Yes, but that article is talking about both public and privately owned cameras. You said public cameras. Unless you want the government to ban private CCTV the large number of private CCTV cameras in the UK isn't really much to do with the government.
Also that statistic on its own doesn't show that the UK has the highest rate unless you have number from other (similarly wealthy) countries to compare it to.
CCTV cameras are mandated with new licences for pubs, bars and clubs. The police often force you to have X cameras or your licence will be denied. So the private/public distinction is fairly meaningless.
In my home city, Nottingham, because it's very hard to get a new licence at the moment, the police have such clout I heard of ridiculous scenarios where they started asking for 7 or 8 cameras in small restaurants in quiet areas of town.
It's still not meaningless because the ease of access for the government is drastically different. E.g. having council employed (sometimes) camera operators watching live feeds vs. some owner that is unmotivated to deal with them unless something happens that they need evidence of.
Yeah, a lot of these places are still old school. They might have a DVD recorder in the back office that rewrites after x hours/days. So its not "we mandate them to buy the hardware and that we have access to at all times". Obviously places can do that with firms like ADT, just saying it isn't a clear cut government ploy.
To be fair, as an ex-Nottingham resident, putting a CCTV camera up made life better for us. There were crack whores jacking up on heroin on my doorstep because there was a light there. Eventually I took the bulb out.
Mapperley Road for reference. There were even crack whores on Google Street View on there for a couple of years...
Mapperley Road leading to St. Anns, one of the worst council estates in England?
So not that surprising. Also Mapperley Road leads onto Forest Road East, which at least used to be a notorious red light district and always have really skanky prostitutes hanging out on it.
You lived on a really bad street.
I lived 10 minutes down the road from you about 8 years ago, Zulla road. That area was really nice, although they'd recently finished a big campaign to stop robberies in the area due to, you guessed it, St Ann's residents.
I really don't think one extreme problem area should be compared to a restaurant in Hockley where all the hipsters hang out.
I think it should be compared. Hockley is right at the bottom of "Wells Road" at the arse end of St Annes and was a notorious shit hole in the early 00s.
Genuinely surprised they managed to clean the place up.
it's sad that the solution for this society problems are cameras in your place.
that you are thankfull for this total surveillance is fucked up.
I hope UK leaves EU soon. it is a rotten place and we should prevent it's dystopian development to spread.
Hell, I don't think even the foaming-at-the-mouth UKIP eurosceptics try to claim the UK turned into a surveillance society due to the EU. Neither did the EU ask the UK to lead the global surveillance efforts in Europe through GCHQ. Not to mention the fact that it is David Cameron himself who is trying to get out of the EU's human rights framework.
I may be wrong, but I read GP as being a citizen of some other EU country wanting rid of the UK. And I can hardly blame them, even as a UK citizen. Our government shows an utter disdain for Europe, mostly so that they can use it as yet another bogeyman to distract people from everything they're doing.
Oh, indeed, this makes sense. Well, if that makes you feel better, most EU countries seem to be on the same nefarious track when it comes to global surveillance, and I don't see this kind of cooperation change in the future, whether or not there is a Brexit.
That's not a solution, it just moves the problem along.
Actually, if you define the solution narrowly as "undesirables on my doorstep" I suppose it is a solution; but since the wider problem is resolved by reducing the pool of undesirables for any doorsteps, only in the very narrowest sense.
The distinction is certainly not meaningless, because they can't be used for surveillance - the footage of private cameras is only useful after the fact.
Also that statistic on its own doesn't show that the UK has the highest rate unless you have number from other (similarly wealthy) countries to compare it to.