38 ms·

Edina Minnesota latest suburb to roll out homeowner surveillance camera program

91 points by jSully24 5y ago

samschooler 5y ago
So I am actually from Edina, I don’t currently live there but my parents do. The context of this is a string of robberies and crimes not normally seen in this suburb. Edina is generally seen as a safe suburb, and all of the recent crime came on very sudden. I don’t agree with the program, but since I have some context around it, I thought I’d add to the conversation. [0]: https://minnesota.cbslocal.com/2021/12/11/edina-pd-offers-5k-reward-for-information-about-4-teenage-suspects-in-attempted-lunds-and-byerlys-carjacking/ https://minnesota.cbslocal.com/2021/12/11/edina-pd-offers-5k...
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- throwawaylinux 5y ago
  What is it about the program you don't agree with, if you don't mind elaborating?
  - cphelps01 5y ago
    Probably nothing but they hadn't typed 'cake eater' in a while...
  - gfykvfyxgc 5y ago
    Maybe close cooperation with the deeply corrupt and unjust police makes you complicit in the outcomes.
    - throwawaylinux 5y ago
      Maybe that is what they believe, but I'm specifically asking samschooler since they are in a unique position to comment on it.
    - cydyyde7 5y ago
    - Bud 5y ago
      Except in this particular case there appears to be a near-zero risk of anyone being "complicit" in bad police outcomes, given that it's opt-in, can only be used on a case-by-case basis, and it's the citizen who searches their own cam footage, voluntarily, and only in response to a specific police request about a specific case. So, while at first glance at a headline, this might seem problematic, after reading the details, I'd probably be willing to participate. This can't really be abused to create any George Floyd-type situations.
    - vba616 5y ago
      Maybe. And maybe homeownership is crossing the Rubicon in that respect.
  - samschooler 5y ago
    I don't agree with the close ties between private residential camera systems and the police. This program, allows police to ask for footage from any camera without a warrant. Granted, its voluntary, there need to be checks within the program that prevent police from mass requesting camera footage without a legitimate reason. And I don't want that check to be individual private citizens who, given the least amount of pressure will need to comply.
    - Spooky23 5y ago
      Many police investigations center around video evidence as is it objective and easy to admit. Police build little databases of where cameras are located and will use them to build timelines, etc. I served in a jury where the police were able to identify a hit and run driver who killed a teenager by knitting together surveillance footage from a bunch of cameras and establishing what cars were in an area in a given 5-minute window.
    - vba616 5y ago
      I think what is novel, is the proliferation of residential cameras. I don't think the police started requesting camera footage of crimes from private citizens recently. It's just that they turned to businesses with security cameras. I think realistically many people who own property cooperate with the police out of a definite sense of self-interest with no coercion required.
- ellisv 5y ago
  I agree. Edina is a low crime area. This feels like a classic cake eater program.
  - samschooler 5y ago
    I'll take it with grace, but I feel like "cake eater" should at least include EP and/or Minnetonka. Edina, as a whole, has become much more diverse and varied in income in recent years. Granted there are some hold out areas of affluent-bubbles, but as a whole, Edina isn't an outlier anymore.
- gjsman-1000 5y ago
  My family had a friend who was eating a restaurant with his wife at lunchtime. In broad daylight someone swiped their catalytic converter while they were eating. The suburbs are not nearly as safe as they were. My county has reported an explosion in carjackings and is considering boosting the police budget, and has referred to it as crime spillover.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - seoaeu 5y ago
    There has always been some amount of crime in suburbs. A single instance doesn’t prove anything about whether the rate has gone up
    - DaniloDias 5y ago
mensetmanusman 5y ago
Human behavior that tends to self-imprison on a large scale is fascinating to me. In the west we see communities opting in to self surveillance 100% of the time, in China it can be literally having your door welded shut so you stay at home. It all stems from the desire to control other people’s behavior to varying degrees. This desire is probably tied to a survival trait, but more often it is to satisfy something else.
- jdkee 5y ago
  Or it could be that humans don't respond well to uncontrolled crime. Unless you have experienced crime directed to you, it is easy to judge other's reactions.
- twblalock 5y ago
