New technology's role in reducing crime and enhancing community safety

Community Safety and Crime Reduction: An Evaluation of the Role of New Technology

Recent technological advances have effectively changed the way we conduct business, secure our borders, fight our wars, diagnose diseases, etc. Indeed, thanks to advances in technology, the world as we know it today looks very different from the world of yesteryears. The fact that technology continues to have a significant impact on almost every facet of our lives is undeniable. One of the areas in which recent advances in technology remains most visible is security. Today, unlike two or three decades ago, there are a wide range of hi-tech security devices that have been specifically developed to help in fighting crime. From CCTV cameras to alarm systems to GPS tracking and even software designed to examine online chat records, the fight against crime has surely gone high-tech. It is however important to note that the utilization of some of these technological advances in the war against crime has raised eyebrows most particularly amongst those who feel that such technologies could violate not only the civil but also the privacy rights of those whose security they are supposed to enhance. There are also those who question the effectiveness of the said technologies when it comes to crime reduction. It should however be noted that when it comes to crime reduction, the relevance of the said technological advances cannot be overstated.

Technology and Community Safety: An Overview

Although crime rates in the U.S. have been on a downward trend according to the annual crime statistics released by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), individual cases of crime reported to the police continue to be significantly high (FBI, 2012). In that regard, there exists a need to actively seek additional ways of fighting crime. Indeed, law enforcement authorities and even private citizens are increasingly using emerging technological devices as security enhancement tools. Whether these technologies have any impact on community safety is subject to debate. In my opinion, the utilization of some technologies could in this case help not only in the prevention of crime but also in the apprehension of criminals. In this case, I will use the Global Positioning System - GPS as an example in an attempt to support my assertion. Generally, recidivism rates across the nation remain particularly high. What this means is that a certain percentage of those released from jail are more likely than not to be rearrested for the same or different crimes. By tracking known offenders using GPS, in real time, we could help bring down the number of reported crimes while at the same time protecting innocent citizens from harm. For purposes of this discussion, community safety will be taken to be a situation whereby members of the community feel sufficiently protected from criminal activity.

The Impact of New Technologies on Community Safety

In seeking to highlight how new technologies continue to impact on community safety, I will largely limit myself to three recent technologies. These include: CCTV cameras, GPS, and advanced alarm systems. In the first part of each section, I will present evidence that suggests a definite impact on crime reduction. The second part of each section will address dissenting views.

CCTV Cameras

This is one recent security technology whose effectiveness in tackling crime has been a hotly debated issue. In recent times, a number of western nations have stepped up their utilization of closed circuit television - CCTV cameras in an attempt to not only avert crime but to also increase chances of nabbing criminals. Great Britain remains one of the places with the highest number of installed CCTV cameras. According to Siegel (2012), as of 2011, approximately 4.2 million CCTV cameras were believed to be in operation in Great Britain alone. This as the author further points out translates to one CCTV camera for every 14 Britons. In the author's own words, "it has been estimated that the average Briton is caught on camera 300 times each day" (Siegel, 2012, p.118). Has such a high number of CCTV cameras had any impact on crime prevention and/or reduction in Great Britain? Available evidence suggests that indeed, CCTV surveillance could have had a significant impact on crime prevention and thus reduction not only in Great Britain but also in other parts of the world.

Approximately 20 years ago, CCTV footage helped reveal the identities of two boys who abducted and murdered a two-year-old by the names James Bulger. This remains one of the most cited cases in arguments seeking to support the utilization of CCTV surveillance cameras as a crime prevention tool. In this particular case, James Bulger was abducted by two teenage boys from a shopping complex near Liverpool after her mother became momentarily detracted (Barak, 2007). Bulger's battered body was discovered two days later. Luckily enough, the shopping center from where Bulger had been abducted was fitted with numerous CCTV cameras in a number of strategic locations (Barak, 2007). Soon, police officers were able to retrieve images of the two-year-old being led away by two boys who were promptly identified and subsequently arrested. This is one instance where CCTV footage has helped in the apprehension of criminals. CCTV cameras were also credited for the successful apprehension of David Copeland. Copeland who has come to be widely referred to as the 'London Nail Bomber' was the architect of a bombing campaign that left several dead and scores injured. In this particular case, CCTV images captured David roaming around the sites where the bombs were later on planted.

In the opinion of Welsh and Farrington (2009), CCTV cameras could also be instrumental in not only the prevention but also the detection of terrorist acts. In the words of the authors, "the role of the CCTV in counterterrorism was further emphasized in the suicide bombings carried out in London's transport system on July 7, 2005" (Welsh and Farrington, 2009, p.29). The authors in this case further point out that although CCTV footage did not avert the said attacks, it played a key role in the improvement of measures designed to counter future terrorist attacks in the city's public transport system.

