[Masthead] Partly Cloudy ~ 73°F  
High: 91°F ~ Low: 62°F
Wednesday, July 23, 2014

Keeping an eye on crime

Posted Wednesday, January 16, 2008, at 8:48 AM

The security camera system to be set up soon at H.V. Griffin Park could bring some peace of mind to those who use the facility frequently.

It's not a dangerous area. The few problems involve minor thefts of purses or wallets, arguments among teens who frequent the skateboard ramp or occasional fistfights.

The system should be expanded to Purdy Court Pool, a site of frequent vandalism.

But other areas of Shelbyville could be helped much more by cameras.

Since so much crime occurs in Shelbyville Housing Authority areas, why not set up security cameras in the more crime-ridden areas of the city-owned "projects"? The same applies to some privately-owned apartment complexes.

That's where cameras could make a major difference.

I realize that would mean a loss of privacy, and that many innocent people live in those areas.

But constant monitoring could possibly lead to crimes stopped in progress, and make life a little easier for those decent people who have to put up with criminals.

Cameras are routine in densely-populated housing areas elsewhere. It's worth consideration locally.


Comments
Showing comments in chronological order
[Show most recent comments first]

It would seem that a little loss of privacy would be offset by increased security. When I am outside my house, I know that I can be seen, so.....

You mentioned constant monitoring, is that the way they would be maintained? It would not just record info after the fact?

-- Posted by stevemills on Wed, Jan 16, 2008, at 9:07 AM

Let us start by installing the first camera at your house David.

-- Posted by nathan.evans on Wed, Jan 16, 2008, at 9:08 AM

It can be monitored from a home or laptop anywhere in the world at any time so long as the user has the username, password, and address.

-- Posted by nathan.evans on Wed, Jan 16, 2008, at 9:09 AM

The cameras in Wartrace can be monitored by the Wartrace Police Chief from his house while he is drinking a cup of coffee in his underwear.

-- Posted by nathan.evans on Wed, Jan 16, 2008, at 9:10 AM

Someone who is doing anything illegal or immoral shouldn't mind monitoring equipment outside their home, Nathan. David isn't asking you to sacrifice the privacy inside your home! If I lived in a high crime area, I'd not only welcome the surveillance, but politic to get it. Only the criminals have any real argument against this. At least, that's the way I see it!

-- Posted by tgreader on Wed, Jan 16, 2008, at 9:49 AM

The reasons for cameras being used today are valid reasons, but can we guarantee that the reasons for their use may not change in the future? By allowing them today for such modest reasons, we open ourselves to the possibility of their abuse in the future. If the future political climate in America changes and we vote for radicals that promise change due to poor economic conditions (think Germany 1933) and in the process create a monster, these cameras may not held in such high regard by those who fight to restore liberty. I am not saying that cameras preventing common thugs from doing evil are a bad thing. I am saying that we must be careful when introducing changes of this nature so lightly into our communities without considering the consequences that could result.

-- Posted by nathan.evans on Wed, Jan 16, 2008, at 10:03 AM

Most post should of read, "Someone who is NOT doing anything illegal..." Wish they would change this to allow us folks too lazy to proof-read the ability to edit our entries...

I think your getting way ahead of yourself with these "Big Brother" fears of yours. You haven't watched that Will Smith movie about the government spying on you recently have you? ;)

-- Posted by tgreader on Wed, Jan 16, 2008, at 10:36 AM

Darn, did it again...."My Post should of read......" I'm going back to bed!

-- Posted by tgreader on Wed, Jan 16, 2008, at 10:50 AM

nathan,

The problem is, those radicals are already in our government, the damage is done. Bush is now over in the middle east making sure his assets are still intact and will continue to be intact after the new president is elected. He is making sure we can't pull out for years and years.

-- Posted by Evil Monkey on Wed, Jan 16, 2008, at 10:55 AM

I am not going there Evil Monkey. The radicals I speak of will do far more than the current administration has done and will not worry about concealing their actions.

-- Posted by nathan.evans on Wed, Jan 16, 2008, at 11:01 AM

Putting cameras up in public places, is a norm. But aiming it at peoples place of living, does seem like "More of who is living there, what are there routines, and who goes in and out of there, what do they drive" than who is breaking in their homes, or vandalism.

If that's the case; what you do to one persons place of living, you would do to all. "Break Ins", "Vandalism", "Drug trafficking" "Arson" MURDER, etc. is in "ALL" neighborhoods.

If you put cameras down every street to catch a crime, Hey Hey you might be able to stop all crime, But would probably have LAW SUITS coming out your ears.

But who knows you might get away with it, after all It wasn't to long ago we heard on the News about everyones phones were being Tapped to catch Terriost (sp?)plots over the phone lines. "?BUSH?"