  Who in this program is surveilling or imprisoning themselves? Having a camera on your house, pointed into the street, is the opposite of self-surveillance. It's a way to surveil people in a public thoroughfare. Some of those people happen to be thieves who steal things from homes and cars, and if they get caught by video surveillance, that's great. What exactly do the neighborhood residents lose by participating in this surveillance? It's only an upside for them -- they might be able to catch the thieves, with no loss of privacy for themselves.
  - spoonjim 5y ago
    What do they lose? They lose if they're the people on the wrong camera at the wrong time and they get picked up for a crime they didn't commit!
    - DSMan195276 5y ago
      ... So nobody should put up security cameras outside their house? That's what these are, that's it. In such a situation most people would consider security cameras a pretty good investment. I think it's also worth considering what can happen if there aren't cameras - eye witnesses suck. What if someone (or more than one person) claims to have seen you walking by a house that got robbed, and there's no video to prove your innocence? If people are hyper-aware that crime is happening they're going to be paying extra attention, while probably still doing a very bad job of determining what's actually going on.
alex_sf 5y ago
A few of the comments here seem to have not read the article. This is an opt-in program that effectively creates a map with contact info of private citizens with cameras. When something nefarious happens in a particular area, the police can reach out to the people who put themselves on the map and ask if they have footage and are willing to share it. The police already and have always done this.
- jodrellblank 5y ago
  > "The police have always done this" Assuming police in the 1840s couldn't find citizens with cameras watching the street, how long is your "always"? ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_enforcement_in_the_United_States#Development_of_modern_policing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_enforcement_in_the_United_... )
  - alex_sf 5y ago
    Since the advent of surveillance cameras I suppose. So, 1927? https://www.asecurelife.com/history-of-security-cameras/ https://www.asecurelife.com/history-of-security-cameras/
    - jodrellblank 5y ago
      I was genuinely asking what you meant by "always" when the police have been around 180 years and the ability for individual homeowners to be recording footage of whatever they want in common usage has been around maybe 10 years. Given that link, I would be very surprised if the Minnesota Police heard of Leo Theremin connecting a camera to a TV in the Kremlin in 1927 and immediately organised a map of citizens with cameras they could "ask if they have footage and are willing to share it"; the link says CCTV was a military thing until 1950, was expensive and uncommon until the 1960s because it needed someone always watching the feed, so ther ewouldn't have been any recordings for the police to view for over 40 years. Then "it wasn’t until the late 1990s that it started appearing in mainstream camera products like security cameras for the average business or home." I'm guessing the time the police would routinely ask if anyone had footage of the crimes would be sometime after that, after CCTV recordings became popular enough in businesses that there was a good chance of a camera seeing a crime in enough cases to make it worth organising. Maybe mid to late 1990s for businesses? Then, individuals with things like Nest Doorbells ("homeowner surveillance camera program") wouldn't be a thing until maybe 2010s? Which makes me think it's an odd thing to say the police "always did this".
exogeny 5y ago
r2b2 5y ago
> Minneapolis still encourages residents to register their cameras, but Merchant said that doesn't give police "blanket access. ... There has to be consent from the owner." I'm glad a warrant-like system is the plan. Technology opens the door to many dystopias I hope we avoid.
- cool_dude85 5y ago
  A warrant-like system? No, it looks like the cops just have to ask your paranoid gun-nut neighbor before they can get the videos. That's a far cry from a judge and the judicial scrutiny, legal protections, etc. that a warrant entails.
  - alex_sf 5y ago
    They can already do that. They've always been able to do that. Consent circumvents nearly all legal protections.
    - cool_dude85 5y ago
      Sure! But it's not a warrant-like system.
      - alex_sf 5y ago
        > No, it looks like the cops just have to ask your paranoid gun-nut neighbor before they can get the videos. That's the part I was referring to. Anyone can provide footage from their cameras if they want.
duk3luk3 5y ago
In some countries (notably Germany) it is illegal for private citizens to point surveillance cameras at any property they do not own, including public property. This includes dummy cameras (in Germany).
- LinuxBender 5y ago
  It can also be problematic in the US as peeping tom laws have not really caught up with surveillance cameras and drones yet. I had a neighbor that was allegedly pointing cameras at his neighbor because he didn't want a black woman in the neighborhood. He was also an officer of the HOA. He was trying to intimidate her with cameras and staring at her all day. She sued and won. The judge ordered him to remove the cameras. I got out of that HOA in a hurry. They've since doubled the fees to compensate for the law suit, so they should have it paid off in 25-30 years.
