Four down, 44 to go. Yes, the city's newest line of defense against crime has started appearing on city streets -- surveillance cameras. The first four locations were announced last week, and the remaining cameras (23 were originally planned, though 48 have been announced) will be hitting District streets over the next month. Today the Washington Times -- who has generally opposed the cameras -- reports that some of the new cameras are more obvious than others.

We've never much been fans of the idea, and now we have to concede this much -- the cameras are here to stay. Though part of emergency legislation that expires in mid-October, the cameras will likely be made a permanent staple of the District's urban landscape. Why? Because crime or not, the cameras obey only the logic of the politicians who voted for them. If crime falls, whether or not the direct product of the cameras, the law-and-order contingent on the D.C. Council will claim that they were right all along -- cameras do deter crime. If crime remains the same or even spikes, that same crowd will call for more and more cameras. Whichever way the wind blows, we should get get used to the cameras.

We did a little research and found this gem, published in the Post in late 2002:

The D.C. Council yesterday lambasted the city police department's system of surveillance cameras, with several members saying vehemently that they did not want the technology -- now an entrenched part of D.C. police operations -- to be used at all.

The sudden and impassioned objections, with several council members talking about the Orwellian potential of the cameras, could have serious consequences. After months of hearings and debate about the cameras -- which were installed without notice to Congress or the council -- yesterday was the first sign that legislators might consider killing the surveillance program altogether.