4 ms·

Does anybody have a link to the San Francisco study referred to below by Cory Doctorow? "It's about the total failure of CCTV to deter people from committing c

Does anybody have a link to the San Francisco study referred to below by Cory Doctorow? "It's about the total failure of CCTV to deter people from committing crimes in the first place. After all, that's how we were sold on CCTV – not mere forensics after the fact, but deterrence. And although study after study has concluded that CCTVs don't deter most crime (a famous San Francisco study showed that, at best, street crime shifted a few metres down the pavement when the CCTV went up), we've been told for years that we must all submit to being photographed all the time because it would keep the people around us from beating us, robbing us, burning our buildings and burglarising our homes." http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2011/aug/17/why-cctv-does-not-deter-crime http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2011/aug/17/why-cctv-do... “Rather than being a tool, [CCTV] has in a lot of cases become a substitute for policing. So people very rarely see a bobby on the beat [a police officer patrolling the streets], but they do see CCTV cameras,” said Pickles. “The danger is that there is almost an acceptance that crime is going to happen. So rather than trying to prevent crime you just focus on making sure you have video footage of it when it happens.” http://www.dw.de/doubts-as-to-cctv-efficacy-in-big-brother-britain/a-16461692 http://www.dw.de/doubts-as-to-cctv-efficacy-in-big-brother-b...

Spooky23 14y ago
CCTV is a waste because effective police know who the criminals are anyway. Every city police department has org charts for gangs and drug dealing orgs, and they know where people fence stolen property. Best case, CCTV makes prosecution easier. Worst case, it makes it easier for the cops to justify harassing every black kid with a hoodie based on a grainy picture.
- objclxt 14y ago
  CCTV is quite good at helping to mitigate public order offences. For example, here in London (with possibly the most cameras per person in the world - hard to get a reliable figure) one of the few genuinely useful examples of CCTV is to enable fast response on Friday/Saturday nights. For example, a fight breaking out outside a pub. It is not totally unusual to see mobile CCTV units (vans with telescopic cameras on the roof) on the streets of London for this purpose. But yes, in terms of intelligence gathering or crime prevention outside of drunk and disorderly, CCTV is not very useful. A few years ago, the Met Police reckoned that in London one crime was solved for every thousand cameras[1]. Not really an endorsement to shout from the rooftops about. [1]:http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/cctv-in-the-spotlight-one-crime-solved-for-every-1000-cameras-1776774.html http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/cctv-in-the-spotl...
  - deleted 14y ago
    [deleted]
  - rhizome 14y ago
    It may be that only one crime was solved for every thousand cameras, but there are several houses and politicians bought with each contract.
  - barrkel 14y ago
    The mobile CCTV units with the periscope cameras are mostly for parking enforcement.
archivator 14y ago
I believe this is the study: http://www.library.ca.gov/crb/08/08-007.pdf http://www.library.ca.gov/crb/08/08-007.pdf Summary of results: • Neither cameras in Jordan Downs nor Hollywood Boulevard had any significant effect in reducing violent or property crime rates within the target areas; • The monthly rate of violent crimes fell in both the Jordan Downs and Hollywood target areas; however, the Nickerson Gardens control site and the Hollywood Box matched pair experienced similar reductions and the results were not statistically significant; • The monthly rate of property crimes decreased in Hollywood, and increased in Jordan Downs, but the results were not statistically significant in either case; • The evidence on the displacement of crime is mixed; in both locations, some crimes increased at a faster rate in the adjacent areas, indicating that CCTV may displace crime, while other types of crimes decreased relatively more in the buffer areas, though results were not statistically significant; • CCTV had no statistically significant effect on arrest rates for misdemeanor quality-of-life infractions in Jordan Downs or on Hollywood Boulevard
- bitcartel 14y ago
  Thanks. That's not actually it but there was a reference to the SF study and from that it was possible to find the actual report. Researchers: http://citris-uc.org/news/2009/04/14/citris_helps_city_san_francisco_evaluate_community_safety_camera_program http://citris-uc.org/news/2009/04/14/citris_helps_city_san_f... PDF: http://www.ischool.berkeley.edu/files/CITRIS_SF_CSC_Study_Final_Dec_2008.pdf http://www.ischool.berkeley.edu/files/CITRIS_SF_CSC_Study_Fi... SF Chronicle TLDR: http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Crime-cameras-not-capturing-many-crimes-3290349.php http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Crime-cameras-not-capt... "San Francisco's 68 controversial anti-crime cameras haven't deterred criminals from committing assaults, sex offenses or robberies - and they've only moved homicides down the block, according to a new report from UC Berkeley. Researchers found that nonviolent thefts dropped by 22 percent within 100 feet of the cameras, but the devices had no effect on burglaries or car theft. And they've had no effect on violent crime. The cameras have been installed in phases on some of the city's roughest streets since 2005 with large concentrations of them in the Western Addition and Mission District and others in the lower Haight, the Tenderloin and near Coit Tower. The cameras have contributed to only one arrest nearly two years ago in a city that saw 98 homicides last year, a 12-year high. The video is choppy, and police aren't allowed to watch video in real-time or maneuver the cameras to get a better view of potential crimes."

