CCTV cameras to watch for speed camera vandalism. Rinse, repeat.

But who's going to watch the CCTV cams? That's the irony apparently lost on the Lothian and Borders Safety Camera Partnership, which is considering installing CCTV cameras to monitor its speed cameras that are frequently the target for vandalism. "There are companies there who would provide us with CCTV coverage of the cameras themselves - the cameras looking after the cameras kind of thing," said Colin McNeil, the head of the group. We're not even making this stuff up. All we know is that as soon as they install these suckers, we're grabbing the first plane to Scotland and liveblogging the hysteria.

[Nish Vamadevan @ Jan 24th 2007 1:41PM]

Needs to find a way to look after the CCTV Cameras now...

CCTV Camera is recorded so who would be stupid enough to vandalize that.

[BatteryAcid @ Jan 24th 2007 7:39PM]

Someone who has the brains to cover the lens from behind before vandalizing the camera. Good point, not many.

[Adam @ Jan 24th 2007 1:45PM]

Now they have to install CCTV cameras on the back of the existing CCTV cameras to watch for vandals sneaking up from behind. And then they need to install CCTV cameras above both, pointed at the sky, to watch for vandals dangling down from a tree branch over the cameras. And then they need to install ........

[EDawg @ Jan 24th 2007 2:02PM]

Ach! Adam beat me to it. ROFLMAO (dangling from a tree branch). Seriously..... as I reach back some 15 odd years into my lizard brain (age 15), I can pretty much guarantee that installing cameras to watch cameras will result not only in TWO sets of vandalized cameras, but cameras most likely vandalized in a vicious Office Space rendition of "Let's destroy the copy machine in a field with baseball bats and gangster rap"

Still laughing.....

[Spartacus @ Jan 24th 2007 1:56PM]

....brains that work.

Sorry if I stole your finish there Adam.

Anyone know if it's illegal to say drop a pillowcase over one? How far do you have to go to be considered a vandal?

[Josh @ Jan 24th 2007 1:57PM]

...

[J @ Jan 24th 2007 1:59PM]

Just do what my city is doing, they are requiring a police officer on each corner a cameras are located to validate the event for the picture.
Local government at its best.

[Ray @ Jan 24th 2007 2:10PM]

So who is going to guard the camera that watch the speed cameras? What is to stop someone from destroying them before they destroy the speed camera?

[Mike @ Jan 24th 2007 2:21PM]

Maybe the problem is that the citizenship resents the speed cameras in the first place?

Speed cameras are a perfect indication of a government who seems to forget that the government works for the people and not the other way around.

Since there have been a number of studies done which question the effectiveness of speed cameras it is reasonable to have open discussion within a community and have the public involved in the decision.

[Jonathan Fox @ Jan 24th 2007 2:29PM]

who's going to watch the CCTV cameras, watching the CCTV cameras, watching the speed cameras, watching the motorists?

[John B @ Jan 24th 2007 2:33PM]

"Whose going"? I don't know. Whose going is it? Mine? Yours? His? Maybe it belongs to the guy in the "Up Yours" t-shirt that you saw the other day...unless, of course, you meant to use the contraction of "who is", perchance?

And until someone comes up with omni-directional cameras with a combination of infrared, low-light, and motion detection sensors to view every possible approach angle even at night, there's no way to keep these devices completely safe from taxpayer retaliation. Oh, wait. There is a way: STOP USING THE DAMNED THINGS! These cameras do nothing more than make people out to be "assumed guilty until proven innocent". That's not the way it's supposed to work.

[AU @ Jan 24th 2007 2:45PM]

Have the CCTV cameras in the field of view of the speed cameras (assuming they are recording 24/7 in a loop and only saving captured violations to another location. Then each camera watches the other. :)

[s i d @ Jan 24th 2007 2:50PM]

..... then satellite monitoring for every one of those,
why don't they just install a mirror of unbreakable acryllic facing the speed camera should be cheaper right!

