Editor:
Re: An eye on being proactive, safe, July 10 letters.
I really think letter-writer Bob Nicholas is highly exaggerating the amount of times people are photographed each day.
But even if he wasn’t, does it make sense to be photographed yet another time? I am sure it is going to be mostly the same people day after day, with some deviation in the summer.
I don’t understand why he is so preoccupied with “information for first responders.” To what? I live near the pier and I was not aware that there were so many accidents or whatever – except for the beached whale, and there was no absence of information then; everyone had their cellphones out and dispatched information out before the media.
Which is a reminder to the writer, that a majority of people carry cellphones and are capable of calling 911 and giving information, should something happen.
As for not having the luxury of spare cash to hire more bylaw officers – thank God. Do we need more personnel to hand out parking tickets or harass people who have dogs?
As for monitoring the pier, I wasn’t aware there was any threat. It seems everyone I have talked to about the cameras have had a negative response and have said things like, “what purpose would they have when most of the problems which occur in the summer are mainly down at the beach where youths party?” Or, “what is this, a police state?” Or, “isn’t there a better place to spend our money?”
What I think is that cameras in the downtown area on Stanley Cup night may have helped to identify offenders, but it sure didn’t help to prosecute them.
So, it makes me wonder, then, when I read on the Peace Arch News opinion page that there was such a high percentage of people for the cameras. (Editor’s note: in our June 20-27 online Question of the Week, 66 per cent of responders agreed with security cameras on the waterfront.)
D. Barros, White Rock
