Thursday, February 14, 2008
Georgia Jamieson: Society would be safer if we had securty cameras in public places to catch potential criminals.
I definately agree with this statement because what it really comes down to, is you shouldn't be doing things in public that you don't want people to see. Having security cameras in public could not only catch criminals but scare them out of committing the crime in the first place. Public security cameras could prevent people being mugged, stores being robbed, hit and runs and many petty crimes like those. When you step outside of your home, and go into the city or out to the street, you have left your privacy in your house. If you don't like the idea of being filmed, stay home.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
11 comments:
I don't know if i agree or disagree with your statement. I'd have to stay on the fence for this one. I mean, i can clearly see and understand teh point you a making perfectly but at the same time i wonder whether complete surveillance would eventually leak in to a "Big Brother" type of thing.
I guess it would all depend in the location that the cameras were put. I'm really not sure about this one.
Angelica Felix-DeGuzman
I think I agree with your thoughts. I think that simply putting the cameras there would discourage people from robbing the store at all. I agree with your last couple of sentences as well. I think as a citizen you should understand that in order to catch criminals in the act/prevent them from committing a crime, you have to give up a little of your privacy.
the last comment was from Eliza Cohn
I agree with Georgia and also with Angelica about the location of the camera. The accuracy of this statement truly depends on the surrounding and neighborhood. This statement raises the questions of how much privacy citizens have with cameras watching them but if the cameras are for surveillance, one shouldn't be worried.
-Amanda Jones
The problem here isn't the cameras in public places, it's the nature of the criminals. If you're merely catching criminals, then I agree with you. But potential criminals? That's people who look like they might commit a crime, but haven't actually done so yet. And that is truly wrong.
I do agree with your statement but at the same time I think there could be some opposing arguments. For example, I think that even if there were security cameras in places, criminals would still find some way to work around these cameras or to disable them. Also, I think it would invade people's privacy even when they are not committing a crime. If the government is oppressive then they could record who is visiting certain homes and use this information to punish people that are getting together to oppose the government. While the cameras may have some benefits, they could also have some detrimental affects on a free society.
--Kate Collins
I completely agree with what you said there Georgia. Many stores have closed-circuit surveillance cameras in order to catch anyone who might try to steal goods or assault the clerk, why not have them all around? Anything you don't want anyone seeing you do in public is either illegal or embarassing. Criminal activity could be drastically reduced out of the fact that it'd be nearly impossible. I think security cameras in public venues is a great idea.
That last one is Max David's comment!
After reading 1984, my opinion is still the same, and I want to point out the differences between the situation in 1984 and putting securtiy cameras in public.
In 1984 Big Brother was watching everything. Telescreens were everywhere and it was literally impossible for you to go anywhere without Big Brother knowing. They didn't do this to prevent crimes. They did this to control their people and make it impossible for anyone to disagree with the Party.
Putting cameras in public, for example a mall, is entirely different. Trying to prevent petty crimes, and trying to prevent freedom of thought or speech are two different things. We wouldn't be convicting people for disagreeing with our government. Comparing security to the situation in 1984 is almost impossible.
Again, I would just like to reiterate that public places and public places, and you should expect not to be seen when in them.
-Georgia Jamieson
I definitely agree with Georgia. Placing video cameras in public places would serve as a tool to help catch criminals that could be a threat to society as a whole, not solely the government. The purpose of the telescreens in 1984 is to see if people are commiting crimes against the Party, not against Oceania as a whole.
the one right above is by Zoe Storck
Post a Comment