Something no one else has mentioned is what better uses could have been made out of this funding. You see, most of this camera network is fiber optic and some of it is wireless. Why spend $3mil putting in 160 cameras when we could have used this fiber optic/ wireless network to provide high speed internet to the whole city?! THAT would have been a much better investment, but I'm sure Comcast would have had a temper tantrum.
sehlat writes "From the Los Angeles Times comes word that in Lancaster, Pennsylvania, 165 public surveillance cameras are being set up to be monitored by a 'non profit coalition' of volunteers. The usual suspects, including 'the innocent have nothing to fear' are being trotted out to justify this, and the following quote at the end of the article deserves mention: 'But Jack Bauer, owner of the city's largest beer and soft drink distributor, calls the network "a great thing." His store hasn't been robbed, he said, since four cameras went up nearby. "There's nothing wrong with instilling fear," he said.'"