CCTV Letter Published in EYE Today

A couple weeks ago, EYE's editor came out on the side of CCTV and I bitched them out for it in a letter last week. They've published it in this week's EYE as the first letter (yay!) but sadly, there's no online version so I can't direct you to any links. I will however include it here for my own records though this version won't include their edits for length:

I'm really surprised that EYE would take such an unfortunate position on CCTV in our public spaces. You claim that there is no difference between being seen in public and watched by police camera, but I would beg to differ. We know from the experiences of other cities that CCTV can and has been used to persecute "undesirable" citizens like panhandlers and protesters, and now The Independent is reporting that London, the most camera-saturated city in the world has begun restricting access to tube stations and air ports based on political affiliations no doubt supported by police cameras. How can we claim to foster democracy while we're openly attempting to trade our freedoms for a false sense of security?

While arguably there is a difference between a bunch of independent cameras and a district-wide, centralised, police-controlled system that can read the labels on a soft drink can, how can anyone claim that recording acts of violence makes anyone safer?

Since this pilot program began, there have been shootings directly in front of CCTV cameras and not only did the footage provide absolutely no leads, but the victims have had to limp to hospital for lack of support from groups like the police who would seemingly prefer to watch people get shot on TV than prevent the shooting in the first place.

If the "test" for this program's effectiveness is in fact this recent shooting within the view of a camera, then I would suggest that the project is already a failure -- unless we've collectively decided that the role of the police is not to protect, but to prosecute.

Update: 2007.08.10

Looks like I was wrong. Jonathan found the online version.