Brown Case Shows Need for Street Cameras

[protectionist]

I'm having trouble posting. Got LOTS of stuff to post. Site won't let it post. I'm outta here.

 

[protectionist]

The Philadelphia Police have an interesting program which bring residents and businesses together with the police. They call it Safecam. Lt. John Stanford touts the effectiveness of the city’s SafeCam program. Over the last two years, some 600 businesses and residents have registered their surveillance cameras with police, allowing them to amass a database of videos that have helped to solve many crimes.
“Right now we have posted a little over 300 videos. But since we’ve done this, well over 200 people have been arrested and taken off the street as a result,” Lt. Stanford said.
There is example after example of suspects being arrested after video surfaces of a crime.
Surveillance video is proving to be more and more crucial when it comes to solving crimes. That’s why Philadelphia Police are urging more businesses, even residences, to register with the SafeCam program.

 

[protectionist]

I have a link for Post # 142. Site won't accept it. Lot of bugs in this new format

 

[WinterBorn]

Furthermore


I have already posted links showing just the opposite (and I have many more but this format won't allow large posts to go in) Would you like to see MORE ? I can try,

I am sure I could find more links backing up what the study in London found. But since you won't read the link I provided already, I see no point.

I think cameras in police cars is a great step. I do not see blanket surveillance of all public areas as an improvement.

 

[protectionist]

Post #126 was made by Boedicca.

Sorry. Post # 124, I meant.

 

[WinterBorn]

The Philadelphia Police have an interesting program which bring residents and businesses together with the police. They call it Safecam. Lt. John Stanford touts the effectiveness of the city’s SafeCam program. Over the last two years, some 600 businesses and residents have registered their surveillance cameras with police, allowing them to amass a database of videos that have helped to solve many crimes.
“Right now we have posted a little over 300 videos. But since we’ve done this, well over 200 people have been arrested and taken off the street as a result,” Lt. Stanford said.
There is example after example of suspects being arrested after video surfaces of a crime.
Surveillance video is proving to be more and more crucial when it comes to solving crimes. That’s why Philadelphia Police are urging more businesses, even residences, to register with the SafeCam program.

Most of the crimes I have read it having a big effect on were petty crimes, like theft.

I think our focus should be on more serious crimes. But that is just my opinion.

 

[protectionist]

I am sure I could find more links backing up what the study in London found. But since you won't read the link I provided already, I see no point.

I think cameras in police cars is a great step. I do not see blanket surveillance of all public areas as an improvement.

You don't. Dozens of police departments across America, using street cameras and having crime reduced, DO. And I agree with THEM.

 

[protectionist]

Most of the crimes I have read it having a big effect on were petty crimes, like theft.

I think our focus should be on more serious crimes. But that is just my opinion.

"Read" it > Where ?

 

[WinterBorn]

"Read" it > Where ?

Have you read my link yet?

 

[WinterBorn]

You don't. Dozens of police departments across America, using street cameras and having crime reduced, DO. And I agree with THEM.

Dozens of police depts across the country also see having tanks and other military gear as an improvement, and I disagree.

 

[Rikurzhen]

Well, then you just happen to be very WRONG. It is perfectly well consistent with a Free Society. And if being seen and recorded is unacceptable to you, you should perhaps do one of two things >>

1. Never leave your home and go outside, where people could see you and record you in their memory banks. Or >>

2. Wear a burka.

As for surveillance capabilities being abused by those in power, I have already listed links to sources that say that has not been happening. I could list many more. In the meantime, I haven't seen one shred of evidence from you that this has been happening with street cameras. So if you think you have some, let's hear it. (in link form please)

Thanks for blowing the conservative image. I was always pretty safe in calling Liberals Totalitarians for their love of Big Government and then you come along pushing for a surveillance state where government tracks you and you have the gall to call that Freedom. Why don't you just complete your transformation and join your totalitarian friends on the left and declare yourself a liberal.

 

[WinterBorn]

Thanks for blowing the conservative image. I was always pretty safe in calling Liberals Totalitarians for their love of Big Government and then you come along pushing for a surveillance state where government tracks you and you have the gall to call that Freedom. Why don't you just complete your transformation and join your totalitarian friends on the left and declare yourself a liberal.

