Optical Illusion: Does Buffalo's Surveillance System Make Our Streets Safer?
The city's surveillance system gives the illusion of safety. And not much else.
You've seen them. They're everywhere. The all-seeing eye blinking from up above, emitting a blue light every few-seconds at regular intervals. It's a surveillance system installed by the City of Buffalo and it's keeping a watchful eye on everything below it.
But who, exactly, is it watching?
Hint: it's not the criminals.
There may be less to the city's surveillance system than meets the eye.
The selling point of these expensive, high-end, security systems is that they will keep the streets safer and reduce crime. Politicians swear by it, and police chiefs stand by them. But is crime down as a result? Well, if the FBI, Forbes magazine, and the Huffington Post were to be believed, here in Buffalo, at least, the answer is a resounding no.
I'm hardly the first person to point out the lack of correlation that exists between surveillance systems installed by municipalities and a reduction in crime. You can find studies here, here and here.
Before proceeding, let's take the concept for a spin.
Your old problem is now your neighbor's problem.
Suppose that, after much pleading, a new surveillance camera is installed on your street corner. Suddenly, drug dealers vanish from the site and the corner is free from illicit activities now that the system is installed. Mission accomplished, right? Well, it depends on who you ask.
Were I a criminal and I was suddenly subject to the prying eyes of the government via a surveillance system keeping an eye on things from 30 feet up above, what options do I have?
Let's explore the options:
A.) Continue business as usual at the existing site alongside my new 24/7 companion.
B.) Close up shop and start a new venture.
C.) Move my business to a new location.
Chances are that a street-smart criminal would simply relocate down the street where there is no camera. Thus, "C" is likely their choice.
As a result, what you may find is that activities have now shifted from one corner to the next. This means that what was once your problem is now your neighbor's problem to deal with. While the site where transactions take place has changed, the activities themselves have not. It's back to business as usual just right down the street. In turn, it's not the criminal that's being watched. Only an empty corner.
Following this line of thinking, it stands to reason that crime has not been reduced as a result of installing a new camera system. Rather, it has shifted to a new location. But the problem remains.
Yes, I would "feel" safer with a blue light camera installed on my block. But will my neighbor down the street?
Who's watching the watchers?
Will violence continue to increase in Buffalo? Will rash shootings and homicides persist?
Recent headlines are not encouraging:
- Shooting incident ends on 33; victim later dies. - WGRZ, July 6, 2014
- Four Injured in Overnight Shooting. - WKBW, July 7, 2014
- Buffalo Police Investigate Two Sunday Shootings. - Time Warner Cable, July 7, 2014
- As summer begins, three die in separate Buffalo shootings. - The Buffalo News, June 23, 2014
- Man critically injured in shooting at William Street bar. - The Buffalo News, July 5, 2014
The next time we hear yet another politician trumpet the next $1 million purchase of a new "crime deterrent" system, all the while violence continues to skyrocket in the absence of true crime reform, consider the optics.
There are certainly better, more cost effective alternatives to deter crime.
Social Media Commentary.
I asked what your thoughts were on surveillance cameras in the city.
Below are some of your responses.
“I, myself feel much safer with the one near me, as it has a clear view of the entrance to my building, makes me feel safer”
“I think surveillance camera’s are both a deterrent to crime and helpful in solving crimes. But as I know from retail security camera’s it is almost impossible to monitor them 24 hours a day. Surveillance footage is most useful after a crime has been committed.... and for some it presents enough fear to perhaps prevent a crime from occurring. And it is impossible to put them everywhere! I believe it’s up to the community to be proactive in keeping their own street free from crime. Things as simple as putting a sign on your fence stating you have a dog, leaving a few lights on inside your home overnight, keeping alert and using 311 to report suspicious activity. If your street is dark, request a tree trimming, if you have empty lots, walk the extra mile to keep the lawn cut and the weeds from overgrowth. The City can only do so much, people need to stop pointing fingers at every City Dept. and do something to keep this community safe. It does start one street at a time.”
“I like them there needs to be more....”
“From personal experience they suck... I did 5-1/2 yrs in prison for a crime on grant and delevan which i didn’t do and when i requested for the tape to be pulled they said it wasn’t possible.. So what’s the point on having them if we cant even have justice with them...”
“Merely keeps the corridors clean for visitors.”
“I like it. Next best thing to a “cop on the beat.” Fine with me as long as it serves a protects and is not used to viotate citizens rights and privilieges as outlined in the Bill of Rights.”
“I know for a fact that the cameras on the nfta buses were sometimes on filming, sometimes off; and you could tell by the light... Whether on steady, flashing or off. (I asked a driver once.) I guess the city ones are similar.”
“My son was stabbed at Cambridge and Delavan at 2:00 on a Friday afternoon the perp had his back to the camera and my son was stabbed 7 times so he had to be bloody and the whole time my son was fighting for his life the bastards back was to the camera and it was blurry you could hardly tell what was going on! Like I said they are a waste of money! Money that could have been spent on education and job training”
“Great idea but it will never takes the place of physical presence.”
“They can be useful if the city is willing to provide the money that is needed to keep them working properly. They need to provide the BPD with money to be able to update signals when needed and have companies come out and go up there to clean the lenses after our various weather conditions, money to put more up and upgrade the ones that are up and need it, and then most importantly they need people up in the office that WANT to watch them and do the reviewing work when asked; not just people that want to say they are a city employee and collect the paycheck. That means no sleeping up there, watching movies or getting away with other things just because you have connections with the mayor. I used to work there and I know personally how the system works and how some people do and don’t work. There are some people that work hard there and then there are others that are only there because of their connections to the mayor and his spokes person Mike DeGeorge. They need to go back to where people are hired because they can do the job and not just because of who they know. It should be ou get hired because of WHAT you know and not WHO you know.”
“People will just take their business to the next corner.”