Brown Case Shows Need for Street Cameras

[protectionist]

You are STILL overselling the benefits. We've had cameras in banks for ages and the number of bank robberies is NOT going down. It only means that when the guy is loading your TV out of your home, he's gonna look like a good approximation to Cher.. I've been close to theatre in my life and at 50 feet -- I can make an 18 yr old boy look like Hillary Clinton. And I've also been on the cutting edge of facial recognition which is nowhere NEAR being effective at those distances and lighting conditions.

And there is no cure for your love of govt surveillance. Once you have the attention of the authorities, they can make an innocent person's life a living hell. Just being in the proximity of a crime and showing up on those videos (if they are ever reviewed by a human) will get someone to your door. Which is the ONLY excuse they need to compel you to testify or make a statement whether you care to or not. And if those "bomb-making materials" are in your garage and the crime involves a bomb --- you --- Mr Law and Order will have some "splaining to do" AFTER they subpoena all of your computer, phone, and financial records if you don't WANT to cooperate..It will be LEAgents carrying that stuff out of your abode.. AFTER they shoot your dog..

You have no idea the type of out of control surveillance and justice state we are dealing with today..

I have PLENTY of IDEA about it, and HERE is where that idea comes from >>

In Chicago, the use of street cameras has proven to be very successful in fighting crime. This technology used remote-controlled and viewable cameras called Police Observation Devices - commonly referred to as PODs - positioned to view and record potential crime in high-risk areas. Given the success of the pilot program, in September 2003, Mayor Daley announced that a new phase of PODs would be deployed throughout the City. Subsequently, the number of PODs increased from 30 to 80 by December 2003.

Statistics showed the use of POD technology had been a very effective tool in the fight against gangs, guns and drugs. The Department looked at crime incidents and calls for service in the areas immediately adjacent to the PODs. While narcotic-related calls declined by 76%, serious index crimes declined by 17%, while non-index, quality-of-life crimes declined by 46%. Focusing on just narcotic-related crime revealed a decrease of 76%.

https://portal.chicagopolice.org/portal/page/portal/ClearPath/About CPD/POD Program

NOTE: I tried to post a post 6 times the size of this and the site wouldn't let me. The Chicago case I show here is just a small fraction of what I meant to post, and even that (with examples of significant crime reduction in many cities) is just the tip of the iceberg. If you wish, I can post the rest of this post in other postings.

 

[WinterBorn]

I have PLENTY of IDEA about it, and HERE is where that idea comes from >>

In Chicago, the use of street cameras has proven to be very successful in fighting crime. This technology used remote-controlled and viewable cameras called Police Observation Devices - commonly referred to as PODs - positioned to view and record potential crime in high-risk areas. Given the success of the pilot program, in September 2003, Mayor Daley announced that a new phase of PODs would be deployed throughout the City. Subsequently, the number of PODs increased from 30 to 80 by December 2003.

Statistics showed the use of POD technology had been a very effective tool in the fight against gangs, guns and drugs. The Department looked at crime incidents and calls for service in the areas immediately adjacent to the PODs. While narcotic-related calls declined by 76%, serious index crimes declined by 17%, while non-index, quality-of-life crimes declined by 46%. Focusing on just narcotic-related crime revealed a decrease of 76%.

https://portal.chicagopolice.org/portal/page/portal/ClearPath/About CPD/POD Program

Most crime rates are dropping across the country. Any comparison between the drop in the crime rates in areas without cameras?

 

[protectionist]

Exactly. Look at what constitutes bomb making materials from an actual arrest but without an actual bomb or any explosion caused by a bomb.

According to investigators, Leone then brought the officer to the garage where items used to produce explosive devices were seen. Among the items the officer saw were roadside flares, sulfuric acid, Clorox, PVC pipes, matches, Draino, PVC, Play-Doh and BBs.​

Every single item there has a legitimate use. Welcome to Federal Lock-up Mr. Terrorist - how dare you have Drano and Clorox in your house.

Sounds like a policing problem among a particular cop, or few cops in a particular dept, of a particular police dept. The thread is talking about the successful record of hundreds of thousands of street cameras, used by dozens of police depts, all across America.

 

[protectionist]

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..

Another hysterical overreaction, and not particularly connected to the topic of street cameras.

 

[WinterBorn]

Sounds like a policing problem among a particular cop, or few cops in a particular dept, of a particular police dept. The thread is talking about the successful record of hundreds of thousands of street cameras, used by dozens of police depts, all across America.

Records that could be used to stalk women, harass people, play voyeur, and other things. London doesn't seem to have had the drop in crime you expect.

 

[protectionist]

Another hysterical overreaction, and not particularly connected to the topic of street cameras.

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....."

