When cameras affect crime
In many ways, the security industry has become the video surveillance industry. It has become the dominant technology in many end-users’ environments -- from the small user level all the way to enterprise user level. Walk into your local 24-hour gas station and you’ll find a basic intrusion alarm system that they set if they ever leave, but running all the time is usually a basic video camera and recorder solution set up to capture an image of a robber. You might also find a camera in that retail environment looking directly down on the till. Go into an airport and you’ll find plenty of electronic door access systems (some keys, some prox), but if you look up and count the cameras, you quickly realize that cameras have come to dominate the transportation environment. Flying this last week, I was stuck in a slow-moving line for the TSA checkpoint and I counted over 60 surveillance cameras, some of them just a hands-width away from another camera. Walk down the halls of a modern office building and I bet you will count more mini-domes than you will count electronic card access points. Look over into the world of law enforcement, and you’ll find cameras inside police cruisers, mounted on street lights, pointing at roadways and tunnels and watching over transit stations.
So, apparently we’re camera crazy, and many of you who are equipment installers are making a good living installing this stuff. But there’s always been a little nagging question in our industry: Do cameras really matter? Why, yes, they definitely matter, we’d say, because how else are you going to get visual evidence of a crime for your investigation? But do they really matter, do they actually prevent crime? That was a tougher question, and the answer you received depended on who you asked. Some would say yes, they reduce crime. Others would say, no, they only displace crime. Still others might have said no, they only help you investigate.
But that was only anecdotal and presupposed insight into the effectiveness of cameras. Now, we finally have some definitive input on the effectiveness of cameras. Dr. Nancy La Vigne, director of the Urban Institute’s Justice Policy Center, is considered by many to be the nation’s premier researcher on crime mapping and crime prevention strategies, and last week she published her report, “Evaluating the Use of Public Surveillance Cameras for Crime Control and Prevention.” Dr. La Vigne, who is presenting her research at the Secured Cities conference on Nov. 10-11, found a few key things from Baltimore’s video project. She found that that 1) crime dropped 25 percent in the areas of the downtown cameras and 2) that crime was not simply displaced.
Now, before we all jump to the conclusions and start heralding some sort of bad headline like “Cameras cut crime”, let’s qualify this situation. I’m in a unique position to do so, after spending time with Baltimore this week discussing their video project. First, let me give you the overview. Baltimore and the State of Maryland is very supportive of using available technologies to prevent and control crime. The Baltimore camera project started under Martin O’Malley, who was mayor of Baltimore from 1999 to 2007. In 2007, he became Governor, and the mayor since then has been Mayor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake, who is equally an advocate of using technology to provide public safety advantages for her constituents.
The city didn’t just put in cameras; it actually has two monitoring centers, and it actively monitors its video feeds. Former officers are watching select cameras, especially during high-crime times (something they know because of crime-mapping/Compstat data-intelligence efforts). They focus on areas and actively use PTZ cameras to train their eyes remotely on incidents. They know that if you’re watching a camera in a high-crime location in the middle of the night and you see someone moving around, there’s a very good chance that you’re seeing either a potential victim or a criminal. The city has some impressive technology from companies like VidSys and DVTel (along with a ton of other vendors) and the image quality of their system will stun you, especially when you’re watching a camera at night and it looks almost like a day-time feed (and I even say that after just returning from the ASIS tradeshow where I got a chance to see some of today’s hottest technology).
But Baltimore isn’t just watching and recording cameras and actively focusing their PTZs on subjects of interest. Rather, they are directly moving that visual information out to officers in the field by giving verbal descriptions over radios and even by pushing still images of suspects.
The result was that I saw examples of cameras focused on crimes where they were able to dispatch officers to the scene so quickly that they captured the criminal before he could even run out of the camera’s field of view. I saw officers pull weapons off felons, knowing that the gun was on the person because a camera operator saw the gun on the screen. I saw officers stop an attempted rape because an eagle-eye camera operator witnessed the struggle and abduction. I was impressed, to say the least.
So my point on all of this is that it’s not just cameras that reduce crime. As Dr. La Vigne’s report confirms, it’s when you couple quality camera installations based on crime-mapping with good technology, active monitoring and dispatch – that’s when cameras move the needle against crime … and they do it dramatically.
If this kind of information is valuable to your job, I want to personally invite you to join me at the Secured Cities conference on Nov. 10-11, in Baltimore, Md. As part of the conference, you’ll hear from Dr. La Vigne, representatives from the City of Baltimore, and a host of other urban security and video surveillance experts. On day 2, we’ll be taking a tour of the Baltimore video project so that you can see what makes a successful project work. Registration for the conference is open to city managers, law enforcement, government (federal, state and local) personnel, urban district organizers, corporate security leaders, systems integrators, specifiers/architects/designers and consultants.
In other news
Feds uncover remote control plane bomb plot, SLRI releases report on security budgets, more
A Massachusetts man was taken into custody earlier this week by federal authorities for allegedly planning an attack against the Pentagon and U.S. Capital by using remote-controlled airplanes laden with explosives. … For security executives that want to know how their company’s security budget stacks up with other organizations, the Security Leadership Research Institute, the research arm of the Security Executive Council, has released a new report with findings on security budgets and program structures. … Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano has been selected to receive the Fred V. Morrone Memorial 9/11 Award for her efforts in protecting the nation against a wide range of threats. Napolitano will be presented with the award at the Security Week Gala on Nov. 2. … Looking to cut down on false dispatches, Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue, a rural fire protection district in Oregon, has adopted a new ordinance that requires central stations to verify fire alarms.