Police Require Problem Businesses To Get Video Surveillance

By: Ethan Ace, Published on May 31, 2016

Government intrusion or smart practice?

One city is requiring business that cause repeated problems to get video surveillance. In this note, we examine what they are doing and the pros and cons of this approach.

********** ********* ** ***** practice?

*** **** ** ********* business **** ***** ******** problems ** *** ***** surveillance. ** **** ****, we ******* **** **** are ***** *** *** pros *** **** ** this ********.

[***************]

Approach ********

*** **** ** ********* has ***** ********* ********** classified ** ******* ******** Properties [**** ** ****** available] ** ******* ************ systems. ******* ******** ********** are ***** ***** ******* three ***** ********** ** a ** *** ****** (noise, **** *******, *********, harassment, *** ****) ** two ******* ******* ** a ****, ********* ****, weapons, *******, ************, ***. These *************** *** ***** to **** *********** *** business **********, *** **** businesses *** ******** ** install ************.

**** ********** ** * nuisance, ****** *** ******* a **** ** ******* these ********* **** **********. Businesses *** ******** ** install ************ ** **** of **** **** (****:***** ************ *** *** shown ** *** ******** above). ****** **********/**** ******* is *** ********, **** that *** ****** ** installed *** *********.

********** *** ********** ***** *** improvement ** ******** *** ******* (via *****) *** ****** response ** ***** ********, and ***** ***** ********* being *******, ***** ** to $*,*** *** ****** for ********** ***********.

**********

***** *** *** ********* advantages ** ***** ************:

  • ******** *****:** **** ** ****** incidents, ********* ************ ******* may ******* ****** **** video ** ********* ***** none *** ********** *********.
  • **********: **** ******* ************* ********* and *******, ********* *** be **** **** ****** to ****** ****** ******. Some ******** ******** *** stop ******** **** ************** as **** ****** ***'* want *** ****** ** them ********.

*************

*******, ***** *** *** disadvantages *** ****** ***, as ****:

  • ********* ********* ************:****** *** ****** ****** in *** ******** ************ system **** *** **** to **** ***** ************, with ****** ******* ***** to ****** ****** *** positioning, ******* *******, ** professional ************, ****** *** system *********** ******* **** the *****.
  • ****** *** ********* ** maintain: *******, ****** ****** *** install ************ ** ***** to **** **** ***********, they *** *** ** motivated ** ******** * system **** **** ****** to *******. *******, ******, or ***** ********** *** fail, ******* ****** **** no ***** ** **** of *********. **** **** no *********** ************ *** codified ** *** ******** ordinance.

** * ********* ******** for *** ******** *****, some *********, **** ***** doing ** *****, *** simply *** **** *** notion **** ****** *** be "********" (****** **** view ****** ** *** required and ** ********) *** stop *********** *** ********, affecting *******. 

****

**** ** *** *****? Is **** ********** * good ****, ****** ** reduce ********* *** **** police *** ***** *****? ** is ** * *** idea, ********** ********* *** unlikely ** ******* *******?

**** ** *** **** and *******:

Comments (15)

Must require a minimum base line spec to be followed and approved by City through permit process.

Is that from a document?

From a UK perspective, this is the default for bars, clubs. Part of the licensing conditions will be the requirement for CCTV.

The issue is its not "to a standard" but its still a general requirement.

More regulations imposed by bureaucracy that has minimal understanding of what they are requiring always sounds like a good idea. Also love the idea of mandating an additional cost of doing business.

The Police tend to find its a waste of time just arresting, charging etc,its often the same people fighting / dealing or causing issues. Using the CCTV they tie in "pub watch" schemes and Police orders banning individuals from the venues or the areas.

To work you need the full circle, councils, businesses and Police to buy in. If you don't its seen as an extra cost and wont be used effectively :)

Businesses are required to install surveillance as part of this plan...

Is this actually part of the Milwaukee Nusiance Ordinance, or some creative police interpretation of the statute?

Well, it would appear to be a strong arm tactic of LE since there is no explicit remediation involving purchasing video surveillance anywhere in the very long statute.

Police must approve of a plan, if they don't they can put a 24/7 cctv truck watching the property and charge you for it.

So I assume that threat is enough to make property owners comply with the far less costly suggestion of self monitoring.

Overreach for sure, but couldn't be for a better cause!

note: I voted "just show me the results".

Detroit is saying they will eventually require businesses that are opened past 10pm to connect to the PD.

"Chronic Nuisance Properties are those which receive three minor complaints in a 30 day period..."

Required upon COMPLAINT? Not upon conviction?

What a great new lever to push! Three noise complaints in a month? Thousands of dollars in costs as well as the disruption of an installation?

In one case, a disgruntled individual made verifiably false official statements which successfully enlisted the coercive power of government to place demands upon business resources. Resultant government inspections cost about half a person-day. Proving the statement false required more than an additional person-day. Beyond these costs, no long term ill occurred, but those false claims had the (unrealized) potential to terminate the business.

The individual wasn't punished -- for him: mission accomplished.

If only I were a trunk slammer....

Step one: purchase a few dozen TracFones (burner phones)

Step two: Call in three noise complaints on each and every piece of city-owned property, forcing the city to install video surveillance.

Step three: Show up at City Hall with a van full of DVRs and Cameras.

Step four: Profit?

As a potential downside for the business owner, some clientele, even those doing no wrong, may simply not like the notion that police may be "watching" (though live view access is not required and is unlikely) and stop frequenting the business, affecting revenue.

Why would the clientele think the police were involved at all, and not just think that the business put in a security system on their own?