grapescheesee 5y ago
I was in Minneapolis a few months ago and grabbed a Lyft. I started talking with the driver about crime surges, mainly the dramatic car jackings increase. He said 22 people he personally knew have been victims of car jacking in 2021. They are organized and setup drop off points to box the cars in. The 'passanger' then holds them at gun point and another person gets in the driver seat. Stolen phones and credit cards are also being used for this. Its out of control. Multiple Amber alerts issued with infants or toddlers in the back seat from separate car jackings are increasingly common. A few days ago another happened. https://www.mprnews.org/story/2022/01/07/1yearold-missing-in-a-car-stolen-in-minneapolis https://www.mprnews.org/story/2022/01/07/1yearold-missing-in...
- throwaway0a5e 5y ago
  How is it possible to do this professionally without getting shot or run over? The first few victims I get. But after it becomes an identified pattern and makes the news people are gonna be on somewhat of a lookout or at least have it in the back of their mind that it's possible and the odds of your victim seeing the trap before you've got it complete go way up. Sure you can try and profile people and avoid the car with five dudes in it and go for the middle aged lady in the car with a real estate agency sticker on the door but even then you can only point a gun at so many people before someone's knee-jerk reaction is to either hit the skinny pedal and GTFO or whip out their own piece. This seems like the kind of crime you can only commit 5-10x before you get unlucky and it goes off the rails.
  - germinalphrase 5y ago
    They are giving the impression that this is an organized crime issue and that these cars are being stolen for financial gain, but I live in Minneapolis and everything I’m hearing is that it is joyriding teenagers with guns. Everything about it is reckless, dangerous and scary - but I don’t think anyone is doing it “professionally” (and I’m skeptical that any organized “boxing in” is taking place). And I know this next bit is going to come off as defensive - but I think it provides some context. I’m native to the upper Midwest, but I’ve spent a lot of time living in other large cities around the country. Take a look at the FBI violent crime data below. Minnesota is a very low crime state and is coming off historically low crime. The current uptick in violent crime is real, but still doesn’t come close to the 90’s and lags significantly behind US average. All that said, talking with people - including family - in neighboring communities and across the border in Wisconsin, you’d think Minneapolis is a burning, crime ridden hellhole where you can’t even walk down the street safely. There’s clearly some kind of political hay being made by that narrative. https://crime-data-explorer.app.cloud.gov/pages/explorer/crime/crime-trend https://crime-data-explorer.app.cloud.gov/pages/explorer/cri...
cphelps01 5y ago
[dead]
- codyogden 5y ago
  As a heads up, all of the "Crime Watch" for Minnesota and Minneapolis are run by a verifiable racist. Please ensure you review that source with awareness of the bias that is implicitly in every update from them. Source: https://minnesotareformer.com/2021/01/25/data-show-racial-bias-in-reporting-from-popular-twin-cities-crime-media-network/ https://minnesotareformer.com/2021/01/25/data-show-racial-bi...
  - henriquez 5y ago
    Any facts that come from a racist or otherwise problematic source are deemed “hate facts” and must be discarded.
  - the_doctah 5y ago
    If it's verifiable then why didn't you provide the evidence?
    - codyogden 5y ago
      Okay. https://minnesotareformer.com/2021/01/25/data-show-racial-bias-in-reporting-from-popular-twin-cities-crime-media-network/ https://minnesotareformer.com/2021/01/25/data-show-racial-bi...
      - the_doctah 5y ago
        This reads like a bunch of high school drama between the source you posted and the crime watch page. It also provides extremely weak support for your racism claim.
  - bequanna 5y ago
    Why are you making this about race? Even if that account doesn't have perfect coverage of all crimes committed, the incidents that are being report by that account DID actually happen, right? As an aside, I've been very happy to see the strategy of calling everything you don't like "racism" lose its effectiveness over the past year.
tomohawk 5y ago
The criminals are using social media and tech to organize. It's now an arms race where the police and non-criminal citizens need to figure out ways to out-coordinate the criminals.
menimaxi 5y ago
Solving crimes with cams in times when every one is wearing a mask, specially those who do crimes will wear a mask, a hat or something else more. But how to fix this - put there even more cams :) Genious, really. People, please don't do any crimes, cause you gonna weight on the police system now. Please, if you do commit a crime, just during that time, for short, remove your mask and look at the camera. hahaha

