A report in the U.K. discovered that CCTV cameras aren’t effective:
“This fact has been demonstrated again and again: by a comprehensive study for the Home Office in 2005, by several studies in the US, and again with new data announced last month by New Scotland Yard. They actually solve very few crimes, and their deterrent effect is minimal.”
It would be nice if these facts would halt the growth of cameras going up, but it won’t:
Orlando is not alone:
“Police will get some extra eyes around Cincinnati, where 120 crime cameras will be installed at no cost to local taxpayers.
A $2 million federal grant will pay for the surveillance cameras, which will be connected to laptops in police cruisers.”
Don’t confuse them with the facts seems to be their motto. And the line that the ones in Cincinnati are at no cost to taxpayers because of the federal grant is outrageous.
In case anyone is not aware, any money that comes from a federal grant has indeed come from the taxpayers-all taxpayers across the country. The federal government does not make any money. It can’t because they do not produce anything. All the money they get is from the taxpayers, so yes indeed, taxpayers did pay for that grant.
These CCTV cameras were not about crime anyway. It is about getting the people used to having cameras on them all the time so that the world can become a surveillance society.
Is a surveillance society a free society?
Powered by ScribeFire.