> Police in many places don't do all the things that they do on television anymore. None of what you're claiming is an argument against using cameras, though.

> Police in many places don't do all the things that they do on television anymore. None of what you're claiming is an argument against using cameras, though. Including the insinuation and logical fallacy that the only experience I, a lay judge within the Norwegian justice system, have with police work is through television........ You won't believe how often camera surveillance footage comes up in court cases, and how often they are instrumental in deciding those very cases. That you have an underfunded police force has exactly nothing to do with camera surveillance. In fact, knowing that is actually a giant argument for getting more surveillance cameras(!), since it's such a big help in solving cases and convicting criminals. Add to this that I've travelled quite extensively, including in countries with severely underfunded police forces, such as in Bulgaria and Romania, or worse, Serbia. There I've seen up close how such underfunded police work. Yeah, surveillance footage; it's even more important in areas with underfunded police! So if you choose to not install cameras, that's up to you, pal. But don't complain to me when you're making sure that any burglary towards your house becomes unsolvable because you refused to install them...