It’s Friday — and we have lots of response to my question about installing more security cameras to cover everything from burglaries to drive-by shootings.
READ MORE: Nanny state or surveillance state? Bob Layton weighs in
Matthew moved here from England, where he says there are lots of cameras.
His mom and dad’s credit card was stolen, and using the cameras, police were able to follow the thief from the ATM to the bus he took home.
Dan says the average citizen has nothing to worry about, most of the footage will be boring and ignored, anyway.
Rebecca sees no issue on privacy, since the video is only seen by police if there’s an issue.
RELATED: How Edmonton police use surveillance cameras
Angie says if it was a family member who was victimized, you might wish there was a camera.
Lorne says cameras that capture criminal activity are useless if the justice system is too weak once it gets to court.
Kris put cameras on his garage after graffiti and had no more issues.
Bill says cameras only seem to affect the negativity of criminals, while enhancing the safety of everyone else.
But not everyone agrees with cameras. Mickel says there are too many cameras already. He says it is the mark of the beast.
Let me know what you think about that and have a great weekend.
Bob Layton is the news manager of the Corus Edmonton group of radio stations and a commentator for Global News.
Comments