Security Cameras in Building - Essay Example

Some of the justifications given by stakeholders within one of the test schools claim that face recognition cameras will protect their children against known criminal offenders and other types of dangerous persons. Another safety consultant in the schools that adopted the security system claims that they adopted the use of face recognition cameras in order to prevent another saga that occurred in a school in Columbia during the year 1999. Advantages of using cameras in buildings have also been put forward in the GSA (1997) article.

Although this has been mentioned shortly, they assert that security cameras in public places and government buildings are essential in detecting assailants and criminals who may have intentions of causing harm. There are no such advantages mentioned by Lyon (2001). Keen (2006) also points out to some advantages of the cameras. She describes how bars in Chicago will be required to install cameras in buildings. She affirms that some business owners feel that this enhances their patron's confidence and security.

In the article, the major of Chicago claims that security cameras in business premises such as bars have worked wonders for other cities that have done the same in the prevention of crime. He cites examples like London where they were able to prevent a bomb attack by a potential terrorist through their cameras. Keen (2006) affirms that security cameras in public places will help catch some seemingly passive crimes such as drivers who pass red lights or those who leave bomb packages in public places.

The article also claims that placing cameras in buildings is easy and cheap consequently denying residents any excuses. Disadvantages of using cameras in buildingsThree out of the four articles also examine some of the mishaps, inefficiencies and misgivings about the use of cameras in buildings. GSA (1997) is the only article that does not look at the disadvantages of using security cameras in buildings. Frank (2007) states that the cost that come with this new technology will only place undue burdens on the consumer of that technology.

He claims that for a school to employ face recognition camera systems, they require finances reaching the tune of 30, 000 dollars. This is something that is rather costly considering the fact that those schools still have to go about their daily operations. Keen (2006) also points out to this same problem. She says that many business owners who in Chicago who are required to place security cameras in their premises will have to deal with the additional expenses that come with the system. This means that there will be greater costs for bar owners who may not necessarily see the direct benefits that come with the installation.

Keen (2006) also says that security cameras in buildings do not necessary bring about positive effects. In her articles, one of the stakeholders (a president of the Chicago restaurants Association) claim that this is just another form of intrusion from the government since no tangible results are visible. In this same article, some representatives from the American Civil liberties Union claim that security cameras in buildings should only be allowed unless there is a direct link to the September eleven attacks.

Since this is not possible, then the idea should be abandoned. The Union claims that The American