Voices: Increased surveillance
Dec. 28, 2005. 08:52 PM
We asked you whether you think the expanded use of security cameras deter gun violence. Here's what you had to say.
The reason that a gun fight was started was because the shooter thought they could get away with it. They then fled through the TTC which has quite comprehensive surveillance cameras, so surveillance cameras were not a deterrent. What might deter further tragedies is if the TTC shut down if there was a 911 call for a serious criminal act. This would allow police to freeze off an area and prevent the speedy escape of suspects. Ottawa has a very quick area seal-off procedure in the event of an attack against a diplomatic target.
John Bawden, Toronto, Dec. 29
These criminals who would spray a street full of innocent bystanders with bullets probably would not be deterred by video cameras, but at least it would be a great deal simpler to identify and arrest them. For those who spout privacy issues or have a "Big Brother" complex, come on, if you are not doing anything illegal, why would you care? Put one up on every corner.
Michael Gorgey, Port Perry, Ont., Dec. 29
Nothing will stop the violence in Toronto (or Canada) as long as it is a money maker for the Government and their cronies.
Garth Bourne, Oshawa, Dec. 29
No, security cameras may help after the crime is committed. We need to prevent victims - what resources are available if people knows someone who is "troubled". What help is there if a parent/caregiver can't or won't control their child? People don't suddenly go bad; it's a process.
Candis Ollivierre, Toronto, Dec. 29
I can't understand how privacy can be an issue in a public area. The two terms have extreme opposite meanings. Put up the cameras, ban hand guns outright and most of all get the trash off our streets and into prison. Enough already.
Will Reid, Toronto, Dec. 29
Cameras, parks, gyms, jobs ... nice ideas but have any of these ideas actually come from that of a gun-toting killer? How about asking a convicted murderer what would have kept them from committing the crime? Talk to them and see what changes could be made before we spend millions on cameras on every street corner.
Carl Oliver, Newmarket, Dec. 29
I think the value of the cameras has been undermined by the wording of the question. While I whole-heartedly support our Canadian values of deterrence and rehabilitation over mere capture and retribution, something has to be said for the much needed justice in simply punishing these (people). As far as I'm concerned, if it's a public space, there should be a CCTV watching.
Ross Grasso, Ajax, Dec. 29
Surveillance cameras may be helpful in apprehending those involved in gun crimes but it isn't going to deter people. A more suitable solution is to stiffen the penalties for committing a crime with a gun. I also like the idea of removing young offender status to any teenager committing a crime with a gun.
Susan Shandro, Vancouver, Dec. 29
If we put people that carry and use guns in jail and leave them there, I'm sure the crime problem would be reduced greatly and we could use the money for other things that are needed. We have a legal system with laws why not use it instead of trying to patch and bandage the situation. If you carry or use a gun mandatory prison term. Or better still, how about chain gangs?
Steve Brown, Mississauga, Dec. 29
Get rid of the Youth Criminal Justice Act, just for starters.
Mary Smith, Ajax, Dec. 29
I don't think the cameras will stop or deter it but it would at least give the police a weapon on catching these people. As far as the cry of 'right to privacy,' I don't think that applies when you are out in public. And if you are doing no wrong, stop the whining.
David Yarema, Smithville, Dec. 29
In London, England there are cameras all over the city. Crime is lower and cr