CCTV Cameras from the Perspective of Their Effectiveness - Coursework Example

CCTV Cameras Student’s Name: Instructor’s Name: Course Code and Name: Date Assignment is due: CCTV Cameras Introduction Closed circuit television (CCTV) cameras are utilized to record and monitor images of events as they occur in real time and in different locations (Adams 1996, pp. 24-28). The images from the different cameras are then collected from various central positions and stored as digital information on tapes or on DVDs. These cameras have various modes of operation. They can be ser ton scan a certain area at a certain time; they can be movable and controlled form a central position or they can be fixed in a single position (McCahill 2002). Controllers then watch the videos captured by the CCTV camera in real time or they could be unmonitored then watched later or if the need arises. The discourse of CCTV camera use in surveillance mostly centers on aspects of reducing antisocial behavior and crime prevention. This is because of increasing focus on situational crime prevention techniques, which include the use of CCTV surveillance. CCTV has in the society for more than three decades. There are conflicting opinions about the motives behind the introduction of CCTV and its implementation en masse. These arguments are both malevolent and benevolent. CCTVs have been dragged into the public for scrutiny and evaluation during several high profile criminal cases and investigations. One of the most relevant cases is the investigation of Garry Newlove’s murder in 2007 by a group of youths after he tried to prevent them from acting in antisocial ways (Levesley & Martin 2005). The CCTV had been installed in the victim’s private home as a response to the escalating cases of antisocial behavior and crime in the area. This example is a reflection of why most residents and businesses opt for the use of CCTV cameras not only as a preventive measure, but also to help in apprehending and successfully convicting perpetrators. This paper argues that CCTV use is an effective tool for deterring criminal behavior and aiding the police is closing investigations. The essay will look at CCTV cameras from the perspective of their effectiveness and relate this to theoretical perspectives theoretically, shedding light on the positive aspects of a certain concept also means exploring the negative ones and attempting to find a point of reconciliation for the two that will support your argument. Accordingly, this essay will also look at negative aspects of CCTV and how they can be reunited with the positive. Body In order to comprehend the concept of using CCTV surveillance as a way of deterring criminal behavior, it is essential to shed light on the current understandings of anti social behavior (ASB), CCTV surveillance and research issues associated with CCTV. Under the CDA98, anti-social behavior (ASB) was criminalized resulting in the development of different initiatives meant to deter or reduce its occurrence and ill effects (Newburn 2007; McLaughlin & Munice 2006). In this context, anti-social behavior (ASB) refers to a situation where an individual acts in a manner that causes is likely to cause distress, alarm or harassment to one or more individuals who do not share the same household with him (Newburn 2007, McLaughlin & Munice 2006). From this description, it can be deduced that criminal activity and behavior leading to criminal activity on another individual is a crime. However, the definition limits the parameters of criminal activity to that which occurs outside the home. This is not a reflection of reality since crimes perpetrated by family members also occur in similar households. The exclusion of the household from an ASB context may have been owing to the fact that ASB is linked to CCTV, which is rarely used in homes. Attempting to measure the success or failure rate of a video surveillance system used by the public is a complex issue. This is due to the fact that environmental interventions such as video surveillance are sometimes affected by issues that cannot be readily measured (Gill 2003). Other factors may have contributed to the rise or fall of the crime rate in a certain area that is also under surveillance. Showing that there is an increase or decrease of the rate of crime in an area does not necessarily translate to the conclusion that it was because of the presence of video surveillance systems (Newburn & Hayman 2002). These conclusions do not take into acknowledge and account for crime reporting and crime trends in the area such as an increase in police presence, better lighting and crime displacement. Varying factor make it a harder venture to analyze the impact that video surveillance has on the rate of crime in the society. Crime displacement complicates how individuals interpret and understand the reduction or increase in crime in certain areas (Gill et al 2005b). Attempts to measure the effect of surveillance come up with flawed conclusions. For instance, for a study that is done on CCTV cameras that have been installed downtown. The cameras may have been installed in a particular block and not the others. If the muggers move from one block to another, the conclusion that crime rate has reduced is inaccurate because