A number of studies conducted in the past have also clearly demonstrated that CCTV cameras do indeed have an impact on crime reduction. For instance, as Siegel (2012) points out, on reviewing numerous studies on the effectiveness of CCTV surveillance technologies, Welsh and Farrington concluded that the said technologies are most effective in reducing vehicle crimes as well as crimes committed within car packs. Welsh and Farrington as Siegel (2012, p.118) further points out also found out "that CCTV schemes in the U.K. showed a sizeable (19%) and significant desirable effect on crime…"

Based on the discussion above, CCTV cameras aid in crime reduction in four main ways. To begin with, they act as a deterrent to crime. In this case, would be criminals may spot the camera and in such a case choose to abandon their nefarious activities altogether. This could help in reducing burglaries and other related thefts. According to Grolle (2009), the presence of a CCTV camera could force a potential offender to undertake a risk-benefit analysis of his action. If the risk of either immediate or future apprehension appears too great, a criminal is less likely to go ahead with his or her plans. Thus in the final analysis, when would be criminals are aware that every move they make is being watched, they are likely to think twice before committing a crime. Criminals are well aware that evidence presented in CCTV footage is almost impossible to beat in a court of law.

Secondly, CCTV cameras could help in the reduction and hence the prevention of crime by helping law enforcement officers in the positive identification and subsequent apprehension of law breakers. This according to Grolle (2009) can be made possible via the utilization of images capturing the commission of offenses. Removing such individuals from the society effectively averts the commission of further criminal acts thus bringing down the number of reported criminal activities.

CCTV cameras may also help in the aversion of crime before the same actually happens or takes place. For instance, in those instances where the said cameras are actively monitored by guards, it would be easy to identify suspicious looking individuals and hence institute early intervention measures before a crime occurs. As Grolle (2009) points out, staff monitoring the CCTV system could (based on their judgment) request for police assistance or deploy other security personnel on detection of suspicious behavior. This is yet another example of the relevance of CCTV cameras when it comes to crime reduction.

Further, when members of the public are aware that a given area is under CCTV camera surveillance, they are more likely to be less fearful. In such a case, the said members of the public could start using areas they previously avoided as a result of fear of attacks. The installation of CCTV cameras in public spaces could also in this case be a sign that law enforcement agencies are fully committed to the enhancement of security. This could have a reassuring component on members of the public. With the increased utilization of public spaces as a result of increased public confidence, crime rates are more likely than not to decrease as criminals avoid crowded areas for fear of apprehension. Thus in my opinion, the installation of CCTV cameras in areas that were previously regarded criminal dens could help redeem the image of such areas by bringing down crime rates. Closely related to this, it can also be noted that visible CCTV cameras could also induce members of the public to basic precautions in an attempt to enhance their safety. For instance, it would be highly unlikely for an individual to scout for an isolated spot to answer a call of nature while knowing all too well that such a location is being monitored. The shame of appearing on CCTV footage could in this case keep an individual away from harms way. Further, according to Grolle (2009), the presence of CCTV cameras reminds would be victims to be more security conscious.

The evidence presented above clearly shows that the relevance of CCTV cameras in crime prevention and hence crime reduction cannot be overstated. It is however important to note that the effectiveness of CCTV cameras as effective tools in crime prevention is largely dependent on the quality of footage produced. The quality of the said footage could on the other hand be largely dependent on where a CCTV camera is located, how well it is maintained, etc. For instance, a CCTV camera fitted high enough to cover a vast area but only showing a bird's eye view of people below would be of little use in crime prevention. In this particular case, it would be hard to capture important features of 'subjects of interests' were a crime to take place. It should also be noted that to further enhance the effectiveness of CCTV cameras in crime reduction, there exists a need to also make use of other security enhancement strategies including but not limited to better security lighting, increased police patrols, etc. In the final analysis, the success of CCTV surveillance in the UK especially in regard to the reduction of crime rates is a clear indicator that the said surveillance technology could be used elsewhere in the world with similar results. Indeed, as Siegel (2009) points out, CCTV cameras installed in Washington, D.C. have proven useful in quite a number of occasions.

Dissenting Views

After reviewing worldwide studies on the effectiveness of CCTV cameras Welsh and Farrington made yet another interesting discovery: that apart from the U.K., CCTV schemes "in other countries showed no desirable effect on crime" (Siegel, 2009, p.118). Those disputing the effectiveness of CCTV cameras in crime reduction could use this argument as their reference point. It is however important to note that a number of factors have contributed to the effectiveness of the CCTV schemes in the U.K. For instance, as Siegel (2009) points out, members of public in the U.K. lend significant support to CCTV undertakings. However, in the U.S. And many other nations, the public is less accommodative of any form of surveillance (Siegel, 2009). This effectively hampers the utilization of CCTV surveillance technology as an effective crime reduction tool. In that regard, should members of the public in America and other jurisdictions embrace the utilization of CCTV cameras, the success of CCTV schemes could end up being replicated in such jurisdictions.

