Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Scotland Yard Chief: Put CCTV In Every Home To Help Solve Crimes

Posted by samzenpus on from the all-the-better-to-see-you-with dept.

schwit1 writes Homeowners should consider fitting CCTV to trap burglars, the country's most senior police officer declared yesterday. Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe said police forces needed more crime scene footage to match against their 12 million images of suspects and offenders. And he called on families and businesses to install cameras at eye level – to exploit advances in facial recognition technology.

16 of 282 comments (clear)

  1. Seriously? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Then again, Orwell did write that tyranny in UK would come in the guise of nationalism and security

    1. Re:Seriously? by Albanach · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Then again, Orwell did write that tyranny in UK would come in the guise of nationalism and security

      Well, he isn't apparently suggesting the police or state should be able to place a camera in every home, just that it's a smart idea for a homeowner. Personally, I'd have thought that for anyone willing to pay for a home security system this would be a no brainer today. There's countless wireless enabled camera systems that are obviously going to be useful in the event of a burglary.

      That said, it's a short term fix. As burglars become more aware of the presence of cameras, they'll start wearing a mask just like folk robbing stores and banks where CCTV is expected already do. Once outdoor cameras become more prevalent, they won't use your driveway to park. There might be a small deterrence factor that would encourage an opportunistic thief to go next door if they can see cameras outside your house, but equally you might just be advertising that you have stuff worth stealing.

    2. Re:Seriously? by Firethorn · · Score: 4, Insightful

      That said, it's a short term fix. As burglars become more aware of the presence of cameras, they'll start wearing a mask just like folk robbing stores and banks where CCTV is expected already do. Once outdoor cameras become more prevalent, they won't use your driveway to park.

      Both increase the 'costs' of burglary though. A mask is generally hot, a pain in the but, and outside the home signals that you're up to no good. Having to park elsewhere increases the distance you have to carry your loot, not necessarily a big deal for jewelry, but if you're trying to steal big screen TVs and other heavy or bulky goods, decreases your haul capability significantly. Plus, well, hauling stuff a longer ways increases the chances of the neighbors calling you in. You look less like a moving/delivery company.

      Increased expense, lower haul, should reduce the amount of robbery,

      (Note, I like playing opposing force in exercises)

      --
      I don't read AC A human right
    3. Re:Seriously? by AmiMoJo · · Score: 4, Insightful

      This isn't about making your home more secure. For that you just need reasonable locks and the remember to use them when you go out. Most burglary is opportunistic, doors or windows left open.

      This is about two things.

      1. Make the facial recognition database more acceptable to the public. Hay, it might solve that crime you were a victim of but we couldn't be bothered to investigate! Don't worry, it's only bad people on there... Well, a few million innocent people too, but if you have nothing to hide and don't go around robbing houses...

      2. Make the police's life easier. Investigating domestic crime is a hassle and takes officers away from revenue generating speed traps and more interesting work. The police are also fairly shit at solving this kind of crime, especially things like domestic violence. Cameras, paid for by victims, would really help improve their stats.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    4. Re:Seriously? by Anne+Thwacks · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Well, he isn't apparently suggesting the police or state should be able to place a camera in every home

      No. Install it yourself, and let them use the backdoor. Saves the state a lot of money. He is not as stupid as he looks.

      --
      Sent from my ASR33 using ASCII
    5. Re:Seriously? by N1AK · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Personally, I'd have thought that for anyone willing to pay for a home security system this would be a no brainer today. There's countless wireless enabled camera systems that are obviously going to be useful in the event of a burglary.

      Why? By the time someone has broken into your house the only benefit of security systems for the owner (deterrence) is gone. Sure I could get loads of head-height cameras set up in my house, maybe even get the burglar caught (not that the police in the UK give a fuck about catching burglars) but my shit is long gone.

      The solution to burglary is for the police to move a fucking finger to try and do something about it, which they clearly don't in the UK.

  2. sure thing.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    You first asshole...

    Adding thousands of the things has made almost no difference go crime rates in London

  3. Life Imitating Art by Prototerm · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Repeat after me: Orwell's 1984 is *not* an instruction manual!