it has only moved to a different block. Displacement is also difficult to show conclusively (Love 2000). Although this argument shows that conclusions about the success or failure of CCTV in reducing crime may be skewed, it also brings out another parameter, which is that the implementation of CCTV should be on a mass scale if it is to work. Thus, other than implementing CCTV as part of a larger strategy, it is also important to establish it in mass scale to eliminate displacement avenues. Another research issue that is often encountered in video surveillance results is that of the presence of confounding variables (Norris & McCahill 2003). It may be inaccurate for a researcher to extrapolate the success rates of CCTV surveillance from particular areas to larger or general ones. This is because there are issues that pertain to context and environmental fixtures that contribute to affect the behavior of an offender (Gill & Loveday 2003). For instance, since it has been found that enclosed areas have better results, areas such as parking lots would have better results than others. Generalizing the conclusion from this study to other contexts is an inaccurate practice. Owing to confounding variables and displacement, private or individual CCTV cameras should not be studied on their own (Burrows 1997, pp. 1079-1139). If one decides to evaluate the benefits of a certain CCTV surveillance system, it is important to take a look at the results of multiple studies from different areas. More emphasis should be placed on studies that have been carried out using rigorous methodologies. Key issues CCTV has only been in use – on a mass scale – for about three decades. However, the concept of surveillance has been around longer. In his writings, the philosopher Jeremy Bentham proposed a panopticon prison design that allowed the guard to view all prison cells form a central position without a reciprocate view from the prisoners (Fox 2001). The Utilitarian philosopher believed that it was necessary to have this kind of surveillance in certain social contexts such as prisons. His aim was to eventually help prisoners regulate themselves (Quinn 2001). The prisoners were unaware of their surveillance and would be unable to tell if they would be punished for deviance or not (Newburn 2006). Self-regulation would mean that there would be no need to guard the tower at all times anymore. This trend is similar to what business owners do to some extent. Most of them do not hire extra security but instead hope that the presence of a CCTV camera will be an effective deterrent by encouraging individuals to regulate their own behavior. Most stores that use CCTV make people aware of this fact. The results from the Panopticon prisons suggest that people in the society should regulate their own behavior because they are aware of the surveillance. In relation to research applicability, this would allude that areas covered by surveillance should witness less ASB incidents. The emergence of new technologies used for surveillance could be a prerequisite to the vast extension of disciplinary power, which has always been associated with a rise in the rate and nature of modernity. This type of behavior deterring can be explained using Cohen and Felson’s (1979) RAT theory. The theory posits that three things are prerequisite for the occurrence of ASB. They include a suitable target, a capable guardian lacking and a motivated or likely offender (Cohen & Felson 1979, 488-608). CCTV cameras may take the place of a capable guardian thus deterring ASB. The suitable target can be an object, a person or a place. No matter how suitable the person is, the other two prerequisites need to be present for a crime to occur. In theory, a capable guardian was any individual who is present when the likely offender may be contemplating crime (Wilson & Sutton 2003). The presence alone of this individual deters the offender’s intents. This alludes that the capable guardian can also refer to something that possesses human elements like a CCTV camera. The RAT theory has the benefit of clarity and brevity. However, its applicability to situations where CCTV is used is lacking since it excludes the possibility of the CCTV being private and the attacking in his own household. However, its proponents focus on the advantage of the CCTV being applicable to one of the three prerequisites of crime. In consequence, it shows that there are CCTV is a deterrent of criminal behavior. Most arguments for and against CCTVs are based on ideological issues rather than factual ones. The growing volume of CCTVs in many western countries is causing people to question the privacy of individuals in their societies. Arguments have been made that CCTV are a method of social control especially since CCTV currently do not have a third party form of regulation (Coleman 2004). This stance is also supported by Marxist theories relating to criminology. These arguments, though valid, happen to be one-sided. There is truth in the fact that CCTV is meant to control certain aspects of the society. CCTVs are meant to control harmful and potentially harmful behavior patterns and individuals. Norris et al (1998) posit that control rooms where CCTV is controlled are susceptible to oppression of certain