It could also be argued that the costs associated with the installation, operation as well as maintenance of CCTV cameras does not justify their utilization as an effective crime prevention tool. Indeed, as Jones (2003) points out, the costs associated with the installation as well as servicing of CCTV cameras could be prohibitive. In my opinion however, the reverse could actually be true. When CCTV technologies are used effectively, they could help law enforcement officers reduce the amount of time they take to nail culprits. This saves a lot of money used in further investigations. Resources saved in this case could be diverted to other more urgent security enhancement measures including but not in any way limited to sponsoring undercover police informers. Police officers who would ordinarily be pursuing the same suspect for years are also freed up to undertake new assignments thus further enhancing the efficiency of security agencies in their law enforcement efforts.

In an attempt to discredit CCTV cameras and their ability to reduce crime, others could also cite instances where the said CCTV cameras have failed to help unravel a crime. It is however important to note that as I have already pointed out elsewhere in this text, the effectiveness of CCTV cameras when it comes to the reduction of crime is largely dependent on how well they are maintained. When the focus of the said cameras is clear and appropriate, there exists no reason whatsoever as to why they cannot be used as effective security tools in the war against crime.

A number of privacy concerns have also been raised in regard to the utilization of CCTV cameras. Some individuals according to Welsh and Farrington (2009) are convinced that public CCTV cameras infringe on their right to privacy. I beg to differ. In my opinion, a CCTV camera in a public place would not prevent a law abiding person from doing something that he would otherwise lawfully do in such a public place. Privacy concerns could only arise were such surveillance technologies to be installed in private property.

Dissenting Views

There are however those who might argue that the utilization of GPS technology infringes on the privacy rights of individuals. This is more so the case when the said tracking is done without a warrant. Towards this end, the Supreme Court according to Liptak (2012) ruled that attaching a GPS device on the vehicle of a 'person of interest' effectively violated such an individual's privacy rights. In my opinion, when the said surveillance efforts are backed by a warrant, they need not be regarded an infringement on the privacy rights of individuals. To obtain a warrant, law enforcement officers are required to prove that indeed there is a valid reason to obtain the said warrant. This is an effective safeguard against arbitrary surveillance.

Alarms

When it comes to the development of new technologies to help in the aversion and/or reduction of crime, alarms have not been left behind. Unlike a few decades ago, the security marketplace is now awash with enhanced alarm systems. Thanks to advances in technology, we now have wireless alarms as well as silent alarms which while offering maximum protection are difficult to compromise or interfere with. As the name suggests, wireless alarms do not need or require any form of wiring during installation. These alarms are largely dependent on wireless technology making them easier to install and more challenging for criminals to disable by interfering with visible wiring. Silent alarms on the other hand are activated without necessarily bringing this fact to the attention of the criminal. Typically, silent alarms do not sound. They instead have a mechanism that when activated alerts law enforcement officers or available guards of an ongoing crime. The intruder is therefore in most cases caught unawares. Has the advancement in the capability of alarm systems had a significant impact on community safety? In my opinion, and based on the evidence I present below, I believe it has.

A comprehensive study conducted by a group of Rutgers University School of Criminal Justice researchers came to the conclusion that intruder alarm systems have a positive impact on crime reduction (Rutgers, 2009). To begin with, alarms are said to have a deterrence effect. In most cases, burglars do not want to arouse suspicion as this would increase their likelihood of being arrested. It therefore follows that when a burglar suspects that there is an alarm system installed in a certain apartment or premises, and that the alarm system is almost impossible to compromise, he is more likely to choose another less risky target, i.e. A home without a functional alarm system. In that regard, sophisticated alarm systems that are hard to compromise or disable play a critical role in the reduction of burglary cases thus further enhancing community safety.

In the past, advanced alarm systems have also helped in the apprehension of criminals. For instance, according to the Cedar Rapids Police Department (cited in Lab, 2010, p.64), "silent alarms in various Cedar Rapids, Iowa, schools and businesses increased both the number of arrests and the clearance rate in buildings with alarms." In that regard, alarms also do help in the apprehension of suspects thus effectively eliminating from society individuals who are likely to be a threat to community safety. This could help in the reduction of crime rates.

Dissenting Views

According to Hakim and Blackstone (1997), a vast majority of alarm activations (94 to 98%) are in most cases false. As the authors in this case further point out, police officers who routinely find themselves responding to false activations are in most cases convinced that "burglar alarms are ineffective and police response should be ceased" (Hakim and Blackstone, 1997, p.10). It is however important to note that as Hakim and Blackstone (1997) point out earlier on, most false activations (70%) are largely as a result of users' errors. False alarms do not therefore affect the effectiveness of alarms as a crime deterrent. In that regard, proper installation and maintenance of the said alarms could have a positive effect on the reduction of the rate of false alarms.

Conclusion

To be of any use in crime reduction, none of the new technologies discussed in this text should be used in isolation. Members of the public should also be sensitized on the usefulness of such technologies in tackling crime. This in my opinion would most likely diffuse the resistance witnessed most particularly in the U.S. especially in regard to the installation of CCTV cameras in public places. It is highly likely that going forward; new technologies will continue to be unveiled to help tackle crime and other crime related activities. This is likely to pose new challenges for law breakers.