-- Posted by Momof3&3step&1gran on Wed, Jan 16, 2008, at 2:31 PM

Throw some camera's in all the trailer parks and some on Couch Lane too.There is always some kind crime going on in these areas. If ya'll are just wanting to spend some tax dollars make it worth your while!

-- Posted by joe1401 on Wed, Jan 16, 2008, at 4:17 PM

When rights are taken away from the innocent, the criminals win another round. Let's allow the good people to finish on top for once.

The above is from David Melson's blog titled: Uniforms in jails -- and schools

I realize that would mean a loss of privacy, and that many innocent people live in those areas.

The above is from this blog titled: Keeping an eye on crime

Forgive me David if I am reading you the wrong way, but I am getting the impression that you think cameras would be good if put up in SHA and other areas where there are also innocent people whose right to privacy would be violated. At least that is my opinion.

How is the first above statement different in this case?

William

-- Posted by HorseGentler on Thu, Jan 17, 2008, at 2:13 PM

Video surveillance could allow people living in unsafe areas to feel safer in their homes. I see several police reports a week concerning violence, drug dealing, etc., in high-crime areas that aren't happening in other areas of Shelbyvlle.

I'm thinking in terms of cameras like those in convenience stores, where the videos wouldn't be viewed except in response to a criminal act.

Surveillance cameras wouldn't infringe on anyone's right to make any personal choice. If a criminal's caught as a result of something on video, the public wins.

But infringing on one's clothing style does dictate a personal choice. And we aren't hearing of violence occurring in local schools as a result of what's being worn.

-- Posted by David Melson on Thu, Jan 17, 2008, at 3:09 PM

I know of surveillance systems in local convenient stores that allow the owner to view the video from any camera at any store at any time. Also these systems (which are fairly common) print what you the customer is buying, how much cash you gave the cashier, and how much change they gave back. A similar system was just installed in Wartrace minus the register till.

-- Posted by nathan.evans on Thu, Jan 17, 2008, at 3:56 PM

Cameras every where,computer chip your pet,GPS,tv comercials promoting a cashless society. HMMMM

-- Posted by freindsaw on Thu, Jan 17, 2008, at 8:15 PM

You want a real wake up call? Go to the national sex offenders web site and put in any major city and get a real taste of whats happening to this country then tell me what safe is.

-- Posted by freindsaw on Thu, Jan 17, 2008, at 8:21 PM

Sex offenders required to have tracking chips. That I have no problem with if the individual's case is deemed heinous.

-- Posted by nathan.evans on Thu, Jan 17, 2008, at 9:01 PM

IMO if people wanted that type of security cameras to catch crime happening where they are living they would get it for themselves.

It is ok if they have the cameras for themselves to see, and if a crime is done they have a copy of it on camera to report.

But as for a camera that is aimed at there place of living, that they have no idea who is looking at when ever they want, for what ever reason they want seems like that will cause some problems.

I believe the reisdents should have a say wether they like it or not. It doesn't matter if it is city-owned "projects" or not. They still have to pay for staying there.

And the privately owned Apartment-complexes, I imagine the owners would have the say in that and the renters would need to be informed.

Who exactly would be over these cameras?, Could copies of what is on it be made, and passed around or kept for someones on use. These are the type of things that would be of concern.

Is "Whoever has access" to the camera SWORN not to go gossiping about peoples business, even though they weren't doing any crime. This is the type of things that could be causing problems. All seems like invasion of privacy, even if it is Outside their doors.

I haven't heard of alot of crime going on in the Shelbyville Housing Athourity areas, either. I know some people that live there. In Past years their use to be some problems.

Lately, all you see is DUI's, Driving on suspended revoke licenses with drugs cases, and failure to appears, or probation violations.

There are some assult cases, they don't say were they take place at, so could be.

-- Posted by Momof3&3step&1gran on Thu, Jan 17, 2008, at 9:51 PM

Once you give the government the ability to "remotely" monitor these cameras, any two-bit hacker (no offense, Nathan :-) ) has the same ability. Saying that innocent people have no reason to dislike the cameras is like saying that you shouldn't have a problem with the police searching your vehicle whenever they stop you. Personally, I would feel violated if someone were to put these up in Bell Buckle and have them pointed anywhere but DIRECTLY at the park (which backs up to railroad tracks) thereby keeping them from "inadvertently" filming people's day to day lives.

-- Posted by Thom on Thu, Jan 17, 2008, at 10:11 PM

I am on the fence again. If I lived in a "bad" area I would want cameras. We all have cameras on us daily. The store,work,and Parks (I am glad for that one because over the summer my 10 year old was going to the bathroom at the park and there was a teenage couple in there haveing sex, did I mention she is 10??????)

