Department of Transport

Cameras can also be used as a means to monitor traffic. This is what they call a speed camera. The aim of the speed camera is to force motorists to drive safely. This had been applied in the country of Britain. According to statistics in the Department of Transport, the cameras had reduced accidents by a total of 24%. The cameras had also stem the trickle of deaths and serious injuries. There were several protest with regard to the use of speed cameras.

The people that oppose the installation of video cameras had stated that the cameras detect speeding but they could not detect bad driving. The government had evaluated their concerns and the government pushed through with the installation because lives are at stake. As of 2007, lives had been saved because since the system was changed to a high definition camera, casualties number had fallen to 35%. The Army News Service (2007, p 45-46) had shown another use for the surveillance camera.

It has shown that the surveillance camera had minimized the dangers that the soldiers have been facing in Iraq. The surveillance camera had provided continual observation in operating areas and had improved situational awareness for soldiers in joint stations. The system was called Rapid Deployment Integrated Surveillance System. A testimony from Sgt 1st class Mark Henderson had stated that the surveillance system had cut down the exposure of US troops in Iraq. Lastly, surveillance cameras had been used in schools, according to Bryan Yurcan (2007, p.

25 and 27) of the Westchester County Journal. The National Center for Education Statistics had shown  that the percentage of schools that uses  surveillance cameras  was 38% in the year 2001 and had increased in the year 2005 which had become 56%. Experts in the field, Paul and Mike Durante of Valhalla Security Cameras had stated that the cameras were meant to deter the people who would think of stealing something in the classroom area. The students would think twice in committing such crimes before doing the act.

One of the disappointing disadvantages of security cameras is that the cameras are a threat to a privacy of a person. Surveillance cameras can be used as spy cameras. This in turn becomes a violation of privacy of a person. Marshall (2001) had shown in his article that the surveillance camera becomes a threat to the privacy of a person. According to Marshall (2001), the Constitution only protects citizens from unwarranted video surveillance by government entities. There is no protection from surveillance by businesses and private parties.

This only means that having a surveillance camera inside a private business institution cannot be considered as illegal. This only means that the issue on the workplace privacy is not answered by the constitution. Another disadvantage of having cameras is that anti-camera activists vandalizes and torches cameras. In Britain there are groups that vandalize cameras and this group was called Petrolhead. The Conservative Party thinks about removing the cameras and putting the budget of cameras to roads and such, and the cameras cannot do anything about the situation because these are only objects.

Seeing the advantages and disadvantages of the surveillance camera, it can be seen that there are more advantages that people can get from the surveillance camera than the disadvantages. The advantages of surveillance cameras show more of security while the disadvantages concerns is the privacy issue. Thinking about the benefits that can be ripped from the surveillance cameras, it is better to have one. As Tom York had stated in the editorial, it is better to have a sense of security rather than having nothing. As what people say, Prevention is better than cure.

It is better to be ready and know what is happening around rather than speculate and think about what is happening. Safety is much more important than privacy. Based on the statistics mentioned above, most crimes happen on streets, parking lots and people’s residence. Having been able to identify these sources, the government must make away to lessen the occurrences of crime in public and the solution could be the surveillance camera. If there were cameras located on the streets, crime offenders would most likely be identified by the police immediately.

As for parking lots, it is also a public place and needs to be surveyed at all times because people come and go in the area. Surveillance cameras would be able to identify the person who committed the crime and at the same time caught the person doing the act of making the crime. Residences are also important. Although some people would most likely think that installing a camera is expensive but having able to have one would help the owners of the house check the house area for strangers who are coming in and going out of the house.