Spooky23 14y ago

CCTV is a waste because effective police know who the criminals are anyway. Every city police department has org charts for gangs and drug dealing orgs, and they know where people fence stolen property. Best case, CCTV makes prosecution easier. Worst case, it makes it easier for the cops to justify harassing every black kid with a hoodie based on a grainy picture.

objclxt 14y ago
CCTV is quite good at helping to mitigate public order offences. For example, here in London (with possibly the most cameras per person in the world - hard to get a reliable figure) one of the few genuinely useful examples of CCTV is to enable fast response on Friday/Saturday nights. For example, a fight breaking out outside a pub. It is not totally unusual to see mobile CCTV units (vans with telescopic cameras on the roof) on the streets of London for this purpose. But yes, in terms of intelligence gathering or crime prevention outside of drunk and disorderly, CCTV is not very useful. A few years ago, the Met Police reckoned that in London one crime was solved for every thousand cameras[1]. Not really an endorsement to shout from the rooftops about. [1]:http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/cctv-in-the-spotlight-one-crime-solved-for-every-1000-cameras-1776774.html http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/cctv-in-the-spotl...
- deleted 14y ago
  [deleted]
- rhizome 14y ago
  It may be that only one crime was solved for every thousand cameras, but there are several houses and politicians bought with each contract.
- barrkel 14y ago
  The mobile CCTV units with the periscope cameras are mostly for parking enforcement.

archivator 14y ago

I believe this is the study: http://www.library.ca.gov/crb/08/08-007.pdf http://www.library.ca.gov/crb/08/08-007.pdf Summary of results: • Neither cameras in Jordan Downs nor Hollywood Boulevard had any significant effect in reducing violent or property crime rates within the target areas; • The monthly rate of violent crimes fell in both the Jordan Downs and Hollywood target areas; however, the Nickerson Gardens control site and the Hollywood Box matched pair experienced similar reductions and the results were not statistically significant; • The monthly rate of property crimes decreased in Hollywood, and increased in Jordan Downs, but the results were not statistically significant in either case; • The evidence on the displacement of crime is mixed; in both locations, some crimes increased at a faster rate in the adjacent areas, indicating that CCTV may displace crime, while other types of crimes decreased relatively more in the buffer areas, though results were not statistically significant; • CCTV had no statistically significant effect on arrest rates for misdemeanor quality-of-life infractions in Jordan Downs or on Hollywood Boulevard

bitcartel 14y ago
Thanks. That's not actually it but there was a reference to the SF study and from that it was possible to find the actual report. Researchers: http://citris-uc.org/news/2009/04/14/citris_helps_city_san_francisco_evaluate_community_safety_camera_program http://citris-uc.org/news/2009/04/14/citris_helps_city_san_f... PDF: http://www.ischool.berkeley.edu/files/CITRIS_SF_CSC_Study_Final_Dec_2008.pdf http://www.ischool.berkeley.edu/files/CITRIS_SF_CSC_Study_Fi... SF Chronicle TLDR: http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Crime-cameras-not-capturing-many-crimes-3290349.php http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Crime-cameras-not-capt... "San Francisco's 68 controversial anti-crime cameras haven't deterred criminals from committing assaults, sex offenses or robberies - and they've only moved homicides down the block, according to a new report from UC Berkeley. Researchers found that nonviolent thefts dropped by 22 percent within 100 feet of the cameras, but the devices had no effect on burglaries or car theft. And they've had no effect on violent crime. The cameras have been installed in phases on some of the city's roughest streets since 2005 with large concentrations of them in the Western Addition and Mission District and others in the lower Haight, the Tenderloin and near Coit Tower. The cameras have contributed to only one arrest nearly two years ago in a city that saw 98 homicides last year, a 12-year high. The video is choppy, and police aren't allowed to watch video in real-time or maneuver the cameras to get a better view of potential crimes."