Yeah, the last thing I want my landlord doing is installing cameras on every approach to my front door and doing facial recognition and storing the footage for 60 days (yet, somehow, it's conveniently "not available" if a package of mine goes missing but it's for damn sure attached to the posting on our group discussion forum if someone's dog pees in the wrong spot).

Funny how 90% of anything landlords do--other than the existence and some light upkeep of the building--never seems to accrue to tenants.

My landlord installed cameras in the car garage a year ago after a series of car breakins. My car is in that garage, and I am not a thief, so why shouldn't I view improved security as a good thing?

If the camera were pointed at my door instead then I wouldn't like it much, but it isn't.

But the point of capturing package thieves was that it would be pointed at your door.

Beyond that, I don’t get why people want to capture footage of package thieves. It’s not like police actually go after these people. Has anyone here ever actually heard back, “yeah, we got the guy and here’s your packages!” Pretty rare as far as I hear.

In my building packages are left in the lobby. It would be pretty easy for package thieves to walk off with packages, but I've not heard of anybody having trouble with that here. From what I've seen package theft is more a problem for stand-alone suburban houses where packages are left on the front porch visible from the street. I think a lot of people living in such homes think there is value in cameras, and those cameras aren't being imposed on them by landlords. I don't know if there is any real value to those cameras though, and I suspect a better solution involves some sort of lockbox with a one-way door, similar to mail slots in front doors or bear-proof trashcans..

That is not a problem with surveillance though. Surveillance works to catch package thieves, it's that the government is dysfunctional and won't do the actual catching.

I do actually live in a complex with cameras on all the entrances. not sure where I fall between "complete apathy" and "somewhat approve". if I really wanted to get someone/something in without it being captured on camera, all I have to do is put it/them in the backseat of my car.

I'd actually love that (if it worked). The last apartment building I lived in in Seattle had packages stolen regularly from a locked room. It was an arms race between criminals breaking the glass window in the door to open it (wire added to the glass), destroying the lock (better lock installed), prying the door open with power tools (steel plates installed around the door perimeter). It felt like Russia in the 90ies (basically a 3rd world country) where people with anything to steal would install reinforced steel doors in their condos with some crazy locks.

One thing that did not work was adding lights and cameras, because in Seattle property crime is not crime. If the cameras were used to catch the guys and put them in jail for a long time, I'd be 100% for it. The only problem with surveillance in general is lack of choice/control of the watchers. In case of a small private organization like a n apartment building, this does not apply; surveillance is an unalloyed good IMHO.

Can you explain further?