[0r3n @ Jan 24th 2007 3:06PM]

I wonder if they'll work off wireless signals like the digital signs that hang over our highways? If they do they can be hacked, uber easily.

[Dan @ Jan 24th 2007 3:20PM]

Each speed camera would have a CCTV camera on the same pole, pointed straight up at a mirrored cone (using the same pole) pointy side down. With the correct image correction software, the reflected image from the mirror cone would give the CCTV cam a good 360 degree view of the surroundings. There could be software that would alert if the light average the CCTV camera records changes quickly. Someone would have to check to see if it was a vandal or some other kinda beast. Something like the CCTV cam set up I described should be set up in front of banks, grocery stores, etc. (keep your hands off my colloquialisms, John).

[Ben @ Jan 24th 2007 3:56PM]

@Dan: That would make for an awesome target to shoot at.

[Dan @ Jan 24th 2007 5:37PM]

Gee, Ben, you were thinking that they would make the mirror cones out of glass? LOL!
Nope, the whole thing would be armored, and if the property owner is really sharp, he'll set up armored invisible mics so he can triangulate acoustically where the shot came from. Public whippings on TV! Yay!

[John B @ Jan 24th 2007 4:27PM]

:) But your colloquialisms are so cute!

{shudder} I feel dirty now.

[grable @ Jan 24th 2007 4:48PM]

And what if i wear a ski-mask when i vandalize these cameras?

[Maiden @ Jan 24th 2007 6:02PM]

CCTV cameras can be quite small and so can be positioned in disguise pretty high up on a pole or anywhere else on the roadside to watch over the more easily accessable and recognisable speed cameras - don't see much of an issue with that and it well might work!

[DCxRecon @ Jan 24th 2007 6:42PM]

I think it so funny that somebody would complain about speed cameras. I am a police officer myself and I would much rather charge into a rape in progress than sit at an intersection to write maybe 5-6 citations for speeding. The public learns the routine and speed traps are only temporarily effective. In my city we use them by schools and in intersections where accidents often result in fatalities and serious injury. If your child was struck by a speeding car and killed, you would be screaming for us not enforcing the speed limit enough in that area. Heres a crazy idea, obey the *&%$ speed limit jackasses!!!

[Gixser @ Jan 25th 2007 2:04AM]

DCxRecon: I agree with you...to a point. Speed limits in towns, villages and other hazardous areas should be obeyed for the safety of all. However, the speed camera's in the UK are an out of control money making scheme. I believe even some "high up" police officers have openly criticized the indiscrimate deployment of the cameras and many studies have questioned the ability of the cameras to fulfill their stated raison d'etre. i.e. The reduction of harm. In fact, certain studies state the cameras (in certain areas) are resulting in an increased number of accidents.

As an ex-pat living in CA I am completely stunned at the manner in which the cameras now infest the UK. Its absolutely disheartning to see the deployment of these cameras in the UK. I never thought the UK citizenery would stand for it. Huxley and Orwell should be spinning in their graves. No offense, but I don't want my beloved UK to be a police state.

[jjrr @ Jan 25th 2007 10:48AM]

"The public learns the routine and speed traps are only temporarily effective."

So if the public has "learned the routine" and now drives slow past that area, the trap is no longer effective? Is the point to get them to drive slower or to give them tickets?

[Dia @ Jan 25th 2007 5:04AM]

DCxRecon,

What a sanctimonious prick! You obviously have NO concept or understanding as to WHY speed cameras are so hated in the UK!

Are they sited neer schools... NO!
Are they sited where they can reduce casualties... NO!
Are they sited on completely clear (previously 70mph) stretches of road that have had their limit dropped to 40 or even 30mph for no real reason... YES!

The thing that most people miss though is that it's not even about the money. Oh yeah, I mean they're self proliferating and funding but it's about the control of people in the UK.

And here's the best bit. When you receive an NIP (Notice of impending prosecution) after being "camera'd" you are bound by law to reply stating who the driver was (you obviously have to sign it). You are then automatically guilty of the charge, without having seen evidence against you OR having had the right to defend yourself. If you don't sign it (with the intention of going to court and defending yourself) you are AUTOMATICALLY guilty of a higher crime (Refusing to give evidence).

