Thank you for your thoughtful reply to my question: “The addition of 105 cameras to the 60 we already have will ‘make Lancaster the most-watched city of its size in the nation.’ What do you think of this?”
I have no problem with surveillance cameras in public places, as in commercial areas where one has no expectation of privacy, but I feel that cameras should be installed in relatively crime-free residential neighborhoods only if a majority of the property owners in the neighborhood request it.
The argument that any privately-owned property that can been seen with the naked eye may legally be video-taped 24/7 is not valid in that, with surveillance cameras, the property owner does not know when and if his property is being watched.
If someone stands across the street pointing a camera at the property, the owner knows that the property is being watched and photographed. But with a surveillance camera, the film is being viewed in a distant building by a person or persons not visible to the property owner. The property owner may consider this to be a violation of Constitutional rights to privacy.
