Brown Case Shows Need for Street Cameras

[Rikurzhen]

Exactly !! There was just a Federal Case where they charged a lady for violations of the Intl. Chem. Weapons treaty for using caustic kitchen materials to burn a neighbor's hand.. It gets escalated rather quickly these days.. All they need is an EXCUSE to pressure you into cooperating or testifying in some case because you were coming home from Dunkin Doughnuts when something evil was caught on camera..

How about the Times Square Bomber - a car bomb is now the equivalent of a nuclear bomb or a chemical bomb or a biologic weapon. He was charged with attempting to use a weapon of mass destruction. A car bomb is no more a weapon of mass destruction that Adam Lanza's rifle was a weapon of mass destruction. Killing a lot of people is not the proper criteria. Nuclear, chemical and biologic weapons are in a class unto themselves, that's why we passed special laws to deal with these Weapons of Mass Destruction. A car bomb, give me a break.

 

[Politico]

I agree. Big Brother already has its intrusive tentacles in our lives. It could be that the cops could have more cameras in their cars though. I'm not fond of the "1984" mentality.

That..

 

[dblack]

Unecessary if you have a DNA national database. Your body fluids are your already built-in "implant". Why add more ?

There's no opportunity for live monitoring with the DNA database.

 

[Mathbud1]

It's not feasible to have a camera covering every square foot of every street in every city. The cost would be huge. You are talking vandal resistant cameras with sufficient capabilities to handle dramatic changes in lighting and obstacles. You are talking secure storage sufficient for potentially thousands of cameras. You are talking thousands of man hours to calibrate and aim all the cameras. You are talking infrastructure to transport the video to a central repository or significant investment in equipment for "edge storage" which is to say storage at the camera (battery backup to keep the storage and camera running when power is out, heating and cooling to keep the electronics functioning in the winter and summer, weather tight and vandal resistant containers, etc. etc.)

The "cop cams" idea is a lot more feasible and desireable in my opinion. It serves the dual purpose of protecting the cop and protecting citizens from the cop.

Say, how about we do one better and come up with a "pol cam" and make all politicians wear one 24/7. Get a little more honesty on the hill maybe. Lol.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Liberals need to be implanted with a combination GPS Chip and behavior modification devise

 

[Esmeralda]

There are street cameras all over the UK. I think it is a good idea. In a situation like the Brown shooting, we would have a much better chance of knowing what happened. If you are not doing anything wrong, a street camera should not bother you at all.

 

[dblack]

There are street cameras all over the UK. I think it is a good idea. In a situation like the Brown shooting, we would have a much better chance of knowing what happened. If you are not doing anything wrong, a street camera should not bother you at all.

Indeed. Anyone who does object to this is clearly up to no good!

 

[jasonnfree]

It's not feasible to have a camera covering every square foot of every street in every city. The cost would be huge. You are talking vandal resistant cameras with sufficient capabilities to handle dramatic changes in lighting and obstacles. You are talking secure storage sufficient for potentially thousands of cameras. You are talking thousands of man hours to calibrate and aim all the cameras. You are talking infrastructure to transport the video to a central repository or significant investment in equipment for "edge storage" which is to say storage at the camera (battery backup to keep the storage and camera running when power is out, heating and cooling to keep the electronics functioning in the winter and summer, weather tight and vandal resistant containers, etc. etc.)

The "cop cams" idea is a lot more feasible and desireable in my opinion. It serves the dual purpose of protecting the cop and protecting citizens from the cop.

Say, how about we do one better and come up with a "pol cam" and make all politicians wear one 24/7. Get a little more honesty on the hill maybe. Lol.

I like it. Cams and recordings of politicians, absent any public funded only electioneering.

 

[jasonnfree]

The idea that we should submit to constant surveillance because "if you aren't a criminal you have nothing to hide" is a terrible slippery slope. Why would cops need a warrant to search our car? If you haven't done anything wrong, why wouldn't you let them search it? Why would you need a lawyer? If you haven't done anything wrong, you should be fine talking with the police.

