Introduction
The increase in security threats across the world has facilitated the introduction of technology to assist security agencies. Security agents are using surveillance systems such as Closed Circuit Television (CCTV) to enhance safety precautions to the public. A CCTV is a surveillance system that consists of cameras, recorders and displays for monitoring activities. Installation of CCTVs around the streets has raised mixed reactions from the public (Cieszynski, 2006, p. 6). Some people claim that the system has reduced crime rates in the recent past while others feel insecure in the absence of police officers in the street. The presence of both police officers and CCTV videos in the streets contributes to reduction or increase of crime rates. Although CCTVs are digital and efficient because they are in strategic places, the cost of maintenance, privacy concerns and societal perceptions are affecting their significance.
Cost
The cost of acquiring CCTV cameras is economical compared to the recruitment of hiring police officers. This is because police officers consume a lot of money during training, hiring and salaries. These monies can be placed at other vital projects instead of hiring many police officers. CCTVs are cost effective because they are cheap to acquire and install with limited expenses. The cameras help officer to monitor the movement of suspected persons in the streets without their notice. This saves the number of officers in the streets who can alert the criminals through their presences (Coleman & Mccahill 2011, p. 6). However, some people claim that the presence of police officers is crucial in the streets because they feel safe. This is untrue since the police officers collude with thugs for bribes and other may inform criminals about their patrol schedules. This makes the CCTV economical due to detailed coverage of all events that take place within the town centres. The only cost incurred by the installation of CCTVs is the high maintenance costs. The machines require regular maintenance to ensure their effectiveness and reliability. It is also costly to hire experts to install and maintain the devices since it is a technological initiative that needs experts only. Sometimes the devices wore out or damaged by extreme weather conditions, which is uneconomical to taxpayers money. The devices also face vandalism or manipulation from the public due to reduction of employment opportunities. Decrease in equipment costs and increased production of CCTV equipment has enabled even the small-scale businesses to acquire this visual surveillance technology. For instance, wholesalers, security retailers, and Internet dealers offer a variety of products for a varied choice of security needs at cheap prices. This increases security details at homes and neighbourhoods without over-reliance on police personnel (Coleman & Mccahill 2011, p. 15). Additionally, the low costs have influenced security managers to incorporate security-monitoring systems, which combine boundary access, fire and invasion alarms, and observation video into a single safety network. Wireless machinery allows security workers to observe cameras from laptops, handheld gadgets, and even mobile phones.
Society
Another issue that influences that use of CCTVs is the societal perception. The project is a crucial initiative that aims at reducing crime rates, yet the public does not appreciate its importance. The public misconception of the devices that it monitors the activities of all people affects its services. Traditionally, the presence of police officers in the streets has helped in scaring criminals. Failures in technology have also enabled criminals break into businesses or homes unnoticed (Goold 2004, p. 27). Public support is based upon the often-erroneous belief that the cameras are universally subject to regular, routine and systematic monitoring. Consequently, societal involvement in the use of CCTV enables the operations of a police officer to be smooth because they report any occurrences. This implies that the role of the police is a major aspect in the operation and success of CCTV as a resource to fight crime and the fear of crime. There are core variances in approaches between police forces and the public with some keen to own and operate camera systems while others have planned and implemented the removal of CCTV systems from the police stations. The society feels that CCTVs should be controlled from intelligence departments and not police since they take time to reach crime scenes. The society supports this project because of the recent creation of police contact centres and the introduction of the airwaves radio system, which have changed the nature of channels of communication and information from CCTV control rooms to police response resources (Goold 2004, p. 45). This enables the society to contact the police about any vandalism or breakages observed in the streets or crimes that happen in areas with few CCTV cameras. Public involvement in the use of CCTV is also essential because they support and sustain the project financially through local authorities’ kitty. As a result, a core of committed CCTV managers and operators who strive daily to deliver high quality services, monitoring and recording CCTV images underpins this investment (Cieszynski 2006, p. 10). This is because CCTV cameras are an intelligence source, which depend on, other partners, to provide appropriate and effective responses to the images or the information they generate.
