Firefighters from six communities spent 13 hours in November fighting a large warehouse fire that destroyed a Presque Isle firm. Three days later, police arrested a paid, on-call firefighter, Timothy MacFarline, 25, and charged him with arson.

The State Fire Marshal’s Office made the arrest, according to the Bangor Daily News, after reviewing evidence and talking to witnesses. In addition, security cameras on nearby buildings had caught MacFarline in the act, sealing the arrest.

In another case last November, a camera helped police track down and arrest a man for looting a toy fund donation jar at a doughnut shop. Zackary Locke, 26, of Westbrook asked for an employment application at the store. While filling it out, the store’s camera apparently caught him tucking the donation jar under his coat before heading to the bathroom.

When he returned, the camera caught him placing the empty jar on the counter. In a classic case of dumb-and-dumber, Locke had used his real name and address on the job application, according to the Portland Press Herald, making it exceedingly easy for police to track him down.

These are, of course, uncontroversial examples of cameras helping serve as silent witnesses to crimes.

The more extensive use of cameras for law enforcement purposes has, however, proven controversial. Last year, for instance, Maine joined a handful of other states which have banned the use of standing cameras to catch drivers running red lights, partly because of misplaced concerns about privacy.

Generally, public places are just that, public. That means citizens do not have the same expectations of privacy they have in their own homes. 

Already, we probably appear on dozens of video cameras per day — when we visit the grocery store, pass through a Maine Turnpike toll booth or go to the bank — all without incident or problem.

Red-light cameras are being used effectively in other parts of the country, and the decision by the Maine Legislature to ban their use was a mistake that should be corrected.

At the time, criticism centered on the inability of a camera to exactly identify the person driving the vehicle at the time of the offense.

This should be a minor issue. First, the ticket should go to the owner of the car, who we suspect will quickly figure out which family member or friend was driving the vehicle at the time of the offense. Second, the Legislature should determine that no points be assessed against a driver’s license based upon a red-light camera offense.

Cameras should pose absolutely no problem to people who obey the law and stop for red lights. 

The red light ban was an error that we hope some future Legislature can correct. With budget and staffing cutbacks, police need all the help they can get prosecuting reckless, dangerous and illegal behavior.

[email protected]