<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Use CCTV cameras to catch criminals first say Westminster Labour</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.labourmatters.com/westminster-labour/use-cctv-cameras-to-catch-criminals-first-say-westminster-labour/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.labourmatters.com/westminster-labour/use-cctv-cameras-to-catch-criminals-first-say-westminster-labour/</link>
	<description>Labour news direct from the newsmakers</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 31 Jan 2012 11:06:15 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: PaulJoseph</title>
		<link>http://www.labourmatters.com/westminster-labour/use-cctv-cameras-to-catch-criminals-first-say-westminster-labour/#comment-381</link>
		<dc:creator>PaulJoseph</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 10 Mar 2010 23:48:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.labourmatters.com/?p=2862#comment-381</guid>
		<description>CCTV cameras are NOT effective in fighting crime according to all available evidence. See

http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2009/08/on_londons_surv.html

(read the comments)

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/8219022.stm

As an uncommitted voter I am not impressed with this message:

Stop collecting millions of pounds in revenue with existing cameras and install cameras in places where crime MIGHT be committed. 

Does this make sense? Would it be an idea to pay for more cameras, if they are really needed, from revenue from existing cameras? 

Paul Joseph
Westminster</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>CCTV cameras are NOT effective in fighting crime according to all available evidence. See</p>
<p><a href="http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2009/08/on_londons_surv.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2009/08/on_londons_surv.html</a></p>
<p>(read the comments)</p>
<p><a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/8219022.stm" rel="nofollow">http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/8219022.stm</a></p>
<p>As an uncommitted voter I am not impressed with this message:</p>
<p>Stop collecting millions of pounds in revenue with existing cameras and install cameras in places where crime MIGHT be committed. </p>
<p>Does this make sense? Would it be an idea to pay for more cameras, if they are really needed, from revenue from existing cameras? </p>
<p>Paul Joseph<br />
Westminster</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