Privacy
Privacy is another concern that influences the use of CCTVs. This is because developments in technology and economical access to CCTV cameras have resulted in an increase in the number of protests about attacks of privacy by fellow citizens. The cameras are installed, on every street in major towns, to monitor the operations of people. This makes the public feel that the government is supervising its citizens (Hess 2009, p. 159). Criminals are also aware of the existence of the camera and can execute their activities during blackouts or rainy periods. CCTVs are raising privacy concerns because individuals are monitored without their knowledge in public constructions, train locations, stores, lifts, storerooms, and school halls. They are also caught at ATMs and when confronted by the police in patrol vehicles. There are instances when the cameras are helpful to the public since the features that have enabled the distribution of CCTV also promote the collection of information about an individual. This helps security agencies to access information that can help in future investigations or court cases that arise due to personal identities. Privacy is a vital matter that concerns the lives of people, but the government insists that installation of surveillance cameras help in identifying criminals before they execute their ill intentions (Cieszynski 2006, p. 17). The only hindrance that arises from the system is that, despite the existence of video surveillance, applications in the current security structures have been restricted compared to those of surveillance equipment (Hess 2009, p. 170). There is also the risk that information collected from the surveillance machines can extend to spying on government officials or prominent personalities.
In order to address the problems that originate from the communication of technological advances in video investigation and individual confidentiality necessities, the signal processing community can offer explanations such as the introduction of smart cameras. The smart cameras can be used to insert privacy restrictions in the strategy of a surveillance system (Deflem 2008 p. 262). Smart cameras are investigation cameras furnished with a digital signal processor (DSP). In surveillance operations such as street and transport control, the DSP is encoded to selectively de-identify persons. Additionally, an explanation of the constitution provisions allows security departments to monitor the operations in the towns. For instance, in the US, privacy issues associated with the use of CCTV surveillance are in the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution, which defends a resident from arbitrary pursuits and seizures by law administration and other government organizations (Deflem 2008, p. 260). Consequently, a number of cases maintain the use of technical strategies to improve the natural facility of vision and audible range police officers could install on the street if they were there in person. The courts cannot withdraw the use of surveillance equipment because it helps in maintaining the safety of all citizens. This implies that law can only restrain the right to confidentiality when it is essential to do so in an independent society for motives such as national safety, public protection, the avoidance of crime or defense of the rights and liberties of others. Any restriction on this privilege must be equivalent.
Conclusion
CCTVs are essential surveillance equipment that helps police agencies in strengthening the safety of all citizens. These services monitor the movement of all people within crime prone areas and protected regions such as government offices. There are restrictions that hinder effective operations of CCTVs because of the public beliefs and perceptions. For instance, the cost of obtaining CCTV cameras is inexpensive compared to the staffing or hiring police constables. This makes the CCTV effective due to detailed exposure of all events that happen within the town centres. The only cost suffered by the connection of CCTVs is the high maintenance costs. There are reductions in equipment costs and increased manufacture of CCTV equipment that has allowed even the small-scale industries to obtain this visual surveillance technology. The other crucial issue that influences installation of CCTVs is the perception of the community. Although the project is a crucial initiative that aims at reducing crime rates, the public do not appreciate its prominence because of unclear circumstances. As a result, the commitment of CCTV managers and operators is to strive daily to provide high quality facilities of monitoring and recording CCTV images, which underpins this investment. The society offers support to this project with the creation of the recent police contact centres and the introduction of the airwaves radio system. Lastly, the privacy of the images and information collected through the cameras raise security concerns to the innocent citizens. This is because the cameras monitor individuals without their knowledge in public buildings and ATMs. This helps security agencies to access information that can help in future investigations. The government can introduce smart cameras to reduce instances of privacy concerns since these cameras monitor distinct events only. I think despite all the concerns that surround installation of CCTVs compared to recruitment of police officers; they are effective in reducing crime rates.
List of References
Coleman, r., & Mccahill, M. (2011). Surveillance & crime. London,
SAGE.
Cieszynski, J. (2006). Closed Circuit Television. Burlington, Elsevier.
Print.
Deflem, M. (2008). Surveillance and governance: crime control and beyond. Bingley, UK,
Emerald/JAI.
Goold, B. J. (2004). CCTV and policing: public area surveillance and police practices in
Britain. Oxford [u.a.], Oxford Univ. Press.
Hess, K. M. (2009). Introduction to private security. Belmont, CA, Cengage Learning.
kruegle, H. (2007). CCTV surveillance analogue and digital video practices and
technology. Burlington, MA, Elsevier Butterworth Heinemann.
Matchett, A. R. (2003). CCTV for security professionals. Amsterdam, Butterworth-
Heinemann.
