Cameras or No Cameras?

On a blog called, " Keeping a closer eye on crime in downtown Austin", Emily Hajovsky. She makes a great point on how the we should have cameras in “high-crime areas”. It would help the Austin Police Department to find that person and arrest them. She also talks about “some owners of their establishment might want to use the video for their own civil law suits or just to treat their curiosity”. She backed her information about “the Austin Police Department is…debating whether or not to install security cameras in high-crime areas around the downtown area” with an article.

I think it is a good idea to have cameras at “high-crimes areas”. I think that will help the owners feel a lot better that he/she knows what going on outside of their place when they are not there. I agree with her that “safety should be there number one concern”.

I also agree that “we have a right to see what’s being videotaped as well as what’s going on in our neighborhoods”. It might or not be useful for a lawsuits or a crime. According to Emily “it wouldn’t be any different if the person pressing charges were to video tape it and use that in their lawsuit”. She gave an example of a case that was in 2007. She said that “they used cameras to catch people who ran red lights” and “people complained about how it was an invasion of privacy”. She makes a great point how people complained about being videotaping but “how is it any different than if there was a cop sitting at that light instead of a camera”. It got me thinking and it is the same thing but they have proof of them doing something.