I guess that’s one way to waste £200million

From the U.K. we find (via Bruce):

A comparison of the number of cameras in each London borough with the proportion of crimes solved there found that police are no more likely to catch offenders in areas with hundreds of cameras than in those with hardly any.

In fact, four out of five of the boroughs with the most cameras have a record of solving crime that is below average.

[…]

We have estimated that CCTV cameras have cost the taxpayer in the region of £200million in the last 10 years but it’s not entirely clear if some of that money would not have been better spent on police officers.

Not entirely clear? What could be more clear? It appears that the rate of crime resolution is inversely proportional to the number of cameras present.

But they are apparently so accustom to Big Brother being there they are afraid to consider his absence. But don’t expect them to remove the cameras and spend the money on something better like more police and/or better enforcement. You should expect them to conclude they don’t have enough cameras and to increase proselytization. It’s just one of those things about human nature that is hard to accept.

One thought on “I guess that’s one way to waste £200million

  1. “Not entirely clear? What could be more clear?”

    We’re talking about UK police here, remember.

Comments are closed.