Should The Surveillance Be Done in Public Areas Essay

Should The Surveillance Be Done in Public Areas - Essay ExampleIntroduction of charge camera has significantly changed the security issues around the globe. Surveillance chiefly involves paying close and frequent attention to someone or something (Tavani, 2001). This is usually for a circumstance reason, whether private or popular and for a certain period of time. In addition command usually takes many forms, such as listening and comprehend devices and wiretapping, but in this case, it is important to focus on surveillance involving cameras, placed in either public or private areas. From when you walk out of your house, in most cities, you are creation watched (Parenti, 2003). This is because the cameras are now installed in major city streets, gas stations, retail shops and transport systems such as trains. The use of surveillance cameras doubled in the aftermath of the 9/11 terrorist attacks in New York City. These prompted frantic efforts, to curb terrorism, a major threat to security in this century. thither is a need to identify the ethical motive of surveillance cameras. Historically, the idea of watching the public by a select few, especially those who control us politically and economically can be traced to the Panoptical (Foucault, 1977). This was a kind of prison design, built in such a way that a single bear could watch the prisoners in a single gaze. This is a broad way induces prisoners in a state of conscious and permanent knowledge that they are being watched. Foucault saw surveillance as productive machinery of continuous mind control, which is somehow what current surveillance cameras represent. Therefore, what the papers seek to argue the need for new ethics in the surveillance camera industry, because of the reasons below. This is because surveillance when done sortly and for the right reasons and people, individuals involved end up surrendering apart of their civil liberty to privacy, for the sake of public security. Closed -circui t televisions when placed in public areas, give people a sense of security, reduce crime by up to five percent. Up to 90 percent of respondents saw no problem in having such surveillance in public areas. Surveillance done in the above manner, by the correct agencies, can be said to be ethical and legal. On the other hand, there is need to look at the ethics of surveillance cameras, by tone at who does it and for what they will be used to do, therefore the ethics of surveillance cameras. Ethics is defined by the BBC online, as a system of moral principles. This is what is effectual for the individual and society, therefore is responsible for holding the society together. The ethics of surveillance cameras therefore seeks to look at the circumstances surrounding the use of such cameras, and exactly how much harm can be done if it finds itself in the wrong hands. Foucault, 1994, referred to surveillance carried out by the government as being watched by big brother, which would enco urage good behavior amongst the general population, due to the fact that people would think that they are being watched, even when they are not. As ahead stated, this discussion is not that surveillance cameras should go, rather that it should be done in public areas, by the right people. The main areas in a persons life most affected by surveillance cameras are trust, privacy, and autonomy (Parenti, 2003). First, surveillance cameras usually infringe on a persons privacy, in the main when it is done in their private time and within their private property. Concerns on privacy have been here since way back, and have increased with continuous usefulness in technology.