Video Surveillance Cameras vs. Personal Privacy Research Paper

Video Surveillance Cameras vs. Personal Privacy - Research Paper Example This research will begin with the statement that video surveillance has been in existence for a long time now. Often you will find cameras in shopping malls, bank halls, workplaces, airports, transportation hubs and mostly on urban streets. As modernization and development increased, the number of risks also grew to such an alarming extent that employers, governments, organizations and even individuals saw the need for keeping a close watch on their lives and property. Video surveillance has been more embraced in the recent times compared to other complex systems. Camera surveillance has taken over the market as a main figure of supervision in high risk public and private areas, where theft and terrorism are observed to be prevalent. The digital technology has proved to be the ultimate stimulator for camera surveillance, which comes in a variety of models that could be easily implemented for use. According to Jones, there are about 100 million CCTV cameras operating in the world of w hich 30 million can be identified to be from the United States. Systems of video surveillance cameras have been applied widely to different situations and not necessarily to intrude on personal privacy but to monitor and supervise activities for the intended purposes. The use of surveillance cameras is potentially used and recognized in the European nations more than in the United States, with Europe significantly overstating the benefits of the CCTV.... It is obvious that those cameras will be deployed on both ordinary public places and even more private areas, which are prone to crime. The constitution project staff (12) mentions that video surveillance is carried out in line with the need for police investigation, in a suspected criminal act of an individual in New York, pursuant to a warrant. Most of the crimes are strategically organized not to occur in an open place, rather looking for a secluded environment to pursue their mission. Placing cameras in such locations would make it easier for security agencies to deter crime and capture the offenders. Many in the society oppose the government strategy, claiming that they are being watched or recorded enough to read an individual’s next move and the way they privately carry themselves in the public. A study on Manhattan surveillance cameras established that there were high chances of being recorded almost every step of the way, as one walked around the city and most especia lly, it seems to be worse when more cameras are even located in some sacred public domains (Winston and Edelbach 223). While this is true, individuals concentrate more on their private life and tend to forget that the primary concern is not surveillance intrusion in privacy, but to gather and cover timed activities for analysis and as evidence in case of an event (Constitution Project Staff 8). Again, individuals who seem to be anxious would portray a character that would raise the suspicion of security agents monitoring activities on cameras, making them question whether the individual has a hidden agenda. With border patrol surveillance, cameras are placed on roads, highways and at the border to keep watch and control exits and