I literally just said it solved my problem. Most casual crime is opportunistic, and cameras and lights add uncertainty to the opportunity. Most people aren't willing to chance the camera for an opportunistic score.
I literally just said it solved my problem. Most casual crime is opportunistic, and cameras and lights add uncertainty to the opportunity. Most people aren't willing to chance the camera for an opportunistic score.
I’m not sure how it’s so hard for people replying to you, to understand, cameras are a deterrent. Crime is often opportunistic. I grew up in 80s Miami, the common tactic was knock on your front door to see if anyone’s home, when no one answers, they’d kick in the backdoor.
Cameras deter crime. Not ALL crime. Criminals aren’t stupid and will simply go burgle someone that isn’t recording.
> knock on your front door to see if anyone’s home, when no one answers, they’d kick in the backdoor.
So now your front camera has somebody with an unidentifiable hoodie knocking and your back camera has somebody with an unidentifiable hoodie kick in the backdoor. How did the camera help exactly? Is the police really going to find somebody with this almost-invisible stain of dirt on the sleeve of the hoodie? Or are they rather going to say "oh well we'll keep an eye out" and that's the last you hear? My experience is the latter. Now you lost the worth of what they took plus all the money spent on your camera gear and the time setting it up.
Or are you saying doesn't matter, the deterrent is enough? Well then put up a fake camera for a fraction of the price. Works offline too.
> Most casual crime is opportunistic, and cameras and lights add uncertainty to the opportunity. Most people aren't willing to chance the camera for an opportunistic score.
People have been stealing things from stores which have had cctv for decades. Your premises are manifestly false.
The reason why people steal from stores is because there are rarely consequences unless you get caught in the act. Most stores won't file a report over a can of tuna, it'll get chalked up to losses and prices will go up on tuna cans to cover the loss, as it's low friction.
Someone's private property getting trespassed/burgled will have a much higher chance of resulting in legal consequences.
The question isn’t whether people EVER steal when there is a camera, the question is whether they will still LESS.
Just because something doesn’t work 100% of the time doesn’t mean it can’t be effective.
It's a good thing I don't live in a store, then
This comment used to say something about shooting people on sight, which perfectly tracks with the demo that owns these cameras.
No it didn't.
I know you think you're being clever but in a week this archive will have your original comment https://hackerbook.dosaygo.com/?view=news&p=1&year=2026
Sure, theft still happens, but I don't see why home theft wouldn't be reduced by the presence of CCTV or other video surveillance.
CCTV doesn't work well when people feel like nobody is going to bother to check its footage (e.g. pocketing a $2 drink from a big-box department store). But when it comes to homes, there are much higher chances of captured footage being used and examined, so it may cause opportunistic burglars to look at other houses instead.
Or it tells the burglar there is sth valuable that's being protected and to make sure to cut the fiber before they do anything.