91 points by jSully24 5y ago

So I am actually from Edina, I don’t currently live there but my parents do. The context of this is a string of robberies and crimes not normally seen in this suburb. Edina is generally seen as a safe suburb, and all of the recent crime came on very sudden. I don’t agree with the program, but since I have some context around it, I thought I’d add to the conversation. [0]: https://minnesota.cbslocal.com/2021/12/11/edina-pd-offers-5k-reward-for-information-about-4-teenage-suspects-in-attempted-lunds-and-byerlys-carjacking/ https://minnesota.cbslocal.com/2021/12/11/edina-pd-offers-5k...

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
throwawaylinux 5y ago
What is it about the program you don't agree with, if you don't mind elaborating?
- cphelps01 5y ago
  Probably nothing but they hadn't typed 'cake eater' in a while...
- gfykvfyxgc 5y ago
  Maybe close cooperation with the deeply corrupt and unjust police makes you complicit in the outcomes.
  - throwawaylinux 5y ago
    Maybe that is what they believe, but I'm specifically asking samschooler since they are in a unique position to comment on it.
  - cydyyde7 5y ago
  - Bud 5y ago
    Except in this particular case there appears to be a near-zero risk of anyone being "complicit" in bad police outcomes, given that it's opt-in, can only be used on a case-by-case basis, and it's the citizen who searches their own cam footage, voluntarily, and only in response to a specific police request about a specific case. So, while at first glance at a headline, this might seem problematic, after reading the details, I'd probably be willing to participate. This can't really be abused to create any George Floyd-type situations.
  - vba616 5y ago
    Maybe. And maybe homeownership is crossing the Rubicon in that respect.
- samschooler 5y ago
  I don't agree with the close ties between private residential camera systems and the police. This program, allows police to ask for footage from any camera without a warrant. Granted, its voluntary, there need to be checks within the program that prevent police from mass requesting camera footage without a legitimate reason. And I don't want that check to be individual private citizens who, given the least amount of pressure will need to comply.
  - Spooky23 5y ago
    Many police investigations center around video evidence as is it objective and easy to admit. Police build little databases of where cameras are located and will use them to build timelines, etc. I served in a jury where the police were able to identify a hit and run driver who killed a teenager by knitting together surveillance footage from a bunch of cameras and establishing what cars were in an area in a given 5-minute window.
  - vba616 5y ago
    I think what is novel, is the proliferation of residential cameras. I don't think the police started requesting camera footage of crimes from private citizens recently. It's just that they turned to businesses with security cameras. I think realistically many people who own property cooperate with the police out of a definite sense of self-interest with no coercion required.
ellisv 5y ago
I agree. Edina is a low crime area. This feels like a classic cake eater program.
- samschooler 5y ago
  I'll take it with grace, but I feel like "cake eater" should at least include EP and/or Minnetonka. Edina, as a whole, has become much more diverse and varied in income in recent years. Granted there are some hold out areas of affluent-bubbles, but as a whole, Edina isn't an outlier anymore.
gjsman-1000 5y ago
My family had a friend who was eating a restaurant with his wife at lunchtime. In broad daylight someone swiped their catalytic converter while they were eating. The suburbs are not nearly as safe as they were. My county has reported an explosion in carjackings and is considering boosting the police budget, and has referred to it as crime spillover.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- seoaeu 5y ago
  There has always been some amount of crime in suburbs. A single instance doesn’t prove anything about whether the rate has gone up
  - DaniloDias 5y ago

mensetmanusman 5y ago

Human behavior that tends to self-imprison on a large scale is fascinating to me. In the west we see communities opting in to self surveillance 100% of the time, in China it can be literally having your door welded shut so you stay at home. It all stems from the desire to control other people’s behavior to varying degrees. This desire is probably tied to a survival trait, but more often it is to satisfy something else.

