April 9, 2008
City Gives MPD Access to 5,200 Closed-Circuit Cameras
The Washington Times has the story this morning on how the District government is handing over the keys to a network of 5,200 closed-circuit cameras to the Metropolitan Police Department. The cameras are normally used to monitor traffic, schools and public housing, and in addition to the 92 crime cameras police already monitor in high-crime neighborhoods, will give D.C. one of the largest surveillance networks of any major city in the United States.
The initiative, dubbed the Video Interoperability for Public Safety (VIPS) program, will consolidate the more than 5,200 cameras operated by D.C. agencies into one network, which will be managed by the city's Homeland Security and Emergency Management Agency.
The story quotes the local American Civil Liberties Union and, of course, At-large Council member Phil Mendelson, as saying they're concerned about the potential for civil liberties violations such an enormous network of cameras could lead to.
There's no doubt about it: 5,200 cameras, 1,388 of which are outside and 3,874 of which are inside buildings throughout the city, all being actively monitored in a single network would be a very big change. It's interesting to note that the consolidation will actually cost the city roughly half what it costs to operate the camera programs separately. But does it make you feel like 1984 is arriving in D.C., or do you welcome any efforts to deter crime in the city?
Photo by christaki
|
really? people think the MPD are going to spy on people?
I doubt they're even looking at the god damn things, but if it helps catch people like the folks who just car jacked a friend of mine, I say bring on the cameras. I'm not stealing peoples shit.
Well, if you haven't committed any crimes, you don't have anything to worry about, right? It's not like the cops ever arrest the wrong people
They'll be spending more time checkin' out some booty than actually looking for crime.
I'm not stealing peoples shit.
As a career "night soil" thief, this will certainly make me think twice about "poop jacking" the neighborhood gong farmer.
[shaking fist towards heaven] Curse you, Orwellian nightmare state!
Monkey-
I'm a nocturnal poop-flinger. something you should be familiar with i guess.
when my neighbors neglect to clean up after their brood of yap-dogs, I fling their crap back onto their driveway so they'll step on it getting into or out of their cars.
I'm all in favor of the cameras, but only if we can all check 'em out online anytime we want. You want community policing? I say, open the floodgates. Instead of reading DCist all day long and surfing porn all night, we could all be fascinated by clicking through the 2,400 cameras and watching crimes in progress.
Talk about good money management! The police department would be almost guaranteed that some voyeur is watching at any given time, and would call the cops if a crime was in progress. I can't think of a downside, honestly. If it's legal to stand on a streetcorner and watch the happenings, why shouldn't we be able to do so virtually. Leverage the paranoid population of DC to monitor the cameras, we'll all be safer.
"Do you think having 5,200 actively monitored cameras in D.C. is a good idea?"
Actively monitored, my patootie. Do they have thousands of screen watchers on staff? Hundreds? Dozens, even?
Not to mention that it will be SO boring, and so rare that something significant happens, watchers are likely to miss something when it does happen. Also, cameras tend to lead to "tunnel vision," where law enforcement efforts are concentrated too much on camera-viewed areas, at the expense of enforcement everywhere else.
It's much better to have a live officer or guard patrolling who (a) can see in every direction; (b) can hear things; (c) can talk to people; and (d) can respond when something happens.
The one way the cameras might be useful is if they're recording, so police can go back and look at the tape after an incident occurs. They don't need active monitoring for that.
Will it prevent crime?
No.
Can it possibly be used in an investigation of a crime already committed?
Yes.
But of course, we don't know what the MPD will be doing with it exactly, so it's hard to make a decision about whether or not this is a good thing.
I'm with jaime. Push the content to a public website so we can all watch. It's the only way we can be sure that the cops are honestly ignoring everything that's being recorded. It'll be like the traffic cameras only less entertaining. Now, for a premium of only $9.99 a month, you can subscribe to a spicier version of MPD Cam "After Dark" hosted by Boobarella and featuring the best of DC's drunks peeing in alleys, girlfights outside H2O, and in-car blowjobs on Florida Avenue near 18th. Cue Benny Hill chase music.
tigerflight: did you leave a note and a pile of dog crap on my friend's doorstep yesterday? the note said something mildly threatening and was signed "neighborhood watch". her dog is so tiny that it couldn't have possibly produced that much poop and they installed a gate several months back so the the dog can't get out of the backyard. but she lives in a group house so they must be the source of all discontent in Mt. Rainier..
