7 ms·
> Obvious one would be no more purse snatchers, ever. Almost no rapes, much fewer violent crimes. No lost kids. Lives and wallets saved. That is unrealisticall
by diffeomorphism 7y ago
> Obvious one would be no more purse snatchers, ever. Almost no rapes, much fewer violent crimes. No lost kids. Lives and wallets saved.
That is unrealistically optimistic. At best purse snatchers will move to parts out of view of cameras or wear something.
Like all these proposals they are only effective against non-criminals. Also, "car pulls up, kidnaps a kid" or "kid runs away from home and hides" seems entirely unrelated.
- diffeomorphism 7y agoLooking into it more, it seems that reality is even worse than I thought. Surveillance not only fails to decrease crime, but actually lead to an increase (article in German): https://www.bz-berlin.de/berlin/umland/straftaten-in-brandenburg-nur-in-video-bereichen-gestiegen https://www.bz-berlin.de/berlin/umland/straftaten-in-branden... Interesting. "Crime in Brandenburg increased ONLY in video-surveiled regions".
- radu_floricica 7y agoThat screams "better reporting".
- diffeomorphism 7y agoSounds plausible, but the police disagrees.
- radu_floricica 7y agoLooks like police are saying there's an unrelated reason. From google translate: "The police explain this with fights among young immigrants who met in 2018 in the camera area. Now the situation has calmed down. There are no numbers."