Street cameras only monitor/record PUBLIC places. They don't see anything more than the man on the street sees and records in his memory bank. If you leave your windows open, and that man on the street can see you inside, that is YOU making yourself PUBLIC. Neither the street camera or the man on the street is responsible for that.

 

[WinterBorn]

A hoodie and some shades would make most people unrecognizable on a camera, unless it was very close and low to the ground.

 

[protectionist]

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.

I'm not exactly sure what you mean by "records of surveillance". I have worked with CCTV camera/recorders and they simply make videos which are held for anywhere between 3 days and 2 weeks. 2 weeks is fairly common, but most crime reports come in the same day as the crime or the next day. Many users say that 3 days is long enough.
Here's an example: Lt. Jim Seebock of the Southern Nevada Counter Terrorism Center talks about the street cameras along a 4-mile stretch of Las Vegas Boulevard. The surveillance cameras along Las Vegas Boulevard will pan, tilt, zoom and record 14 days of footage, Seebock said. After each two-week period, the cameras will do an “automatic purge” and start recording anew.Their debut comes in the wake of surveillance footage from Boston businesses proving crucial in identifying the susThat really broke the capects in the April 15 marathon bombing that killed three people and injured 260.
“That was just a great example of how important having video evidence can be,” Seebock said. “That really broke the case wide open.”

As for the rest of your post, I have to confess that I don't think i know what you're talking about. The cameras see no more or less than people on the street do, and they keep the video in their memory for a lot shorter time than the people on the street can, in their memory banks.

 

[protectionist]

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.

1. In a nutshell, what's their beef ?

2. The effect that I think they "will" have, is the effect they have BEEN HAVING for well over 10 year now, in dozens of cities all across America. I can state a list of examples with links, if you'd like. You can see Post # 101, for one example. I was going to list a long list more, but the site wouldn't allow it (too many characters maybe)

 

[WinterBorn]

1. In a nutshell, what's their beef ?

2. The effect that I think they "will" have, is the effect they have BEEN HAVING for well over 10 year now, in dozens of cities all across America. I can state a list of examples with links, if you'd like. You can see Post # 101, for one example. I was going to list a long list more, but the site wouldn't allow it (too many characters maybe)

Read the link. It isn't that long.

 

[Rikurzhen]

As for the rest of your post, I have to confess that I don't think i know what you're talking about. The cameras see no more or less than people on the street do, and they keep the video in their memory for a lot shorter time than the people on the street can, in their memory banks.

You're seriously arguing that a police officer driving in his patrol car has a better recollection of every single car he passed on the road than does his automatic license plate scanner? Is that really what you're trying to push?

A little noticed surveillance technology, designed to track the movements of every passing driver, is fast proliferating on America’s streets. Automatic license plate readers, mounted on police cars or on objects like road signs and bridges, use small, high-speed cameras to photograph thousands of plates per minute.

The information captured by the readers – including the license plate number, and the date, time, and location of every scan – is being collected and sometimes pooled into regional sharing systems. As a result, enormous databases of innocent motorists’ location information are growing rapidly. This information is often retained for years or even indefinitely, with few or no restrictions to protect privacy rights.

The documents paint a startling picture of a technology deployed with too few rules that is becoming a tool for mass routine location tracking and surveillance. License plate readers can serve a legitimate law enforcement purpose when they alert police to the location of a car associated with a criminal investigation. But such instances account for a tiny fraction of license plate scans, and too many police departments are storing millions of records about innocent drivers. Moreover, private companies are also using license plate readers and sharing the information they collect with police with little or no oversight or privacy protections. A lack of regulation means that policies governing how long our location data is kept vary widely.

Automatic license plate readers have the potential to create permanent records of virtually everywhere any of us has driven, radically transforming the consequences of leaving home to pursue private life, and opening up many opportunities for abuse. The tracking of people’s location constitutes a significant invasion of privacy, which can reveal many things about their lives, such as what friends, doctors, protests, political events, or churches a person may visit.

In our society, it is a core principle that the government does not invade people’s privacy and collect information about citizens’ innocent activities just in case they do something wrong. Clear regulations must be put in place to keep the government from tracking our movements on a massive scale.​

 

[protectionist]

Most crime rates are dropping across the country. Any comparison between the drop in the crime rates in areas without cameras?

The comparisons I have are between crime rates in cites after installing the cameras, and those same cites previously, when they WERE areas "without cameras." That is a more valid study, because then you have the same city & everything else being approximately equal. If you compare to other cities, than you're going into a bit of an apples and oranges thing, because those other cities will likely have various other variables affecting the rates.

 

[protectionist]

Read the link. It isn't that long.

It is for me. Maybe I will later. You can't describe the crux of their position ?..in a few words?

 

[protectionist]

You're seriously arguing that a police officer driving in his patrol car has a better recollection of every single car he passed on the road than does his automatic license plate scanner? Is that really what you're trying to push?