In short nobody in the UK wants to fly around like mindless idiots safe in their metal boxes. But what we do want is a return to Police officers on our roads (you very rarely see one these days).

Speed cameras can't detect a drunken, drugged up, unlicensed, uninsured or just down right BAD DRIVERS!!!!

[DCxRecon @ Jan 25th 2007 10:01AM]

Sanctimonious prick you say. I defer to the fact that you are obviously pissed that the cameras have probably burned you for disobeying posted speed limits on probably more than one occasion. I have yet to see anybody whining that hasn't been hit in the pocket book. I have gotten three myself, and instead of blaming the camera, I have resigned myself to being more attentive to my personal driving habits. I tried to post a comment that would result in some provokation of intelligent conversation and transfer of opinion, but you instead choose to merely insult and deny facts. Your right, lets get those officers off the streets to fight real crime and instead put them to work writing you a citation and telling you that you were a bad boy today. I don't pretend to understand how these cameras have effected your community, and I can openly agree that if used in the manner which you have described, I would be in disagreement to their use on my city streets as well. However, you failed to understand the bulk of my argument sir, which is that when used in the right areas and not merely to increase a cities revenue, they are an effective tool for law enforcement in reducing their workload. In my city they have freed us up to combat gang activity, burglaries, robberies, assaults, thefts, rapes, and all other manners of "true-victim" criminal activity. Do the math my friend. oh, and slow down or pay the fine!!

[Revels @ Jan 25th 2007 5:10AM]

I predict a rise in the sales of paintball guns.

[ED @ Jan 25th 2007 5:40AM]

Australia already has these :D

y'know, since speed cameras are designed for detecting speeding cars and recording their plates, they aren't really cut out for simultaneously watching CCTV cameras, so having them watch each other isn't such a good idea.

[oddsends @ Jan 25th 2007 11:31AM]

Dcxrecon:
Although he was flamebaiting you, you seem to be missing the main point of his statement.

Where he lives cameras are not installed in locations where they would be most helpful and advantageous.
The system is rigged to prevent any form of protest.

This was how I read it. (please don't feed the flames)

[Herbert Bauer @ Feb 3rd 2007 4:57AM]

There is a new documentary about video surveillance (CCTV) in Britain coming out, and this time, the topic seems to be covered in a more critical way. There's a trailer online:

http://www.EveryStepYouTake.org

[Herbert Bauer @ Feb 3rd 2007 8:45AM]

There is a new documentary about video surveillance (CCTV) in Britain coming out, and this time, the topic seems to be covered in a more critical way. There's a trailer online:

http://www.EveryStepYouTake.org

[Hon T. @ Feb 8th 2007 8:24AM]

Thank you so much for the info regarding this product. I'll share this to my friends
so that they could get some infos. With this also, i would like
to share great ideas where dmc lumix lx2 panasonic
is related to and lots of great products. Thanks again!

[walk2k @ Feb 9th 2007 2:16PM]

Yes let's install cameras on every street corner. That will really reduce crime.

Also, install cameras in people's homes.

Hell, let's install cameras inside people's very heads! They could even be rigged to EXPLODE and KILL the person if they even THINK about committing a crime! That will really cut down on all that lousy paperwork which bogs down our fine police force and really cuts into their donut time!

[joshgerson @ May 17th 2007 4:56PM]

There's a website that sells a lot of very inexpensive closed caption television (cctv)
equipment at warehouse prices.
www.gvcards.com
If you know how to set the systems up yourself you can get all the parts from the site
for cheap: video capture cards, dvrs, cameras, coaxial cables everything.

I actually put together a 16 camera system myself for way less than if I had hired a
surveillance company to do it.

[Emily @ Jan 3rd 2008 4:30AM]

cctv camera really is nice for look after the store!
http://www.statow.com
MSN:[e-mail]