Related: I just saw this article about a town in Iowa expanding their surveillance ordinance to businesses other than convenience and liquor stores:

While the current ordinance essentially requires convenience stores and liquor stores to have cameras, the proposal would add banks and credit unions, carry-out restaurants, coin dealers, payday lenders, firearm dealers, hotels, cellular phone dealers, money transmission services, pawn brokers, pharmacies, scrap metal dealers and second-hand goods dealers.

Most of these businesses are likely to have systems anyway (which the police acknowledge in the article) but interesting that they require it by law for this many categories.

Video has not proven to be a deterrent for many of the named crimes listed above so that pro is out the window. Sounds like more uninformed government overreach.

This was mandated by the State of Florida in the late 80's for C-Stores and the like, open after 11PM along with lighting, clear windows, etc. Lots of pushback and rebellion from C-Stores until they could buy $300 DIY systems from Sams!

Another simple solution that might work. 

From the perspective of local municipalities… for private property deterrent alarm systems.   

No permits, no registration, no regulations, no requirements of any kind, except fines/fees for false police reports, paid by the caller.   Calls from monitoring firms for emergency police response to private property deterrent alarm systems will receive the same priority as all other citizens.  

Emergency police response only IF witness to a 911 type emergency.  Lower priority response would apply for all other "suspicion calls".  

Remote Video or remote audio could qualify as remote witness (but not ECV).  This would be motivation for private upgrade to audio/video witness technology if wanting the emergency service. 

Login to read this IPVM report.
Why do I need to log in?
IPVM conducts unique testing and research funded by member's payments enabling us to offer the most independent, accurate and in-depth information.

Related Reports

Casino Surveillance Pro Interview: James Lathrop on Feb 15, 2019
James Lathrop [link no longer available] has been working in casinos for almost 25 years. During that time, he says he has held "just about every...
Verified Response Discontinued in Silicon Valley San Jose on Feb 28, 2019
Almost all security alarms are false. This has driven some municipalities to require verified response before dispatching police. However, now San...
Manufacturer Favorability Guide 2019 on Jun 12, 2019
The 259 page PDF guide may be downloaded inside by all IPVM members. It includes our manufacturer favorability rankings and individual...
Kidnapping Victim Rescued With Video From Ring Doorbell Camera on May 24, 2019
A kidnapping victim was rescued within 24 hours, with the police crediting video from a Ring Doorbell camera as key to solving the case. A girl was...
ZeroEyes Gun Detection Startup on Jul 16, 2019
A gun detection video analytics startup, ZeroEyes, is being led by a group of 6 former Navy SEALs, aiming to "save lives" by using AI to assist...
New GDPR Guidelines for Video Surveillance Examined on Jul 18, 2019
The highest-level EU data protection authority has issued a new series of provisional video surveillance guidelines. While GDPR has been in...
Covert Elevator Face Recognition on Oct 24, 2019
Covert elevator facial recognition has the potential to solve the cost and complexity of elevator surveillance while engendering immense privacy...
France Declares School Facial Recognition Illegal Due to GDPR on Oct 31, 2019
France is the latest European country to effectively prohibit facial recognition as a school access control solution, even with the consent of...
Arcules CEO Retracts False GDPR Claim + Dahua and Milestone Claims Examined on Dec 03, 2019
Arcules CEO has retracted a false claim about his organization being a "fully compliant GDPR company" after IPVM reporting (Arcules CEO Threatens...
IPVM Opens 12,000 Sqft Testing Facility on Dec 16, 2019
IPVM is proud to announce the opening of the world's first video surveillance testing facility that will allow us to significantly expand our...

Most Recent Industry Reports

"Hikvision Football Arena" Lithuania Causes Controversy on Jan 24, 2020
Controversy has arisen in Lithuania over Hikvision becoming a soccer team's top sponsor and gaining naming rights to their arena, with one local MP...
Axis and Genetec Drop IFSEC 2020 on Jan 23, 2020
Two of the best-known video surveillance manufacturers are dropping IFSEC International 2020, joining Milestone who dropped IFSEC in 2019. The...
Multipoint Door Lock Tutorial on Jan 23, 2020
Despite widespread use, locked doors are notoriously weak at stopping entry, and thousands can be misspent on locks that leave doors quite...
Avigilon Shifts Cloud Strategy - Merges Blue and ACC on Jan 23, 2020
Avigilon is shifting its cloud strategy, phasing out its Blue web-managed surveillance platform as a stand-alone brand and merging it with its ACC...
Verkada Paying $100 For Referrals Just To Demo on Jan 22, 2020
Some companies pay for referrals when the referral becomes a customer. Verkada is taking it to the next level - paying $100 referrals fees simply...
Camera Analytics Shootout 2020 - Avigilon, Axis, Bosch, Dahua, Hanwha, Hikvision, Uniview, Vivotek on Jan 22, 2020
Analytics are hot again, thanks to a slew of AI-powered cameras, but whose analytics really work? And how do these new smart cameras compare to top...
Intersec 2020 Final Show Report on Jan 21, 2020
IPVM spent all 3 days at the Intersec 2020 show interviewing various companies and finding key trends. We cover: Middle East Enterprise...
Vehicle & Long Range Access Reader Tutorial on Jan 21, 2020
One of the classic challenges for access control are parking lots and garages, where the user's credential is far from the reader. With modern...
Clearview AI Alarm - NY Times Report Says "Might End Privacy" on Jan 20, 2020
Over the weekend, the NY Times released a report titled "The Secretive Company That Might End Privacy as We Know It" about a company named...
Favorite Camera Manufacturers 2020 on Jan 20, 2020
The past 2 years of US bans and sanctions have shaken the video surveillance industry but what impact would this have on integrators' favorite...