The Cost of Ivy League Schooling at Brown

 3000+ administrators for 7000 students, and yet they can't afford video cameras  -- https://www.facebook.com/watch?v=4076255919260590

First of all, the report I read was that Brown has security cameras/video, many were found working OK but some outside of older areas/buildings weren't working.

How many times have we seen/heard about cameras/video surveillance non-functioning when a crime is committed that could have captured useful images?  This must be something out of sight-out of mind, like our home smoke detectors.  At least those begin to 'chirp' when batteries are waning.

So it isn't likely a matter of not ever having them installed, but upkeep being "out of sight, out of mind."  Sad, especially since this occurs over and over and over.

Surely some technology exists to warn somebody when surveillance devices go on the blink.

Candy

First of all, without dedicated security staff --and I mean several people whose jobs are solely to monitor surveillance devices--there's no way that the shooter's intent could have been divined and law enforcement (or armed security) summoned in time to stop him.

Second, in any large areas with security cameras, the concept is that the areas surveilled by the individual cameras overlap, so that the problem you mention or an issue with angles or directions doesn't create "dark areas." Even so, it's quite easy for a person aware of the cameras to evade them.

Third, given that in the US, it's easier to get a gun that can kill a hundred people than it is for a grade schooler to buy a Slurpee, it's a fantasy to think that even with intense and constant scrutiny, a person with intent to shoot someone can be identified as such. Tens of thousands of people enter and leave a college campus every day. How on earth could every one of them be evaluated as a threat or not?

Fourth, even large and famous universities struggle with funding, and campus security is one of those functions that everyone wants but nobody is willing to pay "extra" for. So if corners are cut, they'll be cut on things like...periodic maintenance of surveillance equipment. But in fact, any surveillance system that wasn't bought at a Bozo Mart going out of business sale will at the very least, inform its users when signals are lost, batteries are low, motors that move cams are stuck, that sort of thing. One business sector that we all know about that uses surveillance equipment avidly is casinos. I've been up in the eye in the sky rooms. There are continual automated status reports from all the cameras. Those movies where Spy Man or Doug Diesel or Die Head disable one or more security cameras and none of the bad guys notice and no warnings go off are full of poopoo caca.

Fifth, to institute an environment where everyone is constantly surveilled and access to campuses and buildings is severely limited would pretty much obviate the entire ethos of universities.

Sixth, the shooting may have been caused by a MAGA misinterpreting the message "Kill all Brown people." So, a one-off, at least.

Seventh, whatever Fakebook drool Miller posted (I never watch it), it wasn't out of any concern for what happened; rather, it was yet another pretext for him to start an argument and make snide comments about liberals.

  Lying Lewis's method of dispensing the truth is to make shit up and ignore factual content posted by others.

The original post said Brown "can't afford video cameras."  True or false, I don't know.  But it brings up those issues, the unfortunate instances when security cameras could have revealed, after the fact, useful images that might have helped with an investigation were they functioning as intended.

It is gut wrenching to me when brought out that 'security cameras were in place but not working.' 

Casinos may be one of a few businesses where humans actually monitor the monitors in real time.  Or prisons, maybe.  Banks?  

It's a David Miller post copied from the rectum of Facebook, so its veracity is, um, suspect...but the source aside, I think you know that the statement that a university can't afford video cameras is patently absurd. Miller is just trolling.

As I said in my earlier, longer post, the chances of this shooting being averted were near zero and would still have been that had every video camera been working and another forty thousand were also in operation. Think about it. Can a video camera tell if someone is carrying a gun? Doubtful. Can a video camera read someone's intent? No. Can a video camera detect if a person "belongs there" or not? Maybe at a secure facility with sophisticated facial recognition technology, but a university campus? No way. Far too many people come and go.

But to address investigation after the fact rather than prevention, which seems to be your concern and I neither know nor care what Miller's pseudo-concern was, the sheer volume of foot traffic as well as the difficulty of positively identifying people (who aren't always helpfully looking at the cameras) would have made any investigation based on camera footage consume thousands of man-hours and might not have been all that helpful no matter what. It's telling that the shooter was eventually identified via Reddit commentary.

Even with the knowledge that SOMEBODY who had been on campus (and had entered a certain building, presumably) between the hours of X and Y had shot those victims wouldn't have been much help. There would have been no way to rule out 99% of the people who were recorded/seen on camera just from those images. And tracking down and questioning every one of the thousands of people who passed within camera range during that period is not only a functional impossibility, it would consume far too many resources to try.

Security cameras don't do much after the fact in crowded outdoor public spaces, such as university campuses. And surely anyone entering a building with the intent to do harm would make sure his face is obscured (hoodie, etc.). So don't take Miller's troll-bait. The Facebook bozo whose post he copied may be stupid enough to genuinely think that 100% functional surveillance would have averted this tragedy. But we know that Miller doesn't think so.

 Bullshit

I'll try once more.   Nobody (certainly not me) is saying that cameras can prevent a shooting or other crime in progress, or summon intervention to nab the perp in action.  But they can, and have provided images that can, and have, aided investigations, AFTER THE FACT.  Are they ALL focused in the right direction?  Not likely.  Do perps know about them?  In some cases probably.  Can perps know about or shoot out or otherwise disable a camera?  Of course. 

Were I to own a store, or a building of any sort where goods or human safety were at risk, and I cared enough to install camers in the first place, and I read or saw on TV just one report of a crime being investigated where video cameras were in place but weren't working and POSSIBLY could have captured a useful image or two, especially were it a high profile assault or kidnapping that made national news, getting my own cameras functional would be my first priority, cost be damned.

If you read my earlier responses, you'll see that I realize that you're talking about investigation, not prevention. I neither know nor care what Miller is talking about, since we can be sure that the only purpose of his post was to make snide comments about liberals and hopefully, start an argument.

I totally agree with you that a fully functional surveillance network is desirable. 

  Your asinine retort concerning what I posted has no value since you did not view the link to the post I made.