Is There A Problem With Having Security Cameras at Osan Airbase’s Dorms?
That is what the popular Air Force blog JQ Public believes:
Last year, commanders at Osan Air Base in Korea decided to install high-definition, 24/7 surveillance cameras in the common areas of dormitories housing some 3,000 airmen. The rationale stated at the time was, generically, the safety of those airmen. Not litigated at the time was whether the cost of the new capability would be offset by the marginal gain in safety, but such debates are rarely entertained in such an authoritarian system. Ideas are presumed valid, good, and lawful the instant they gain command sponsorship.
Fast forward a year and the system has predictably loosed from its “safety” moorings and morphed into a tool for the control and criminalization of the base’s junior airmen. Over the past few weeks, we’ve received several reports that commanders are not using video footage merely to aid in criminal investigations after a report of wrongdoing, but are proactively reviewing all footage to scan for unreported wrongdoing.
For many, the new policy feels like pre-emptive criminalization — demonstrating that the chain of command is not genuinely concerned about safety or well-being so much as it cares about nailing airmen for innocuous or minor transgressions that would normally fall well below the threshold of official notice. [JQ Public Blog]
You can read much more at the link and it is an interesting debate. However, overall I like the cameras in regards to being a tool that can be used to collect evidence if a crime in the dorms was to occur. However, I don’t think the cameras should be used as a substitute for leadership presence in the dorms. Instead reviewing hours of video tape leaders should instead be walking in the dorms and communicating with their troops instead.
… 24/7 surveillance cameras in the common areas of dormitories housing some 3,000 airmen
There would be a problem if the policy makes presumptions on who should be surveilled and who shouldn’t.
Are the problems only in junior airmen dormitories? Sure, you might catch some young airmen staggering down the halls, apparently intoxicated, and want to charge him with underage drinking. However, you could also just as likely capture evidence of a senior NCO or officer accused of an incident who appears to be “drunker than 10,000 indians.”
This isn’t any different than a hotel having security cameras. The cameras are in public areas. The footage is recorded. If you don’t want to get nailed for committing an infraction, then don’t commit one.
We had an incident at the base here a while back during an exercise. A female pilot was staying in lodging and reported an unknown assailant entered her room and attacked her. Her shirt was ripped. It led to a big investigation and the city CSI team became involved (since, ostensibly, the assailant had come from off base). Forensics determined she had made it up and ripped her own shirt. Also, it was found that she had a history of making sexual assault claims at other bases. So, they put in video cameras. A couple of months ago another incident happened! This time a dependent spouse was “raped” in lodging. Fortunately it was all caught on camera as a portion of the “rape” occured in the public laundry room (the oral portion of the movie started in the parking lot, also in front of a camera). Though they finished up in the guy’s (private) room it was pretty obvious the whole thing was consensual. But when the husband found out the woman claimed rape. So without those cameras, with that guy’s word against hers, he would have probably ended up in the pokey.
The growing surveillance society should really improve behavior… once society catches up with the fact they are being surveilled. So there’s that.
Within the social contract in a surveillance state, there should be the concept that it will not be used to seek out violations that do not cause problems or generate reasonable complaint.
…as so many well-intentioned laws were designed to solve problems but have become their own enforcement industry even if the original problem does not exist.
Underage drinking is a perfect example… enacted to protect the less mature from using alcohol… yet needlessly hassling a well-behaving 20 year-old while excusing a 21 year azzhole.
Law enforcement in general has a habit of chasing easy, clearly defined, and quantified goals, such as enforcement of underage drinking ages and maximum speeds, rather than ambiguous disruptive actions and subjectively dangerous behaviors.
The surveillance state provides a perfect environment to chase unnecessary enforcement goals at the expense of actions that would actually benefit society.
As expected, Osan seems to be a good example to demonstrate the petty shytbaggery of those given a bit of power and the tools to exploit it.
Considering dorms at other bases have had cameras for the past 6-15 years, it about time Osan caught up with this. Then again, having cameras in the dorms wont really help those that stay off base.