First off most of these cameras are in places that people shouldn't expect privacy. Public spaces like the street or public workplaces are fine for this huge network of big brother's eyes. Honestly I don't care which way or the other. What I care about is either less crime or better investigations of the crimes already committed. DC is awful at both so if they think cameras help either of those goals then bring 'em in.
The cameras near and about public housing is something I have a real issue about. While I recognize that outside of my home I have to deal with a certain amount of poop, as so eloquently put by previous posters, I don't think it's right that those that live in public housing should be required to subject themselves to more (visual) scrutiny. It's bad enough they're living in DC's piss poor public housing complexes anyway.
I like jaime's suggestion. That's really the best way to keep the po po honest on what these cameras are watching.
And the cameras effectiveness will likely be similar to Metro's cameras in stations - bunch of cameras watching, bunch of screens showing the images in the station manager's booth, no one watching those images, and no recordings being made.
The surveillance society is already upon us. We just like to pretend it isn't.
The sooner we decide how all this surveillance will be used and policed by the public the better off we'll all be. It ain't going away, so we dang sure should go ahead and start deciding some ground rules.
tvci5 - It's been my experience that, contrary to logic, it's the smallest dogs that generate the largest amout of poop.
Look at Tom Cruise.
hear hear for jamie's idea. open it up to the scrutiny of the dcist commentariat. god knows we could have a TON of fun with that.
seriously, though, this sounds like the only way we'd be able to say that someone's watching the watchers.
The cameras are pointless. We know who the criminals are and where they operate. Hell, most of them have been arrested. If you want to look at the problem of crime in the city, check out the US Attorney's office that refuses to prosecute criminals once they're arrested. It must be frustrating for MPD to arrest the same people week after week.
If it's anything like downtown news footage, all these crime cameras will show will be groups of kids jumping up and down and waving and yelling, "Hi mom!"
I am constantly amazed by the number of people willing to give up their liberties and see the nation's capital turned into a police state where Big Brother can watch everyone and where everyone going in or near a government building is automatically considered guilty of something until proven innocent.
The Constitution and Bill of Rights have become essentially meaningless in DC and the once free population is rapidly turning into serfs.
Hitler and Stalin would be jealous of the tools of oppression being used by the feds and DC government and by the ease with which the population has been conned into acceptance of their loss of civil liberties.
You have no right to privacy in public. Period.
And since dcrussell invoked Godwin's Law, I'd say this thread is closed. Toetag, please, nurse.
You know who else refused to clean up after their dogs?
Hitler and Stalin would be jealous of the tools of oppression being used by the feds and DC government...
It's nice to see the suburban high school population taking an interest in local issues. Welcome!
And since dcrussell invoked Godwin's Law, I'd say this thread is closed. Toetag, please, nurse.
Is there any way for DCist to enforce this? I know they have posts with no comments, but could they turn off commenting on a post where Godwin's Law was invoked?
First off most of these cameras are in places that people shouldn't expect privacy. Public spaces like the street or public workplaces are fine for this huge network of big brother's eyes. Honestly I don't care which way or the other. What I care about is either less crime or better investigations of the crimes already committed. DC is awful at both so if they think cameras help either of those goals then bring 'em in.
The cameras near and about public housing is something I have a real issue about. While I recognize that outside of my home I have to deal with a certain amount of poop, as so eloquently put by previous posters, I don't think it's right that those that live in public housing should be required to subject themselves to more (visual) scrutiny. It's bad enough they're living in DC's piss poor public housing complexes anyway.
A lot of criminals are either based in or commit crimes at public housing in DC. If you don't like the surveillance in public housing, don't live there. I'm sure the law-abiding residents and neighbors would appreciate the deterrent cameras would provide.
Do they have thousands of screen watchers on staff? Hundreds? Dozens, even?
I asked an Assistant Chief about this last month. She told me the MPD actively monitored hot-spots "as other duties allowed" (or words to that effect).
I asked an Assistant U.S. Attorney if there is some legal reason why MPD closed-circuit camera monitors need to be sworn police officers. He didn't know.
"I don't think it's right that those that live in public housing should be required to subject themselves to more (visual) scrutiny. It's bad enough they're living in DC's piss poor public housing complexes anyway."
Once someone else is paying for your housing (in this case the taxpayer), then you lose all rights to bitch about that housing.
What's up with the poll connected with this? Other??? Either you're against the cameras, for the cameras, or have no opinion on the matter. Other????? Who could possibly be clicking Other.
Only Hitler or Stalin would click "Other."
Besides, I can't wait to read in the WaPo that most of these cameras have been stolen and have to be replaced.