Sunday, May 2, 2010

Part four in the great surveillance debate

Apparently this is becoming a recurring them in my blog: the advantages and disadvantages of surveillance cameras. I've argued they encroach on our privacy; I've argued they help solve crimes. I've questioned the changing expectations of privacy in our world today, and I've advocated being smart under these circumstances.

Now I can't help being a champion for surveillance cameras in light of last night's events: Times Square was evacuated after a suspected car bomb was found.

I sat watching the events unfold on CNN after 1 a.m., and the first thing I thought: Good thing there are tons of cameras in Times Square. And sure enough, after my initial thought, that's what I heard everyone else saying. The reporter, the cops, the government officials. They all pointed to the dozens of area cameras that could help them find a suspect.

Obviously, the story and evidence is still unfolding. But the latest information released at a press conference this afternoon is that police suspect a white male in his 40s is connected to the incident after they reviewed surveillance footage.

It's hard to argue against these cameras when something like this happens.

No comments:

Post a Comment