ethnic minorities in the form of racism. Hence, they are likely to report crimes that involve these oppressed groups and possibly misinterpret innocent behaviors and actions. Norris et al (1998) offer algorithmic surveillance as a better method of surveillance because it eliminates the possibility of ethnic or racial profiling. This advancement would ensure that CCTVs monitor an individual’s gait, which can then be matched. In addition, they would also monitor facial traits that are matched to database images. Vast technological advancement has taken place since Norris et al (1998) presented their work. There has been a vast improvement in the operations of CCTVs making them less vulnerable to oppressive tactics. Although the concerns raised are dated, they played an important role in the debate of making CCTV better hence, adding to its effectiveness in crime investigation and deterring ASB. Advancement in CCTV technology has been taking place including the development of ‘smart CCTV’. It does not have all the features of the algorithmic CCTV suggested by Norris et al (1998) but has the ability to read an individual’s body language and recognize patters that are perceived as prerequisite to crime. It recognizes some behavior patterns that may indicate suicidal intent, ASB or crime. The smart CCTV has the potential of being a good advancement from traditional, CCTV technology. However, there are no prices attached to the option yet. In addition, experiments tried out on the prototypes have shown that facial recognition has a relatively lower rate of accurate leaving room for harassment of certain individuals. Regardless, the technology aced gait tests, which too are significant in identifying individuals. Previous studies found that the effects or benefits of using CCTV fade after a while and those offenders often shift times that they choose to commit crimes, evidence supporting the claim that, the benefits of CCTV fade after some time span different studies that have been carried out on the effectiveness of the surveillance technology. In the beginning, new technology creates an environment of uncertainty for the offender (Groombridge 2002). After a while, the uncertainty is replaced by the development of new skills that help the offender evade CCTV surveillance effectiveness. Tilley et al (1992) made this argument as they discussed the lifecycle that crime prevention initiatives take. Although the argument has validity that is supported by evidence, it does not throw off the assertion that CCTV cameras are effective in deterring crimes. It only suggests that their effectiveness fades with time. The fact that effectiveness with time shows that there is a need to have the use of CCTV, as part of an overall crime prevention strategy. Other prevention measures should be tailored in order to improve the overall package. These measures should be directed at ASB that is likely to results in an individual not being deterred. For instance, users of drugs and alcohol are less likely to be deterred because of their altered states of perception. Being in a space that is monitored will not register in a mind that is already altered. Such advancements can be done using authority figures (Hempel & Topfer 2009). For instance, in an area that has CCTV cameras installed, the presence of a police officer or a guard is likely to raise chances of deterring crime. CCTV is an environmental tool for crime prevention. Accordingly, it needs to be boosted by other environmental factors if it is to be sustainably successful. CCTV deals with environmental issues and benefits the society in various ways. The different ways that CCTV benefits the society can be connected to the greater role of deterring crime (Horne 1998). The provision of surveillance as a function in itself deters people from committing crime owing to the latent disposition of human beings to keep a good image of themselves to others. In addition, CCTV cameras signify to the public that the area they are working or staying in is safe. Consequently, there is an increased use of the space or context that is thought of to be safe and this further deters criminals from making their move because of the greater numbers and witnesses. By influencing behavior, that deters crime, CCTV cameras act as indirect agents of dissuading crime. The presence of CCTV camera also reminds individual to engage in security friendly practices such as locking their car doors. Therefore, evidence from studies carried in the UK show that, CCTV results in a significant reduction of car theft (Coleman & Sim 2000). In addition, it is more effective in small spaces. Research results in urban areas with larger populations have greater ambiguity (Coleman 2004). In 1996, Ditton and Short found that the presence of CCTV surveillance systems precede a decline of the overall offender levels in particular areas. These studies have focused on the reduction and increase of crime as a way of ensuring the efficiency of CCTV cameras in deterring crime, recent scholarship that is related to criminology has been focusing on exploring the dynamics involved in the operation of CCTV, and whether this affects the rate of effectiveness. With this, CCTV has been advanced in discourses of broader criminological