March 23, 2005

Camera Update

I received an official response from Mayor Purcell's office regarding the plan of placing police cameras on Nashville streets (not to be confused with the traffic light cameras I wrote about yesterday):

Mayor Purcell asked me to assist you.

I am going to forward your concerns directly to the Police Department for comment. Policing methods such as the ones being considered for Nashville have been used in other communities with reported success. I am confident your concerns will be taken into consideration with respect to this program.

I want to thank you for taking the time to share you concerns. I can assure you that our goal is to make Nashville as safe as possible.

Billy Fields
Mayor's Office of Neighborhoods

I have responded asking for data from independent sources and/or studies that show the successes and pitfalls from employing this technology. I will post any response to my request here.

To read more about this issue, go here and here.

Update: I was expecting something from today's Nashville Scene regarding this issue, and it has come in the form of an editorial entitled "Big Brother Serpas:"

Frankly, we can't blame the guy whose job it is to catch criminals and reduce crime in this city for doing everything he can toward that end, no matter how crazy it drives the rest of us. But that doesn't mean it's a good idea. What's more, it's astonishing that Serpas can make this unilateral decision to invade the privacy of taxpayers without so much as a head scratch from the Metro Council's public safety committee or without some other public deliberation.

If ever there were an issue to unite the radical left and the far right, this is it. Civil liberties discussions have a way of bringing together the anti-government-intrusion crowd and the staunch privacy advocates. (If in doubt about that, check out the Scene's blog.) From our (camera) angle anyway, Serpas is pretty well alone on this one, with the possible exception of a few neighborhood types whom we predict will ultimately cool on this dramatic gesture. For crying out loud, when the ACLU's Hedy Weinberg and Metro Council member Rip Ryman are cynical about the same thing, a public official has got to know public support is in danger.

Go read the entire thing.

Comments:

Please Note! Failure to abide by the following may result in your comments being edited or deleted: Remain on topic. Foul language and/or personal attacks are not permitted. Excessive links (more than three per thread) must be approved first. If you do include a link in your comment, make sure it is a short link (go to tinyurl.com if it is too long). Try to keep comments to 125 words or less. Thank you.

Try Balko's piece in the AJC:

http://www.theagitator.com/archives/019871.php#019871

Posted by: SayUncle at March 23, 2005 12:09 PM

I got that same letter.

Posted by: Jakester at March 23, 2005 12:19 PM

Memphis implemented police cameras for the FedEx Forum / Beale St. area a few years ago. They now sit idle, unused. The official explanation is unspecified "technical issues." You might contact the Memphis Police Department for more information.

I'm still not sure about these kinds of cams. What would be your reaction if the local police department announced that they were going to "flood" certain public areas with uniformed patrols? All they would do is wander around the crowds, watching. Would that be wrong or unconstitutional? How are cameras different from that?

Also, on the subject of traffic cams, Virginia did an experiment with them and decided not to put them into widespread use. Go to http://reporterette.blogspot.com and dig around.

Posted by: mike hollihan at March 24, 2005 02:07 AM