jdkee 5y ago
Or it could be that humans don't respond well to uncontrolled crime. Unless you have experienced crime directed to you, it is easy to judge other's reactions.
twblalock 5y ago
Who in this program is surveilling or imprisoning themselves? Having a camera on your house, pointed into the street, is the opposite of self-surveillance. It's a way to surveil people in a public thoroughfare. Some of those people happen to be thieves who steal things from homes and cars, and if they get caught by video surveillance, that's great. What exactly do the neighborhood residents lose by participating in this surveillance? It's only an upside for them -- they might be able to catch the thieves, with no loss of privacy for themselves.
- spoonjim 5y ago
  What do they lose? They lose if they're the people on the wrong camera at the wrong time and they get picked up for a crime they didn't commit!
  - DSMan195276 5y ago
    ... So nobody should put up security cameras outside their house? That's what these are, that's it. In such a situation most people would consider security cameras a pretty good investment. I think it's also worth considering what can happen if there aren't cameras - eye witnesses suck. What if someone (or more than one person) claims to have seen you walking by a house that got robbed, and there's no video to prove your innocence? If people are hyper-aware that crime is happening they're going to be paying extra attention, while probably still doing a very bad job of determining what's actually going on.

alex_sf 5y ago

A few of the comments here seem to have not read the article. This is an opt-in program that effectively creates a map with contact info of private citizens with cameras. When something nefarious happens in a particular area, the police can reach out to the people who put themselves on the map and ask if they have footage and are willing to share it. The police already and have always done this.

jodrellblank 5y ago
> "The police have always done this" Assuming police in the 1840s couldn't find citizens with cameras watching the street, how long is your "always"? ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_enforcement_in_the_United_States#Development_of_modern_policing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_enforcement_in_the_United_... )
- alex_sf 5y ago
  Since the advent of surveillance cameras I suppose. So, 1927? https://www.asecurelife.com/history-of-security-cameras/ https://www.asecurelife.com/history-of-security-cameras/
  - jodrellblank 5y ago
    I was genuinely asking what you meant by "always" when the police have been around 180 years and the ability for individual homeowners to be recording footage of whatever they want in common usage has been around maybe 10 years. Given that link, I would be very surprised if the Minnesota Police heard of Leo Theremin connecting a camera to a TV in the Kremlin in 1927 and immediately organised a map of citizens with cameras they could "ask if they have footage and are willing to share it"; the link says CCTV was a military thing until 1950, was expensive and uncommon until the 1960s because it needed someone always watching the feed, so ther ewouldn't have been any recordings for the police to view for over 40 years. Then "it wasn’t until the late 1990s that it started appearing in mainstream camera products like security cameras for the average business or home." I'm guessing the time the police would routinely ask if anyone had footage of the crimes would be sometime after that, after CCTV recordings became popular enough in businesses that there was a good chance of a camera seeing a crime in enough cases to make it worth organising. Maybe mid to late 1990s for businesses? Then, individuals with things like Nest Doorbells ("homeowner surveillance camera program") wouldn't be a thing until maybe 2010s? Which makes me think it's an odd thing to say the police "always did this".

exogeny 5y ago

r2b2 5y ago

> Minneapolis still encourages residents to register their cameras, but Merchant said that doesn't give police "blanket access. ... There has to be consent from the owner." I'm glad a warrant-like system is the plan. Technology opens the door to many dystopias I hope we avoid.

cool_dude85 5y ago
A warrant-like system? No, it looks like the cops just have to ask your paranoid gun-nut neighbor before they can get the videos. That's a far cry from a judge and the judicial scrutiny, legal protections, etc. that a warrant entails.
- alex_sf 5y ago
  They can already do that. They've always been able to do that. Consent circumvents nearly all legal protections.
  - cool_dude85 5y ago
    Sure! But it's not a warrant-like system.
    - alex_sf 5y ago
      > No, it looks like the cops just have to ask your paranoid gun-nut neighbor before they can get the videos. That's the part I was referring to. Anyone can provide footage from their cameras if they want.

duk3luk3 5y ago

In some countries (notably Germany) it is illegal for private citizens to point surveillance cameras at any property they do not own, including public property. This includes dummy cameras (in Germany).