Come to think of it if we did have cameras looking over our roads I might start walking in the mornings again. Sometimes it isn't to bad having "big brother" watch over you. Good side bad side I guess...

-- Posted by happymama on Fri, Jan 18, 2008, at 8:46 PM

The reasons for cameras being used today are valid reasons, but can we guarantee that the reasons for their use may not change in the future? By allowing them today for such modest reasons, we open ourselves to the possibility of their abuse in the future. If the future political climate in America changes and we vote for radicals that promise change due to poor economic conditions (think Germany 1933) and in the process create a monster, these cameras may not held in such high regard by those who fight to restore liberty. I am not saying that cameras preventing common thugs from doing evil are a bad thing. I am saying that we must be careful when introducing changes of this nature so lightly into our communities without considering the consequences that could result.

-- Posted by nathan.evans on Wed, Jan 16, 2008, at 10:03 AM

I'm with Nathan on this one. Sure the cameras may start out being used just to protect innocent people from crime, but what does anyone think happens, if as Nathan and I believe, that the use of cameras could be abused?

Do you think that if in the future some government entity was using the cameras to control people that the people could just complain and have them taken down?

I think not! I do understand innocent people need to feel safe in their own neighborhood, but I think we the citizens need to be careful in how we believe this should be accomplished.

That being said I disagree with cameras in the park, neighborhoods and also at traffic signals. In a nutshell I disagree with any right of mine being violated and that includes my right to privacy.

William

-- Posted by HorseGentler on Sat, Jan 19, 2008, at 9:13 AM

I don't mind them in the park, or traffic stops. I have a child that goes to the skate board ramps, I know they could help some with "Amber Alert". If a child was taken, or abused at the park they may be able to see it. And cameras at traffic locations if they are looking for a paticular vehicle it may be able to track its locations.

Are they any closer to finding the missing woman in Murfreesboro whos daughter lives here in Shelbyville? It's taking to long.

"Public locations" OK, but having it aimed to see peoples place of living I feel is wrong and a Violation of their rights and privacy. They can put up their own cameras for their homes/place of living.

-- Posted by Momof3&3step&1gran on Sat, Jan 19, 2008, at 3:54 PM

Look Nathan, if you don't have anything better to do than to criticize the cameras that are being put up around Shelbyville and Bedford County, then find you some other place to live. Maybe the law enforcement officers of Shelbyville, Bedford County and Wartrace should be watching you since you are so opposed to them. If the officers, EMA and the TBI or FBI do have access to them from their living room drinking a cup of coffee in their underwear, so be it...... get you a REAL job like these people have and you could do the same instead of being jealous!!!!!! Get a life !!!!!!

-- Posted by youbetya on Wed, Jan 23, 2008, at 1:32 PM

o" "OH - NO - YOU - DIDN'T"!!! "o

-- Posted by Momof3&3step&1gran on Wed, Jan 23, 2008, at 7:13 PM

I'm curious about security cameras.

How much footage is retained and for how long?

Could people supoena copies of the film to support an alibi?

Could they be used in civil suits?

If you check a store,bank,hotel,etc;you might find that the information you seek is no longer there.

It may have been taped over.

I think we'd have to get a lot of rules spelled out very clearly or we'll not only have to deal with Big Brother but other family members wanting to see who's cashing Grandma's monthly check,or how well a child's guardian is doing the job.

We might have a way to determine who has a neglected or vicious pet or who dumps dead couches and beer cans in front yards.

Let's be careful how we implement these things.

-- Posted by quantumcat on Wed, Jan 23, 2008, at 7:28 PM

Look Nathan, if you don't have anything better to do than to criticize the cameras that are being put up around Shelbyville and Bedford County, then find you some other place to live. Maybe the law enforcement officers of Shelbyville, Bedford County and Wartrace should be watching you since you are so opposed to them. If the officers, EMA and the TBI or FBI do have access to them from their living room drinking a cup of coffee in their underwear, so be it...... get you a REAL job like these people have and you could do the same instead of being jealous!!!!!! Get a life !!!!!!

-- Posted by youbetya on Wed, Jan 23, 2008, at 1:32 PM

Easy now youbetya, don't go getting your panties in such a wad. Actually with the angry tone of your post I would be more concerned about you than Nathan. Perhaps the cameras should go up in your living room, so they could observe you since you obviously don't mind those cameras or who views them for what purpose. So how bout it?

-- Posted by bunchabull on Thu, Jan 24, 2008, at 2:16 PM


Respond to this blog

Posting a comment requires free registration. If you already have an account, enter your username and password below. Otherwise, click here to register.

Username:

Password:  (Forgot your password?)

Your comments:
Please be respectful of others and try to stay on topic.


David Melson is a copy editor and staff writer for the Times-Gazette.