For those who missed the thumbs-up at a recent city council meeting, CBS 5 announced that San Leandro will soon be installing a series of security cameras around town. The move is allegedly part of a preemptive strike against Oakland crooks who might be turning to San Leandro for their crimes, as a result of their city's own impending camera installations. Some are lauding San Leandro for being proactive as opposed to reactive, while others are bemoaning what they perceive to be a loss of our civil liberties. While I can appreciate the concern by some that our privacy is being invaded with this move, the reality is far less "big brother" than they would have us think.
I look at it like this; there ae cameras all over town whether the city is putting them in or not. From liquor stores to ATM machines, our movements are monitored and compiled almost everywhere we go. Walking around town is a veritable paparazzi fest and half of the folks being filmed don't even know it. Which is sort of the point, I think. The cameras are in place to look for criminals. As 99% of the people going in and out of shops around San Leandro aren't committing armed robberies, most security cams record the to and fro of shoppers and nothing ever comes of it. It's not voyeurism, it's not corporate analytics, it's simple security and precaution.
It's debatable whether San Leandro city government is correct in presuming that Oakland criminals might try to find safe haven here if we don't install the cameras. There is no doubt that word of mouth is huge in the criminal community; sit in a hole-in-the-wall around town and you'll hear some shady people chatting up places to score and easy targets in SL. Knowing that, it's certainly plausible that a lack of cams might give crooks delusions of grandeur. Still, with the glut of cameras that already exist in San Leandro, we haven't exactly seen our city become a crime-free oasis. Making a spectacle out of adding these new cameras might do the trick, but regardless of all the variable outcomes, I see it as an innocuous addition that will likely do more good than harm.
I can certainly understand what people like Mike Katz-Lacabe are saying when they speak out against these sorts of monitoring tactics by the police. Given the recent eavesdropping scandal by our government that has been doing the rounds on the news, along with companies like Google snooping through emails, the American public is getting sick of what feels like an endless invasion of privacy. A more technology-driven world doesn't by default necessitate the end of privacy, after all. These fears, though often justified, don't always require a call to the ACLU.
If the SLPD puts up some cameras, I sincerely doubt anyone is going to be monitoring the footage to see what direction I walk every day. Remember, this is the same police department that barely has the manpower to take non-emergency calls; it's hard to believe someone's going to be sitting and putting little check marks next to the names of every person that steps into Burger King. Indeed, considering the city continues to talk year after year about not having enough money to hire more cops, we can at least give the ones who are there an assist with an extra pair of (albeit digital) eyes. Again, cameras aren't a new thing in town, so it's not like life is going to take this drastic new turn once the SLPD puts in theirs.
The report on CBS 5 ran some statistics comparing the drop in crime over a five year stretch in Pittsburg (who did have cameras) versus San Leandro (who didn't). The results, as shown during the CBS 5 broadcast, are marginal; 22% in Pittsburgh and 23% in San Leandro. What makes me question the report as a legitimate reason to doubt the cameras is that not a single other statistic between the two cities was compared. Demographics, size of the police department, police response time, number of cameras, average citizen income, number of liquor stores in town, etc., all ignored. That sort of omission makes it hard for me to take the report seriously.
Full disclosure, part of the reason I'm supportive of the idea of these cameras is personal and twofold. The first reason has already been covered; we already live with cameras, and at least these ones would be our own. The other reason is that I had a family member who was attacked a few years ago in front of San Leandro High School that could have been helped had the security cameras out front not been broken at the time. Ironically, with almost 20% of SLHS students scared for their safety and dealing with regular fights (I think I've mentioned before how the school makes sure SL parents know as little about this as they can), there are probably quite a few people who can relate to my loved one. Cameras can really make a difference when bad things are going down.
I don't want any single entity to ever have total access to my privacy, but a security camera on the street is no big deal. If it assists the SLPD in catching losers and discouraging others from trying to treat our city like a playground, I say go ahead. Criminals continue to grow more brazen and as a result more innocent people then ever are finding themselves at their mercy. Ask the people in Oakland who's babies and toddlers have been shot if they'd have minded a security camera on a street light that might have spotted the killer. While I don't know for sure that these cameras will help, it's certainly better than nothing.
