http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/...o/3663189.html


HPD may add video cameras to its ranks
Officer shortage leads city to look at surveillance of streets, malls — even some homes

By ALEXIS GRANT
Copyright 2006 Houston Chronicle

Facing a shortage of police officers, Police Chief Harold Hurtt called Wednesday for a new type of patrol: surveillance cameras on downtown streets, apartment complexes and shopping malls — and in extreme situations, private homes.

"If you're not doing anything wrong, why should you worry about it?" Hurtt told reporters.

His remarks came as the City Council approved a financial-incentive program to help the Houston Police Department recruit officers.

The department is struggling with a manpower shortage as well as a spike in violent crime. To supplement officers on patrol, HPD is considering installing five video cameras downtown, Hurtt said. He also suggested that new apartment complexes and malls be required, as part of the building-permit process, to provide security cameras.

And when asked whether the need for cameras extends to private homes, he said, "If they're putting a burden on the criminal justice system and cheating the other residents of Houston, yes."

He did not elaborate on how police would accomplish such surveillance or when it would be appropriate.

Source of funds
The downtown-camera project already has a group to fund it: the Houston Downtown Management District. Once the cameras are installed, the project would be carried out by HPD. Officers would monitor video feeds from a new storefront office planned for downtown.

"It's going to be a lot less expensive than having officers standing in those locations or responding to all those calls," said Hurtt, who wants to have the cameras up by the end of this year. "What we need is a combination of technology and human resources to deal with this issue."

The Downtown Management District, which works to improve the central business district using taxes paid by downtown property owners, has proposed five sites for cameras at intersections on and around Main. They are high-pedestrian-traffic, not high-crime, locations, said Bob Eury, executive director of the district.

Mayor must approve
"The goal is for people to feel safe," said Eury, who compared the cameras to those at shopping malls. "We're finding new ways to make it basically safer in reality and perception."

The program would cost tens of thousands of dollars, Eury said, declining to estimate more precisely since the project will be put out for bids.

The emphasis on new police and surveillance is part of the city's response to a recent spike in violent crime.

It was up 2.3 percent through November 2005, compared with the same period in 2004, though the overall crime rate was down 2.2 percent.

Mayor Bill White, who must approve the camera program for it to go into effect, said he had not yet discussed it with Hurtt.

"There's a legitimate right to privacy," White said. "On the other hand ... if there are some crime hot spots, then we want something where we don't have to have uniformed officers staring at a particular spot 24 hours a day."

The City Council's Committee on Public Safety and Homeland Security will consider the program Feb. 28.

Some privacy concerns
Some privacy advocates questioned whether apartment owners should be required to install cameras.

"It's radical and unheard-of," said Scott Henson, director of the American Civil Liberties Union's Texas Police Accountability Project.

But on city streets, it's a different story. Cities across the country, including Chicago, Los Angeles and Minneapolis, already use surveillance cameras in public places. In London, where cameras are commonplace, the technology helped police solve last year's transit bombings.

Technology isn't the only tool HPD is using to fight crime. The understaffed department hopes to entice experienced officers nationwide to work in Houston by offering a $7,000 bonus and increased pay under a program approved Wednesday by City Council. By hiring 700 new officers every year for the next three years, Houston would have 2.8 officers for every 1,000 people, the national average, instead of the current 2.2 per 1,000 people, Hurtt said.

Under the incentive program, HPD officers who have less than five years' experience will also get a pay raise.

Its more than just Feminisim guys.....its the whole nanny state micro management its only to make you safe mentality.

What do we do guys......Mr Orwell couldnt have possibly imagined how well we would use his book as a blueprint for our new and improved new world order.....and improve on it with new technology ! I am quitting the Computer industry, it will only contribute to the micromanagement of everyperson on the face of the earth. This is no longer the realm of tinfoil hat freaks this is real....here in our faces on the front page of major newspapers.

How do we stop it?

I wish I had answers to that, Virtue, but I don't. TBH, IMO it's only a matter of time, it can't be stopped. With the advancement of technology it's easier and easier to do this, the only thing holding it back is "ethic", but sooner or later, they'll manage to get over that too.

Gotta love this logic - you could use the same line of thinking for private homes - hey, if you're not beating your wife/kids and/or there's no PCP lab in your basement, why should you worry about it?

..and here we go already...

Again, gotta love those lax "reasons" he gave. Even a blind man could see where this is heading...

The men who have been falsely accused by women can benefit from the technology, as they can use the *evidence* to prove their innocence. The technology will make it far harder for the female perpetrators of evil to claim *victim hood*. Objective evidence is the ONLY defense for a falsely accused man, while women can use the most subjective arguments in order to prosecute an innocent man.

Such a device is allowing men to use objective evidence to prove their innocence, therefore why the condemnation for the product? If the product allows the falsely accused men to defend themselves, then it's a step in the right direction.

Sure, if they (men) themselves decide to use it. But we're talking about government and it's minions here.

Also, Chris

Isn't this the real problem here? Removing these "subjective arguments" as proper/sufficient should be a way to go, not embracing even more nanny government intrusion for the sake of neutralizing something, which shouldn't be there in the first place.

In other words - the cause of the problem should be eliminated, not just medicated with a plaster.

Of course, chances of that happening are -given the contemporary cultural climate in the west- slim, I'll give you that.

Just my two cents.

The problem is derived from the draconian laws that assume the accused men are guilty until proven innocent, however the system will NOT change until there is an irrefutable amount of evidence to show that MOST of these men were falsely accused (i.e. video surveillance).