In Minority Report, a movie based on Philip K. 1956 short story, the police have the access to group -pre – cognitive psychics who can predict murder. The pre-crime unit of the police force uses this information to stop murders before they occur. With absolute authority, they capture murderers before they act, place them into a catatonic state, and imprison them underground. But here lies the same old question about the limits of law enforcement: if you arrest a murderer before a murder is committed, did you not just arrest an innocent civilian? If it didn’t happen, how can you be guilty? What right do the police have to seize an innocent man? Measuring how well police surveillance cameras prevent crime is a tricky process since you’re dealing with a vague set of variables. Law enforcement officials are usually the most positive about the CCTV Cameras. They will be helpful in preventing petty crimes but not serious organised crimes and based on recent serious crimes none will provide footage that will help solve any crime. This isn’t to say that CCTV Cameras are entirely useless. Evidence consistently points out that cameras reduce auto-related crimes as much as 41 percent. They are also more helpful with reducing crime in enclosed areas with less foot traffic when combined with other law enforcement efforts. And they’re helpful in conducting post-crime investigations. CCTV Cameras afford a false sense of security To some it’s comforting to imagine vigilant police monitoring every CCTV Camera, but the truth is very different. Most CCTV footage will never be looked at until well after the crime is committed. When examined, it will become common for the viewer not to identify suspects. Lighting will be bad and images will be grainy, and criminals tend not to stare helpfully at the lens. CCTV Cameras tend to break far too often. Even when they afford quick identification – think of 2010 terror attack at lugogo rugby club – police are often able to identify suspects without CCTV Cameras. CCTV Cameras afford a false sense of security, encouraging laziness when we need police to be vigilant. The solution The solution isn’t for police to watch CCTV Cameras. Unlike an officer walking the street, Cameras only look in particular directions at particular locations. Criminals know this, and can easily adapt by moving their crimes to someplace not watched by Cameras – and there will always be such places (Kitosa kisaasi, Bulenga, Matugga,Kulambiro and Masanafu roundabout). Additionally, while a police officer on the street can respond to a crime in progress, the same officer in front of a CCTV screen can only dispatch another officer to arrive much later. By their very nature, cameras result in underused and misallocated police resources. But the question really isn’t whether cameras reduce crime; the question is whether they’re worth it. Given their cost, the funds spent on CCTV Cameras would be far better spent on hiring experienced Crime profilers, Police officers and central data systems for quicker suspects profiling. We live in a unique time in our society: the cameras are everywhere, and we can still see them. Over a decade ago, cameras were much rarer during CHOGM than they are today. Ten years from now they’ll be so small you won’t even notice them. Expenditure on the police force is at record levels. In terms of numbers and budgets, it has never been so large. In spite of this, there is widespread public dissatisfaction resulting in a steep increase in complaints against the police, with many coming from law‐ abiding, middle‐class people who complain of arrogance, rudeness, excessive use of force and neglect of duty. 1 – Create a team of experienced investigators, and as a result they would have the following benefits: Quicker, more effective offender profiling Faster access to critical information More efficient procedures Increased officer safety Higher detection rate Improved crime prevention 2 – There is a huge gap between how we want to be policed, how the police want to police us and how we are actually policed. Why this gap exists and what can be done about it? First of all, what does the public want? The public is not interested whether burglaries have gone up or down by five per cent. ‘They want to know that when they go to bed at night that they aren’t going to get broke into; when they get up in the morning the car is still going to be in front of the house and their loved ones can walk freely to their local shop the following day to get the bread & sugar and return home without being robbed.’ So why, despite record funding and record numbers of police officers, does this gap exist between public expectations and the kind of policing they are getting? Among other things, police need to rebuild the relationship with the public. Every police officer needs to understand that they’re an ambassador for the service that their responsibility is to go out there and rebuild trust and confidence in every interaction that they have with members of the public additionally police needs to change the way they operate, to enable the service to respond more effectively to the public’s priorities, Police need to set clear objectives and introduce changes to the framework within which the police operates. Richard Musaazi Digital Forensics Investigator Do you have a story in your community or an opinion to share with us: Email us at editorial@watchdoguganda.com