and sociological significance. Theorists have explored both criminological and sociological perspectives. Others suggest that the development of new technologies for surveillance is a form of social control. This is because they believe that the amount of control that CCTV has over people cannot be regulated fully leaving a great opportunity for one who seeks to control others (Crime Prevention News 2001). However, they acknowledge that CCTV does have disciplinary benefits, such as, deterring criminal behavior. It is also essential to note that there is a significant paradigm shift in the operation of CCTV. Rather than the method used before of observing an individual who has been identified before, groupings have been made of particular groups of people, certain geographical areas and certain times (Mazerolle, Hurley & Chamlin 2002). There is a shift from older penology to new penology. Old penology was often just concerned with identifying a certain person for the purpose of ascribing blame to them. This is an important role that CCTV plays in investigations. On the other hand, new penology is concerned with more advanced techniques that are focused on identifying and learning certain mannerisms, which are used in managing certain groups, in order to reduce crime (Miller 1987). In essence, this means that CCTV cameras are now playing targeted roles as well. In areas where the crime rate is higher, there will be more CCTV cameras for the purpose of deterring certain criminal behavior. This strategy could explain results from studies that indicate a higher crime rate in areas that have been watched using CCTV systems. This is because there are more CCTV in these areas in a attempt to combat crime. Thus, researchers would think that this means areas with more. CCTV cameras are effective deterrents of criminal behavior. CCTV cameras lack in that they do not have methods of intervention. Future strategies are exploring ways that one can intervene when a crime seems imminent or is taking place. Pre-emptive approaches are now preferred over others. There is evidence that CCTV is effective in deterring some crimes more than others, and it is also more effective in certain contexts than others. Brown (1995) found that vehicle thefts and property crime are more susceptible to the function of CCTV camera (Fletcher 2011). However, violent assaults will not be deterred. This is especially so if the crime being committed or the assault is personal. Oscar Newman in 1972 came up with the idea of certain spaces, which are related to certain issues of criminal behavior. Thus, there is also a potential of creating a space that is designed in such a manner that it prevents crime from occurring. The design of such spaces is altered to include environmental deterrents. Newman called this defensible space and argued that one can design a space that reinforces existing social structures such that the society defends itself (Crane & Dee 2001). CCTV cameras are part of this defensible space, and they are instrumental in deterring criminal behavior. Conclusion Community safety strategies such as CCTV cameras need to be monitored on a regular basis to ensure that any success rate is noted, and the conditions that contribute to this are reproduced in these areas. This essay has shown that CCTV camera use in private and public capacities results in considerable deterring of criminal behavior. Issues such as drug use and personal assaults bring down this positive effect. Studies show that people who have made plans to launch personal attacks, and those under the influence of drugs or alcohol are likely to cloud an individual’s mind against reasoning about the possibility of being in trouble, owing to the presence of video surveillance. Research that aimed to show CCTV as not beneficial has been focusing on issues such as, susceptibility to racial and ethnic profiling. The trend shown by CCTV as it keeps improving to avoid this shows that its benefit of deterring crime is less likely to decline since the technology is updated to accommodate changes in crime, criminals and environments. Theories such as RAT show that the lack of a suitable guardian is one of the essential parts of a crime triad. The suitable guardian can also mean the presence of CCTV, which acts as a guardian and would be helpful in deterring criminal behavior. In addition, Bentham’s Panopticon idea shows the potential that CCTV has not only on deterring immediate crime but on preventing the occurrence of future crimes through self regulation. Self regulation is the ultimate solution to criminal activity. Researchers and scholars stress that the use of CCTV alone is not a long term solution to that can be used to deter crime, but it is one of the most effective methods when used alongside other strategies such as streetlights, patrolling and increased police presence. Methodological issues have also been highlighted because they to influence whether people conclude that CCTV is beneficial or not. Context should always be outlined. CCTV cameras are an effective way of deterring criminal behavior. List of References Adams, J 1996, Privacy: Security surveillance versus civil rights, Security Australia, vol. 16, no.4, May, pp. 24-28. Burrows, Q 1997, Scowl because you’re