    --
    "My country, right or wrong; if right, to be kept right; and if wrong, to be set right." --Senator Carl Schurz (1872)
  4. Seriously? by Greyfox · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Do these guys even listen to the words that come out of their pie holes when they open them? Or do they just have some mental disorder that causes them to just spew out a constant stream of consciousness? Or are they just some unread cronies of some MP? In any event, they might want to run their ideas by some better-educated underling before opening their trap in front of the press. You know, someone who can go, "Wot, like 1984? Bloody 'ell that's a terrible idea!" (For some reason my idea of a "better educated underling" is John Oliver doing a Charles Dickens parody.)

    --

    I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

  5. RTFA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The entire article was about putting the camera you have in the proper position to get a face shot, which they can match to mug shots. They get too many videos of the top of the head, and that doesn't solve the crime. He was not asking that everyone provide a live feed from their house.

    1. Re:RTFA by SeaFox · · Score: 4, Insightful

      He was not asking that everyone provide a live feed from their house.

      No, we'll just install those cameras (that today are IP-based) and tie them in to the in-home recording device over our router -- which is connected to the Internet.
      But that's okay. There's no way to get into the router from outside -- certainly not through a government-mandated backdoor.

    2. Re:RTFA by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Maybe the good Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe should be "encouraged" to volunteer his home as the test bed. And use lots of cameras - those Brits just love their security cameras, you know. "A camera on every corner." So, put them in the corner in the bedroom, the bathroom, the living room, the kitchen (so we can all watch them ruin a good piece of meat by boiling it to death and then some), the kids rooms, the garage, etc.

      You know - practice what you preach or stop preaching.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    3. Re:RTFA by rmdingler · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Then it will become more common practice to cut lines to the places they will rob, if there is a live feed.

      Skilled burglars have been cutting power and phone lines for years, since alarm systems have been in relative widespread use since the 90's. Many homes that report intruder alerts over land lines are easily defeated in this manner, especially if the loudspeaker in the attic can be disabled.

      The new systems that report via wifi are still somewhat neutralized by the power outage throwing a main disconnect at the electrical feed, although they may report the power outage as an alarm trigger.

      I'm sure people wouldn't want that in their bedroom either. There was enough of a fuss about the Kinect always being on. There is no sinker here.

      An alarm system company was out in force in our town a year or so ago, knocking doors and offering the wifi thermostat with the whole house protection system. It came with a door keypad entry system, internet accessibility, and a free camera you could place wherever you wanted.

      An attractive gal pal of mine had the complimentary camera in her bedroom... the sales rep had recommended installing it there and it never occurred to her what a poor placement that might be. So yeah, maybe there's a sinker...

      --
      Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.

      Ernest Hemingway

    4. Re:RTFA by DrXym · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Talk about paranoid. The guy just wants people to install cameras that actually get clear enough shots to ID a perp. It isn't about mass surveillance in the slightest.

  6. What the fuck by scumdamn · · Score: 4, Insightful

    is wrong with the comments section. We installed cameras around the house and ran the cables through the attic to the DVR in our closet. Houses in the neighborhood have been broken into and a car was stolen two doors down. We hope that having the cameras will deter crime and if they don't, we'll at least have footage. Our neighbor has a camera and it was very useful in catching some kids that burned down a bush in front of our house.

    What the fuck is up with the kneejerk reaction to an article that is just suggesting that you try to get the bad guy's faces rather than the top of their heads? That sounds like good advice.

  7. Re:Clickbait title by nehumanuscrede · · Score: 5, Insightful

    In a country where Law Enforcement can jail you for not handing over encryption keys on demand, I don't know how comfortable I would be on having any recorded footage that could also be subject to the same line of thinking in the future.

    Eg: Hand over your CCTV footage to prove you were home last night or we put you in jail.

    Not to sound TOO tin-foil hat here, but I tend to view anything that Law Enforcement says these days with a bit of apprehension / suspicion.
    Regardless of how well it sounds at the time.