Slashdot Mirror
Houston Expands Downtown Surveillance, Unsure If It Helps
SpaceGhost writes "The Associated Press reports that the Houston (Texas) Police will be adding 180 surveillance cameras in the downtown area, bringing the total to close to 1000. While most cover public areas (stadiums, theater district) the police suggest that Houston also has more 'critical infrastructure' (energy companies) than other cities. Interestingly AP points out that 'Officials say data is not kept to determine if the cameras are driving down crime.' Didn't London face the same issue?"
but apparently criminals still commit crimes when other people can witness it.
But I'm sure they'd never tie the data in to the "voluntary" DNA swabbing done last month.
Join the Slashcott! Feb 10 thru Feb 17!
'Officials say data is not kept to determine if the cameras are driving down crime.'
It seems to me, that if there _WERE_ concrete evidence of crime being reduced, they _WOULD_ keep data.
If the cities would collect data, that does NOT show a drop in crime, then city officials might be criticized for the whole operation... ...without the data - it's hard to nail them down on it...
The point is to sell surveillance equipment; have you been asleep for a decade?
The invested parties - police, politicians, journalists, arms dealers and church leaders all have a problem: Crime is on a long decreasing trend, and nobody knows why!
The police, to justify monstrous budgets, love surveillance gear. On the odd occasion it is useful for something other than catching shady cops, it makes for great TV. Great TV makes for proud citizens; and easy budget cycles. Journalists love great footage, so they can collect paycheques without working for it.
Politicians love police (from a certain distance) since they lend a sheen of goodness to their creepy incompetence.
This makes for easy pickings for the surveillance industry to sell boatloads of worthless crap to incompetents who have been trusted with your money. The last thing they need is some bearded hippy pointing out that it is all a scam.
The city has spent more than $18 million in federal money to build its camera system and has another $5 million in reserve.
Houston also has expanded its video network through private sharing agreements, such as by accessing networks along rail lines.
Officials say data is not kept to determine if the cameras are driving down crime.
Implementation in anticipation of application.
They feared that it could be used to suppress protest or support unpopular rule.
The reason they say the cameras aren't for crime reduction is because that is measurable. If we say it is to protect critical infrastructure and no terrorist attacks occur in Houston, well obviously the system worked and it was money well spent.
Same as the justification for TSA. The bin Laden operation was a one shot deal. After it happened, no one would be able to hijack a fully-loaded (public) airplane and use it as a flying bomb. In fact, only 3 of the 4 planes hijacked on 9/11 were successful. Once we knew this wasn't your regular hijacking to Cuba, passengers responded.
But since we set up all these security lines and prevent people from bringing on shampoo and dangerous trinkets, then TSA is obviously the reason for our success.
Frankly, if we had door locks on airplane cabins, I suspect no one could take over an airplane even with box cutters now.
The idea is that that criminals will see the cameras and decide not to commit the crime because there is too much risk of being caught.
What happens in the UK is that hooded tops, baseball caps and scarves became a very popular fashion choice, so that the cameras can't see who you are.
Because preventing crime isn't the purpose of the cameras. That's just the sales pitch that's trotted out to get the public to accept their presence.
The cameras are not placed there to prevent crime, but to assist in criminal investigation.
I suspect it is part of the settlement with the company that got screwed when Houstonians said no to red light cameras AFTER the city implemented them without asking the citizens if they wanted them.
"A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it." - K
The paranoid conflate those two into this all-seeing, all-encompassing "They're watching everybody all the time."
The realists know that because of the inexorable march of technology the two are converging. For example, automatic license plate readers which didn't exist when license plates were made a legal requirement are now so widespread that nearly every repoman has one on his dashboard feeding a centralized and permanent database.
When information is power, privacy is freedom.
Agreed. I've called HPD three times since I moved to Houston - once for a burglary that had happened in the previous 20 minutes, once for a possible crime in progress, and once for an emergency in progress. They did not send anyone to investigate any of the incidents. In the case of the burglary, a smartphone was taken that had its location tracker activated. After a couple hours, the thief turned on the phone and I obtained an address, with the GPS error bubble smaller than the house on the map. HPD refused to take the address or a screenshot of the map with GPS error bubble, despite the fact that a credit card stolen in the same burglary had been used at a gas station two blocks away from that house. HPD is a waste of taxpayer dollars.