on the uselessness of Video Surveillance.
i've had lots of things stolen.
most of these crimes happened under the watchful eye of a video surveillance system.
here are some of the more interesting ones:
in all of the scenarios where there were video surveillance systems available, i have reported the crimes within 12 hours, if not sooner. in ALL of the cases, the response back has been: the tapes haven't found anything.
WHAT?
in some of the scenarios, the tapes had taped over the crime scene. for example: they are on a 48 hour loop.] why this happens when there is an incident reported, i don't know. if the crime was reported within 12 hours [at the longest], the tapes should be pulled for review immediately.
in some of the other scenarios, like the one at my grandma's apartment, the crime was reported within an hour. the tapes were pulled and the security guard and the manager were notified. after a few week's worth of checking back in with them, the report i got back was "we didn't see anything".'
WHAT?
my question was, "well, did you video my van being parked by me and me leaving on foot towards the elevator?"
"YES."
"did you video me coming back to my van to find that my CD player was stolen?"
"YES."
"well, what happened in between those two events?"
"nothing. we didn't see anything."
"WHAT?! YOU ARE AN IDIOT!!! can i watch the recording myself, please?"
"no."
and that's where they always end. can i watch the tape? no.
why not?
is there even a tape?
are they there not to stop crime, but instead to reduce insurance liability costs or "deter" theft?
what's up with this?
this is ridiculous. i'm not a business owner, so i don't know what the con is with these systems, but from my thorough experiences with theft, i have found them to be useless. [even at the bank and in vegas.]
in none of these situations, did i expect to "catch the crook" or identify the criminal. nor did i really expect the situation to be resolved in a way that would benefit me and/or return the stolen goods. in all of the situations, my insurance deductible was too high to warrant filing a claim with them. also, for only some of them did i file a police report. too much hassle for too little return on investment. i just wanted to know that "the man" had my back. they didn't. at the very least, i wanted my curiosity to be satisfied by watching the crime in real time.
in my personal experience, a video surveillance system in a low-risk small business establishment is a waste of money if you expect it to solve/stop crimes. if it's just for "theft deterrent" and you don't intend to use it to it's fullest purposes, you are tricking your customers and providing bad customer service.
now i know that some crimes are solved with these. surveillance tapes often make the news. but as it's played out for me, they'd be better used taping reruns of COPS on FOX.
most of these crimes happened under the watchful eye of a video surveillance system.
here are some of the more interesting ones:
from my isuzu truck in high school parked in a bank of hawaii parking lot: my very first real acoustic guitar - a seagull S6. [video surveillance]
from the parking lot of the MGM Grand hotel in Las Vegas, NV: my friend Heather's ENTIRE CAR. [about 10 of us took a road trip from LA to LV for my 21st birthday.]
from my volkswagen golf parked in a church's underground garage in hawaii: my electric guitar pedalboard containing a bunch of really nice effect pedals. [video surveillance]
from my chevy astro "MAN VAN" at my grandma's luxury condo: the CD deck. [video surveillance + 24 hour roaming security guard]
from my current blue toyota truck parked in the alley at the Church, DURING YOUth CHURCH [no surveillance, but tons of people in & around the building]: the CD deck was stolen.
from C3, a student's electric guitar was stolen from the stage while 10 students and i were in the couch room.
from shelton laundromat, our two sleeping bags out of a dryer. [video surveillance + laundromat attendant - who is NOT there for security purposes!]
in all of the scenarios where there were video surveillance systems available, i have reported the crimes within 12 hours, if not sooner. in ALL of the cases, the response back has been: the tapes haven't found anything.
WHAT?
in some of the scenarios, the tapes had taped over the crime scene. for example: they are on a 48 hour loop.] why this happens when there is an incident reported, i don't know. if the crime was reported within 12 hours [at the longest], the tapes should be pulled for review immediately.
in some of the other scenarios, like the one at my grandma's apartment, the crime was reported within an hour. the tapes were pulled and the security guard and the manager were notified. after a few week's worth of checking back in with them, the report i got back was "we didn't see anything".'
WHAT?
my question was, "well, did you video my van being parked by me and me leaving on foot towards the elevator?"
"YES."
"did you video me coming back to my van to find that my CD player was stolen?"
"YES."
"well, what happened in between those two events?"
"nothing. we didn't see anything."
"WHAT?! YOU ARE AN IDIOT!!! can i watch the recording myself, please?"
"no."
and that's where they always end. can i watch the tape? no.
why not?
is there even a tape?
are they there not to stop crime, but instead to reduce insurance liability costs or "deter" theft?
what's up with this?
this is ridiculous. i'm not a business owner, so i don't know what the con is with these systems, but from my thorough experiences with theft, i have found them to be useless. [even at the bank and in vegas.]
in none of these situations, did i expect to "catch the crook" or identify the criminal. nor did i really expect the situation to be resolved in a way that would benefit me and/or return the stolen goods. in all of the situations, my insurance deductible was too high to warrant filing a claim with them. also, for only some of them did i file a police report. too much hassle for too little return on investment. i just wanted to know that "the man" had my back. they didn't. at the very least, i wanted my curiosity to be satisfied by watching the crime in real time.
in my personal experience, a video surveillance system in a low-risk small business establishment is a waste of money if you expect it to solve/stop crimes. if it's just for "theft deterrent" and you don't intend to use it to it's fullest purposes, you are tricking your customers and providing bad customer service.
now i know that some crimes are solved with these. surveillance tapes often make the news. but as it's played out for me, they'd be better used taping reruns of COPS on FOX.
4 Comments:
I am glad you posted this because it gives me another avenue to push a surveillance system for the church. I know this isn't exactly what you are talking about but I really want to see this happen, and leadership said they had someone starting a team to discuss security but that hasn't happened yet.
Oh and I am sorry you got all those things stolen, I get so angry when things are stolen; to me its infuriating beyond most things.
I just want to say that in our church there are 6 or more exits out of the building. All expect one door has no one near them or anything close to "monitoring". Knowing the town we live in, high amounts of sexual predators per capita we cant afford to be ill prepared. I dont have to explain all the potential problems with that but we have had known offenders in the building and walking around but not really attending (thats a completely different post).
Worse case scenario a child is snagged and is taken out a rear/side exit and no one sees. If we had a camera or surveillance system, we have a chance of seeing time frames, id'ing those responsible, potentially prudent information to finding a taken child quickly.
I dont know if this all makes sense but as the construction process moves forward I will be pushing harder for this to happen as well as exploring all other security concerns.
Nothing like a bunch of pistol packing baptist to keep the church safe.
here's the thing with surveillance systems and the SPD and MCSD. Unless someone is assaulted, drugs are involved, or the theft/property damage is huge, they will not pursue the criminal.
I can elaborate further in person, but i know a business whose surveillance system caught thieves in the act with enough evidence and clarity to ID them - enough that a jury would convict. The cops did NOTHING. They did about three hours of detective work, to the point where they know who did it and they did nothing else.
So for Justin's beef about stuff stolen, sorry, even if you get a clear mug shot of the criminal, they wont get busted.
Brad's point on assaults is another issue altogether. Here, i expect our police would in fact push to an arrest.
So, from a safety standpoint, i think the surveillance system is an interesting idea, but for theft its clearly pointless.
wow that's a sad state of affairs. My cd face plate got stolen out of the alley too. I was in the church for about 1/2 hour. I called the police but I knew it was pointless then and they pretty much agreed with me. Still had to do the right thing. Then again it was my fault for not locking up. Coveting and temptation is a hard thing to avoid in the world.
Good thing we have treasure no one can steal. :)
Jeremy. I couldn't agree more.
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home