Might even lead to cams in houses, like 1984.

 

[WinterBorn]

Indeed. Anyone who does object to this is clearly up to no good!

I disagree. I think that having cams all over our streets leads to abuses, as was discussed in the link I posted.

 

[dblack]

Liberals need to be implanted with a combination GPS Chip and behavior modification devise

It's the only way to ensure truly civil society. Only miscreants would object.

 

[WinterBorn]

The only way to insure a truly civil society and to make sure that everyone is truly safe is to remove all freedoms.

A free society is never a safe place to live.

 

[flacaltenn]

There are street cameras all over the UK. I think it is a good idea. In a situation like the Brown shooting, we would have a much better chance of knowing what happened. If you are not doing anything wrong, a street camera should not bother you at all.

Until YOU show up in a video that's under investigation. Then when the questioning starts to get difficult and you're thinking you might need a lawyer, we can repost your comments to you in the detention facility.. You would be COMPELLED to give statements, access to personal information, and then ALL bets are off how much of your life this will consume. We are ALL guilty of something even if it's keeping bomb making materials in your garage. Or records of searches on your computer. And just being NOTICED carries a risk of being probed by a State that can easily disrupt your life -- even if you ARE innocent.

 

[hjmick]

Street cameras? Why stop there? Let's skip that crap and go straight to subdermal tracking implants...

 

[Peach]

I think we all have a right to privacy and humans need that. They have such a thing as police cameras police officers can wear. It records video and audio. That seems a more private and less costly way to do things.

And many public buildings have cameras, but everywhere? No, the right to privacy is breached, I may live on a street, want to leave my windows open, do not want scratching my leg recorded, if you get my drift.

"Those who give up liberty for temporary security....."

 

[saveliberty]

And many public buildings have cameras, but everywhere? No, the right to privacy is breached, I may live on a street, want to leave my windows open, do not want scratching my leg recorded, if you get my drift.

"Those who give up liberty for temporary security....."

Not exactly, but I am certain pictures would help.

What is that buzzing sound?

 

[protectionist]

The idea that we should submit to constant surveillance because "if you aren't a criminal you have nothing to hide" is a terrible slippery slope. Why would cops need a warrant to search our car? If you haven't done anything wrong, why wouldn't you let them search it? Why would you need a lawyer? If you haven't done anything wrong, you should be fine talking with the police.

There is quite a difference between searching a car or home, and just having a camera see and record you out in PUBLIC places. Cars and homes are not PUBLIC. They are private. By the same token, places that street cameras monitor are PUBLIC, not private.

 

[protectionist]

What's Wrong With Public Video Surveillance? | American Civil Liberties Union

Interesting article about the problems with public video cameras.

Without us having to read it all, what's the jist of it ?

 

[Rikurzhen]

The problem people have with your love of the surveillance state is that the records of surveillance are permanent and this gives government the ability to track everyone.

Already police cars are using automatic license plate scanners tied in with GPS coordinates and every single car on the road within sight of that police plate scanner is having it's location entered into a database.

You're arguing that the cop can see you on the road and the cop can't be asked to close his eyes and not see you in public. Well, a cop can't remember everyone he sees and he can't form a searchable public record which can reconstruct your every move in public. There's a difference in what it means to be in public when one is simply meeting strangers and when government keeps a freaking record of everything you do and everywhere you go and can reconstruct your movements, both by car and by facial recognition technology.

I can't stop a cop from seeing my drive on the road, but it's none of the cop's business to know that every Thursday morning I drive to see my mother and that every Monday at lunch I go to a particular restaurant and that every Wednesday evening I give a female coworker a ride home, etc.

 

[WinterBorn]

Without us having to read it all, what's the jist of it ?

It lists some reasons why cameras all over are not a good idea and that they do not have the effect you think they will.