NCJ Number
182340
Journal
Law and Order Volume: 48 Issue: 3 Dated: March 2000 Pages: 53-58
Date Published
March 2000
Length
6 pages
Annotation
Police use of closed-circuit television (CCTV) is widespread in the United Kingdom and less common in the United States; civil libertarians argue that the cameras violate people’s civil rights, whereas proponents reply that using cameras saves lives so that people can continue to enjoy what rights they have.
Abstract
About 250 cameras operate at traffic signals in the United States. In contrast, police in the United Kingdom use cameras extensively in buses, trains, elevators, and telephone booths; on the helmets of horse-mounted officers; for surveillance of drug dealers; and to prevent vandalism. The police also sometimes require owners of businesses such as pubs or clubs to install CCTV systems. The use of CCTV has produced mixed results in the United Kingdom. They have been a useful asset to police, mainly for mundane purposes such as riot control and traffic control. However, a 1999 study of crime trends in Glasgow, Scotland, concluded that a general downward trend in crime had occurred, but no data suggested that the cameras had a particular impact. In addition, the majority of citizens surveyed were unaware of the cameras’ presence. Nevertheless, a large majority believed that the cameras would reduce crime rates; 67 percent did not mind being observed by cameras. One critic argued that the cameras were not cost-effective, because they produced only 1 arrest every 40 days. The use of the cameras is increasing and police administrators support their use despite the divided opinions. Photograph