One of the most vexing questions of our time is the question of privacy vs. security. Anyone who has to fly anywhere deals with this question every time they go to the airport. Security cameras have been proven to increase safety and security when employed properly. Still, the knowledge that one is being watched represents a significant invasion of privacy for some. Here in Phoenix, where a security camera played a large role in breaking a celebrated murder case, the debate has begun again.
Brandi Lynn Hungerford found out the hard way: We're all being watched.
Surveillance cameras, like the one that captured the Valley stripper checking into a Tempe hotel with millionaire businessman Rick Chance the night before he was found murdered, have become a pervasive fact of life, and not just in expected places such as banks, supermarkets and government offices.
Cameras also keep watch in schools, hotel lobbies, bars, convenience stores, entertainment venues and street corners.
They can deter crime, snap pictures of bad guys in the act and keep traffic flowing, but are they an invasion of privacy?
"The question is how much freedom are we willing to give up in exchange for perceived security?" said Alice Bendheim, an Arizona Civil Liberties Union board member.
Some defend cameras by saying, "If you didn't do anything wrong, you don't have anything to worry about," but what about the woman who runs to the store in hair curlers and doesn't want her picture taken?
"It's as simple as that," Bendheim said. "It's a source of embarrassment for relatively innocent behavior."
Even with these questions in mind, security cameras are coming into increasing use. It is now no longer uncommon for crimes- from the petty to the egregious- to be caught on tape, often catching the perpetrator(s) unawares. Some examples:
• Tempe police identified Hungerford after releasing a grainy image of a mystery woman who might have been among the last to see Chance alive. She was arrested Friday in Tacoma, Wash, and accused of murder, robbery and conspiracy to commit robbery. She is scheduled to be arraigned in Washington state today. Police on Sunday released no new details in the investigation.
• Last week in Abilene, Texas, a surveillance tape of a Wal-Mart parking lot captured a mother holding the side of a car and being dragged about 30 feet after an abductor snatched her month-old infant. The baby was found safe.
• In Phoenix in June, a security camera at Ligouri's Lounge recorded owner Antonio Ligouri's shooting death. Ex-convict James Taylor Sheffield was arrested.
Security provide a degree of certainty, preventing a suspect from claiming "you've got the wrong guy". Capturing a suspect on film in the midst of committing a crime can provide authorities with solid visual evidence that can make or break a case.
Of course, there is a difference between capturing a suspect on film and a law-abiding citizen just going about their business. In post-9.11 America, security has understandably become paramount. In our rush to make our world more secure, we should keep in mind our constitutional-guaranteed right to privacy. Where does an individual's right to privacy end and society's duty to protect the greater good begin? It could be as simple as remembering that when you go out in public, chances are good that you're being watched by someone somewhere.
Surveillance cameras have popped up from the sprawling beaches of Southern California to the monuments of Washington, D.C. Nearly 2,400 cameras focus on the streets of Manhattan. And at the 2001 Super Bowl in Florida, police videotaped everyone passing through the turnstiles, comparing the images to a database of known terrorists and wanted criminals....
Paul Eckstein, a Phoenix attorney, said that when people go to public places, they give up a certain amount of privacy.
"It may be annoying to show up on a surveillance camera, but it's a small price to pay for security," he said.
The important thing to consider, said Joseph Russomanno, an associate journalism professor at Arizona State University, is the places where people should expect privacy.
"Do we have a reasonable expectation of privacy in our own homes? Almost always, yes," Russomanno said. "If you ask that question and you are in a public place, such as a hotel lobby or the beach, then the answer is no."
It's a sea change for all of us who grew up before the era of miniaturized cameras. Now, it is much easier for virtually anyone to surreptitiously tape an individual or group in a public setting. It would seem that the burden has shifted to the individual. Of course, the argument that "if you're doing nothing wrong, you have nothing to worry about" could be raised here, but those of us who feel strongly about personal privacy are still uncomfortable at the prospect of being watched.
