Pulling out of the neighborhood yesterday, I saw the cop car. Uh-oh.
It was parked down by the community park, and soon I saw why. Graffiti, black spray paint, all over playground structure. Which, as neighborhood crises go, is pretty minor. But if you’ve seen something like this in your neighborhood you know the stab of fear that comes at the sight of the cops, and the anger that begins to fester after you see the vandals’ handiwork.
The cop sat there in his cruiser, dutifully recording his observations, but I’d be surprised if much came of it. It would be nice to think that the police will keep a closer eye on the park, to make sure it doesn’t happen again. But the reality is that this small park in the far corner of the township simply isn’t, and can’t be, a priority.
These things happen.
And as I drove on, I began to think that here was an argument for surveillance cameras, like the ones being installed throughout the city.
There’s going to come a day, I’m convinced, when the city is built out in terms of cameras - and the service will then be available to suburban municipalities like my own. When it happens, I’m positive people in those municipalities will positively clamor for the cameras. Because, as noted, the cops can’t be everywhere. Because the mere presence of the cameras - posted, so everyone knows about it - can act as a deterrent, especially for things like drug selling, auto theft, vandalism.
And expansion of the camera system could, and should, be a source of revenue for the cash-strapped city. A service, to be provided - much like the city’s water system, paid for by municipalities, or even individual neighborhoods, via an up-front installation fee, then a monthly or quarterly charge.
We can re-hash all the arguments against cameras if you like, but I continue to draw the line between surveillance of public spheres versus surveillance of private spheres. Intercepting e-mails or tapping phones without a warrant is an intrusion into the private sphere. But the cameras see nothing that a cop on the beat wouldn’t see; and unlike that cop, they don’t require health benefits or annual raises.
There are other issues to this, but I think the cameras are the wave of the future, and certainly not just in the cities. Demand would be just as great if not greater in the suburbs; and with more resources to pay for them, the rollout and expansion of the system could come even faster. Ten years from now, the cameras are likely to have spread far beyond the city’s borders. Will it actually make those surrounding neighborhoods safer? Time will tell - but it’s a chance many people in those neighborhoods are both willing and eager to take.
