotter is, frankly, out of touch with reality

meanwhile, the residents of newark know exactly what i am talking about

disregarding or belittling the concept of security for people whose daily security is a constant issue, simply makes them disregard you, as someone who doesn't know what they are talking about. and they are right about you on that point