CCTV everywhere but are we really safer?

I recently came across an article professing that we have been winning the war against crime with CCTV. The article like the majority of articles in the media on CCTV miss a very important point. And that is the fact that a CCTV system is first and foremost a deterrent and secondly a surveillance system through which evidence can be collected. This distinction is important because it means that as a deterrent it must be used in conjunction with other methods to ensure personal safety. The article suggested that the mere installation of CCTV cameras in the DLR trains automatically means that the DLR trains are safe. This is not true and misleading. Almost all CCTV systems never record normally in real time in the interest of saving space in the recording medium. Real time recording is defined as recording at 25 frames per second. This simply means that as with a camcorder or a DVD when you playback the tape/DVD etc you will see 25 separate frames each second. Anything higher than 25 frames per second makes no difference to our (human) eyes however anything lower will cause the pictures to flicker and appear jerky. Most CCTV systems in normal mode record at around 4 frames per second or less depending on the CCTV set up and how many cameras are in the system. When an alarm is triggered the cameras then switch to recording in real time. As we know, incidents on the trains such as pick pockets and robberies are so quick that no alarm is raised or by the time it is then the incident is over. Thus the footage that will be retrieved will be at 4 frames per second thus vital pieces of information such as a flash of the face is lost within the missing 21 frames. As such the robbery will enter the police's files of crimes that never will be solved. In the mean time the victims are left disappointed as the CCTV images are deemed useless. Even if the camera recorded the incident in real time there are other hurdles to consider. Is the lighting enough to identify the suspect? Is the angle of the camera wide enough to capture the incident? And most importantly does the CCTV system meet the correct standards BS 7958:2005 (UK standards not sure about the rest of the world) that dictate standards for collection, storing reviewing and analysing CCTV? If the CCTV system doesn't follow these standards then evidence is rendered useless as the CCTV system may not be operating within the law. Thus making a mockery of the CCTV system. Finally the handling of CCTV images is to be considered. Do the people that download evidence from CCTV system understand the process of 'chain of evidence'? I don't claim to be an expert in CCTV law but to me it seems media is giving the public a false sense of security. Shows like big brother and other reality shows only feed the frenzy in creating this 'real time' recording myth.

I don't deny the fact that CCTV can help in the fight against crime (even though it can be argued that as a deterrent it simply pushes the crime to another area) by providing a vital role (evidence) however I believe the message should be that personal protection through prevention should come first even if you are on the DLR train equipped with CCTV.
Saying this though the recent developments in IP technology, Digital Video recorders and compression techniques means that these problems are being addressed and we are progressing towards real time recording. So if you are reading this thinking your face is going to be in those missing 21 frames you'd better think again.