LinuxBender 5y ago
It can also be problematic in the US as peeping tom laws have not really caught up with surveillance cameras and drones yet. I had a neighbor that was allegedly pointing cameras at his neighbor because he didn't want a black woman in the neighborhood. He was also an officer of the HOA. He was trying to intimidate her with cameras and staring at her all day. She sued and won. The judge ordered him to remove the cameras. I got out of that HOA in a hurry. They've since doubled the fees to compensate for the law suit, so they should have it paid off in 25-30 years.

grapescheesee 5y ago

I was in Minneapolis a few months ago and grabbed a Lyft. I started talking with the driver about crime surges, mainly the dramatic car jackings increase. He said 22 people he personally knew have been victims of car jacking in 2021. They are organized and setup drop off points to box the cars in. The 'passanger' then holds them at gun point and another person gets in the driver seat. Stolen phones and credit cards are also being used for this. Its out of control. Multiple Amber alerts issued with infants or toddlers in the back seat from separate car jackings are increasingly common. A few days ago another happened. https://www.mprnews.org/story/2022/01/07/1yearold-missing-in-a-car-stolen-in-minneapolis https://www.mprnews.org/story/2022/01/07/1yearold-missing-in...

throwaway0a5e 5y ago
How is it possible to do this professionally without getting shot or run over? The first few victims I get. But after it becomes an identified pattern and makes the news people are gonna be on somewhat of a lookout or at least have it in the back of their mind that it's possible and the odds of your victim seeing the trap before you've got it complete go way up. Sure you can try and profile people and avoid the car with five dudes in it and go for the middle aged lady in the car with a real estate agency sticker on the door but even then you can only point a gun at so many people before someone's knee-jerk reaction is to either hit the skinny pedal and GTFO or whip out their own piece. This seems like the kind of crime you can only commit 5-10x before you get unlucky and it goes off the rails.
- germinalphrase 5y ago
  They are giving the impression that this is an organized crime issue and that these cars are being stolen for financial gain, but I live in Minneapolis and everything I’m hearing is that it is joyriding teenagers with guns. Everything about it is reckless, dangerous and scary - but I don’t think anyone is doing it “professionally” (and I’m skeptical that any organized “boxing in” is taking place). And I know this next bit is going to come off as defensive - but I think it provides some context. I’m native to the upper Midwest, but I’ve spent a lot of time living in other large cities around the country. Take a look at the FBI violent crime data below. Minnesota is a very low crime state and is coming off historically low crime. The current uptick in violent crime is real, but still doesn’t come close to the 90’s and lags significantly behind US average. All that said, talking with people - including family - in neighboring communities and across the border in Wisconsin, you’d think Minneapolis is a burning, crime ridden hellhole where you can’t even walk down the street safely. There’s clearly some kind of political hay being made by that narrative. https://crime-data-explorer.app.cloud.gov/pages/explorer/crime/crime-trend https://crime-data-explorer.app.cloud.gov/pages/explorer/cri...

cphelps01 5y ago

[dead]

codyogden 5y ago
As a heads up, all of the "Crime Watch" for Minnesota and Minneapolis are run by a verifiable racist. Please ensure you review that source with awareness of the bias that is implicitly in every update from them. Source: https://minnesotareformer.com/2021/01/25/data-show-racial-bias-in-reporting-from-popular-twin-cities-crime-media-network/ https://minnesotareformer.com/2021/01/25/data-show-racial-bi...
- henriquez 5y ago
  Any facts that come from a racist or otherwise problematic source are deemed “hate facts” and must be discarded.
- the_doctah 5y ago
  If it's verifiable then why didn't you provide the evidence?
  - codyogden 5y ago
    Okay. https://minnesotareformer.com/2021/01/25/data-show-racial-bias-in-reporting-from-popular-twin-cities-crime-media-network/ https://minnesotareformer.com/2021/01/25/data-show-racial-bi...
    - the_doctah 5y ago
      This reads like a bunch of high school drama between the source you posted and the crime watch page. It also provides extremely weak support for your racism claim.
- bequanna 5y ago
  Why are you making this about race? Even if that account doesn't have perfect coverage of all crimes committed, the incidents that are being report by that account DID actually happen, right? As an aside, I've been very happy to see the strategy of calling everything you don't like "racism" lose its effectiveness over the past year.

tomohawk 5y ago

The criminals are using social media and tech to organize. It's now an arms race where the police and non-criminal citizens need to figure out ways to out-coordinate the criminals.

menimaxi 5y ago

Solving crimes with cams in times when every one is wearing a mask, specially those who do crimes will wear a mask, a hat or something else more. But how to fix this - put there even more cams :) Genious, really. People, please don't do any crimes, cause you gonna weight on the police system now. Please, if you do commit a crime, just during that time, for short, remove your mask and look at the camera. hahaha