Total surveillance would be watching people all the time, indoors too aka Fahrenheit. It would absolutely end 95% of crime.
reply> It would absolutely end 95% of crime
replyIt might solve much of existing crime, but that’s not the same as a net reduction in crime.
Bribery, blackmail, and coercion would just fill the crime vacuum.
It would only solve crime if the police actually followed up on all areas where surveillance pointed out crime. Surveillance itself can't arrest a criminal.
replyAgain by this logic prisons should be free of crime, rather than hotbeds of it. Insisting that something is true because it makes sense to you doesn’t make it true.
replyThis assumes the people watching actually cared about stopping crime enough to step in and arrest the offenders.
replyTo echo the topmost comment's point, you can't convince the public that law enforcement actually cared when the elites who flew on the Lolita express to the child rape island are facing zero consequences while urinating on the side of a highway gets you put on a list forever.