on candid camera: Privacy and video surveillance, Valparaiso University Law Review, vol. 31, Summer, pp. 1079-1139. Cohen, L & Felson, M 1979, Social change and crime rate trends: a routine activity approach, American Sociological Review, Vol.44, pp. 488-608 Coleman, R 2004, Reclaiming the Streets: Surveillance, Social Control and the City, Willan Publishing; Cullompton Coleman, R 2004 Watching the degenerate: street camera surveillance and urban regeneration, Local Economy, vol. 19, no. 3, pp. 199-211 Coleman, R & Sim, J 2000, ‘You’ll never walk alone’: CCTV surveillance, order and neo-liberal rule in Liverpool city centre’, British Journal of Sociology, vol. 51, no. 4, pp. 623-639 Crane, P & Dee, M 2001, Young People, Public Space & New Urbanism, Youth Studies Australia, vol. 20, no.1, pp.11-18. Crime Prevention News 2001, ‘CCTV increasingly being used to prevent, detect crime’, 28, July, Crime Prevention Unit, NZ Ministry of Justice, pp. 4-5 Davies, S.G. (1998) The Case Against: CCTV Should Not Be Introduced. International Journal of Risk, Security and Crime Prevention Vol. 1. No. 4 PP 327-331 Ditton, J. 2000, ‘Crime and the City: Public Attitudes towards Open-Street CCTV in Glasgow’, British Journal of Criminology, 40/4, pp. 692-709. Fletcher, P 2011, Is CCTV Effective in Reducing Antisocial Behaviour? Internet Journal of Criminology, 5-27 Fox, R 2001, Someone to watch over us: Back to the panopticon?, Criminal Justice, vol. 1, no. 3, August, pp. 251-275 Gill, M 2003, CCTV, Leicester: Perpetuity Press. Gill, M & Loveday 2003, What Do Offenders Think About CCTV? In M Gill (ed.):CCTV, Leicester: Perpetuity Press. Gill, M, Spriggs, A, Allen, J, Argomaniz, J, Bryan, J, Hemming, M, Jessiman, P, Kara, D, Kilworth, J, Little, R, Swain, D & Waples, S 2005b, The Impact of CCTV: Fourteen Case Studies, Home Office Online Report, London: Home Office. Groombridge, N 2002, Crime Control or Crime Culture CCTV? in Surveillance & Society, vol. 1, no.1, pp. 30-46 Hempel, L & Topfer , E 2009, The Surveillance Consensus: Reviewing the Politics of CCTV in Three European Countries, European Journal of Criminology, vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 157-177 Horne, CJ 1998, The Case For: CCTV Should Be Introduced, International Journal of Risk, Security and Crime Prevention Vol 1, No. 4 pp.317-326 Levesley, T & Martin, A 2005, Police Attitudes to and use of CCTV, Online Report , London: Home Office. Love, B. 2000, Has digital CCTV technology come into its own?, Security Australia, vol. 20, no. 9, October, pp. 21-22. Mazerolle, L, Hurley, D & Chamlin, M 2002, Social Behaviour in Public Space: An Analysis of Behavioural Adaptations to CCTV, Security Journal, vol. 15, no. 3, pp. 59-75. Miller, J.A 1987, Jeremy Bentham‟s panoptic device, October, Summer. 41: 3-29 McCahill, M 2002, The Surveillance Web: The Rise of Visual Surveillance in an English City, Cullompton: Willan. McLaughlin, E & Muncie, J 2006, The SAGE Dictionary of Criminology, SAGE Publications; London Newburn, T & Hayman, S 2002, Policing , Surveillance, and Social Control: CCTV and Police Monitoring of suspects, Cullompton: Willan Newburn, T. (2007) Criminology, Willan Publishing; Cullompton Newburn, T. (2006) Handbook of Policing, Willan Publishing; Cullompton Norris, C & McCahill, M 2003, Estimating the Extent, Sophistication and Legality of CCTV in London, in M Gill (ed.): CCTV, Leicester: Perpetuity Press Norris, C, Moran, J & Armstrong, G 1998, Algorithmic surveillance: the future of automated visual surveillance, in: C. Norris, J. Moran & G. Armstrong (Eds) Surveillance, Closed Circuit Television and Social Control, Ashgate; Aldershot, Ashgate), p. 255- 267. Short, E & Ditton, J 1995, Does CCTV Affect Crime? CCTV Today, Vol.2, pp 10-12 Tilley, N 1999, Whys And Wherefores In Evaluating The Effectiveness Of CCTV. International Journal of Risk, Security and Crime Prevention, Vol 2, No. 3 pp.175-185 Wilson, D & Sutton, A 2003, Open-Street CCTV in Australia: A Comparative Study of Establishment and Operation, Report to the Criminology Research Council, Melbourn e : Department of Criminology, University of Melbourne. Quinn, M 2001, Writings on the Poor Laws; the collected works of Jeremy Bentham, Oxford University Press; Oxford Bibliography Welsh, BC & Farrington DP, 2004. Surveillance for crime prevention in public space: Results and policy choices in Britain and America, Criminology & Public Policy; Jul 2004; Criminal Justice Periodicals pg. 497 Welsh and Farrington look at incidences where surveillance has been included within government policies. The article addresses issues such as regulation of CCTV by the government and other regulatory bodies that govern organizations and companies Welsh, BC & Farrington, DP 2004, Evidence-based Crime Prevention: the Effectiveness of CCTV.” Crime Prevention and Community Safety: An International Journal, vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 21-33 The article gives an overview of evidence based studies done on the effectiveness of CCTV. The authors focus on the results from different studies. These results contributed to the essay by giving an overview of where research was and where it’s headed. From the article, it is easier to see the common themes and common results. Read More