A little noticed surveillance technology, designed to track the movements of every passing driver, is fast proliferating on America’s streets. Automatic license plate readers, mounted on police cars or on objects like road signs and bridges, use small, high-speed cameras to photograph thousands of plates per minute.

The information captured by the readers – including the license plate number, and the date, time, and location of every scan – is being collected and sometimes pooled into regional sharing systems. As a result, enormous databases of innocent motorists’ location information are growing rapidly. This information is often retained for years or even indefinitely, with few or no restrictions to protect privacy rights.

The documents paint a startling picture of a technology deployed with too few rules that is becoming a tool for mass routine location tracking and surveillance. License plate readers can serve a legitimate law enforcement purpose when they alert police to the location of a car associated with a criminal investigation. But such instances account for a tiny fraction of license plate scans, and too many police departments are storing millions of records about innocent drivers. Moreover, private companies are also using license plate readers and sharing the information they collect with police with little or no oversight or privacy protections. A lack of regulation means that policies governing how long our location data is kept vary widely.

Automatic license plate readers have the potential to create permanent records of virtually everywhere any of us has driven, radically transforming the consequences of leaving home to pursue private life, and opening up many opportunities for abuse. The tracking of people’s location constitutes a significant invasion of privacy, which can reveal many things about their lives, such as what friends, doctors, protests, political events, or churches a person may visit.

In our society, it is a core principle that the government does not invade people’s privacy and collect information about citizens’ innocent activities just in case they do something wrong. Clear regulations must be put in place to keep the government from tracking our movements on a massive scale.​

Wow. I don't know where or how you're coming up with this stuff. I did not say anything about a cop's recollection, or any of this license plate stuff YOU are talking about. You also veering off topic. The thread is only about street video cameras which typically record activities out in the PUBLIC areas, and retain those videos for a few days.

Maybe you could start your own thread if you really are very interested in this license plate stuff.

 

[protectionist]

Records that could be used to stalk women, harass people, play voyeur, and other things. London doesn't seem to have had the drop in crime you expect.

Hundreds of CCTV schemes received a huge cash injection today as the Government approved the biggest-ever single investment in crime-fighting cameras.
The £79 million plan will set up or expand nearly 250 CCTV schemes across England and Wales.
One unusual scheme which got the go-ahead today will see cameras installed at a rural beauty spot.
The £975,000 scheme in the New Forest will bring cameras to Lymington, Totton and Ringwood town centres as well as in the car parks which are used by a million tourists a year, but have been blighted by car crime.
A Home Office spokesman said today's boost will lead to thousands of cameras being installed to target residential crime hotspots and keep a watchful eye on shopping centres, public transport, car parks and hospitals.
Home Office minister John Denham said: "CCTV has repeatedly proved its effectiveness in the fight against crime and the fear of crime.
"Knowing that there is an extra set of eyes watching over their communities helps to reassure people that they will be safe.
"It also acts as an important set of eyes for the police, providing valuable evidence where incidents occur.
"Today's announcement of the largest single allocation of CCTV money ever made will make a real contribution to continuing the national trend in falling crime figures."

More CCTV cameras to help fight crime | Mail Online

As for your stalk, harass, etc. comment. Just about anything can be used positively and negatively. Cars can be used as simple transportation or to run someone over. Ballpoint pens can be used to write or as a weapon to stick in someone's eye. Bleach an be used as a laundry additive or as a weapon. In the dozens of cities where street cameras are used, they have reduced crime significantly, and without the excesses you cite, so why worry ? When I take my car out on the street, do I worry that someone is going to run me off the road ? NO. I don't.

 

[WinterBorn]

It is for me. Maybe I will later. You can't describe the crux of their position ?..in a few words?

I already did that.

 

[protectionist]

A hoodie and some shades would make most people unrecognizable on a camera, unless it was very close and low to the ground.

True, but the camera could still pick up other distinctions. Such as a particular type of boots or shoes, pants, shirt, jacket, gait, slight limp, peculiar habit (ex. rubbing one's ear), scars on arms, legs, or hands, tattoos, particular type of drink, food, candy, or cigarette, etc.
Nobody said the camera could do everything, but it is catching thousands of criminals all across America (who are NOT wearing hoodies)

 

[boedicca]

Instead of street cams, which are expensive and privacy violating devices, cops should have dashboard and personal cams.

 

[protectionist]

I already did that.

I meant WHY do they think the cameras are not a good idea. Upon what do they base that "judgement" ?

 

[WinterBorn]

I meant WHY do they think the cameras are not a good idea. Upon what do they base that "judgement" ?

It is a magazine article. It is a few pages. Read the link. In the time you have taken to ask me 3 times to give you a Readers Digest version, you could have read it.