Public Video Surveillance Paper

The use public video surveillance is a widely debated topic. Proponents of surveillance suggest it reduces crime rates by “(1) increasing the risk of being apprehended; (2) increasing the effort involved in committing the crime; (3) decreasing the rewards of the crime; (4) increasing the shame and guilt expected to result from the crime or felt at the immediate moment of decision-making; and/or (5) reducing provocations that create criminal opportunities” (LaVigne, Lowry, Dwyer, & Markman, 2011, p. 4). As a result, municipalities across the country are increasingly turning to public surveillance systems to assist with everyday policing. Lavigne et al. (2011) state it succinctly when they write:
“Municipalities across the country are in a …show more content…
As the number of CCTVs in use increases, municipalities must weigh the increased costs associated with active monitoring against less expensive and less effective passive monitoring techniques. Active monitoring “consists of authorized users…manipulating the view of a camera and radioing officers to alert them of suspicious activities or crimes in progress” (LaVigne, Lowry, Dwyer, & Markman, 2011, p. 26). Although effective at crime intervention, this type of monitoring requires a human observer to monitor video feeds and make judgements concerning the intent of those they are observing. Conversely, passive monitoring consists of cameras “set to view a single location or follow a viewing pattern… The “pattern” setting programs the camera to repeatedly pan a geographic area, recording the same series of frames over time…the video footage that is produced by cameras is often viewed after the fact to support police officers’ problem solving activities, to aid in investigations and prosecutions, and to enhance training exercises” (LaVigne, Lowry, Dwyer, & Markman, 2011, p. 27). While effective, this type of monitoring tends to be reactive, rather than proactive and does little to address crime prevention or