I do not trust this "If only the gov't could see more" idea anymore than I buy into the idea "If you aren't doing anything wrong you shouldn't worry" nonsense.

Some folks just want Big Brother to fix everything.

 

[protectionist]

Dozens of police depts across the country also see having tanks and other military gear as an improvement, and I disagree.

You can disagree with that and have opinion which you are entitled to. What you are not entitled to do is change facts, which say that crime has been reduced, significantly all over the US (as I posted , and provided links for >>

1. Post # 101 - Chicago

2. # 108 - Las Vegas

3. # 115 - 250 cameras across England & Wales

4. # 124 - generic

5. # 139 - Texas, Baltimore, Denver, Boston, San Francisco.

6. # 142 - Philadelphia

 

[WinterBorn]

You can disagree with that and have opinion which you are entitled to. What you are not entitled to do is change facts, which say that crime has been reduced, significantly all over the US (as I posted , and provided links for >>

1. Post # 101 - Chicago

2. # 108 - Las Vegas

3. # 115 - 250 cameras across England & Wales

4. # 124 - generic

5. # 139 - Texas, Baltimore, Denver, Boston, San Francisco.

6. # 142 - Philadelphia

Have you read my link yet?

 

[protectionist]

Thanks for blowing the conservative image. I was always pretty safe in calling Liberals Totalitarians for their love of Big Government and then you come along pushing for a surveillance state where government tracks you and you have the gall to call that Freedom. Why don't you just complete your transformation and join your totalitarian friends on the left and declare yourself a liberal.

Because I'm NOT a liberal (although I do have some liberal economic positions) Basically, I am a REAL Conservative, from the Eisenhower days (when I attended elementary school) Contrary to popular belief (mostly among young people) Conservative is not synonomous with small, weak, impotent governments, with small treasuries, and low taxes on the rich.

That is a concept which only came about since Ronald Reagan took over. He lowered the top bracket tax from 70% to 28%, and declared that Conservatism was low taxes, low spending, and small (weak) govt. Well, all you youngsters out there who weren't alive during the REAL Conservative days, I hate to burst your Reaganist bubble, but REAL Conservatism hasn't changed, no matter what some goofball movie actor with a super high salary, who didn't want to pay a 70% tax, had to say.

REAL Conservatism was in the 50s, and still is, a concentration on National Defense, Homeland Security, strong military, strong law enforcement, America's traditional values, and a BIG strong national govt to support all these things (as opposed to small, weak, penniless govt unable to hire ICE agents, CBP officers, FBI, CIA. DEA, build a border fence, repair infrastructure, etc.)

So if you want to go around calling yourself a conservative, while you allow criminals to run rampant, without street cameras, and police depts big enough to control them , without sufficient prison space, and everything else needed to ensure national security, you can do that. In the meantime, for all your weaken America efforts, the Muslim Brotherhood thanks you, al Qaeda thanks you, ISIS thanks you, La Raza thanks you, illegal aliens thank you, the NAACP thanks you, the ACLU thanks you, etc.

 

[protectionist]

Have you read my link yet?

I'll get to it (eventually) I'm off the computer right now.

Have you read MY links ?

 

[WinterBorn]

I'll get to it (eventually) I'm off the computer right now.

Have you read MY links ?

I am not disputing your links, nor have I asked for a readers digest version.

 

[protectionist]

I am not disputing your links, nor have I asked for a readers digest version.

That wasn't the question.

 

[Mathbud1]

First of all, NO, the law abiding citizens are NOT being monitored going about their private business. That is because the camera only records those "law abiding citizens" when they are going about their PUBLIC business, because those are the only places where street cameras monitor. And it also monitors law-BREAKING citizens (and non-citizens), breaking the law helping police to protect you.

And the law abiding citizens are no more "monitored" (ie. seen) by a camera and some security/police personnel, than they are by people in the street, who see them also. Go to a football game. 90,000 people in the stadium you're in, can see you.

Can and do are different. People on the street CAN see you. Cameras on the street WILL see you every single time unless something gets in the way. I can walk past someone on the street and not be able to tell you one detail about that person because I wasn't paying attention to them. A camera will "remember" every detail it is capable of capturing. It is not capable of not paying attention.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

OP says, "Brown case shows need for street cameras".

It also shows need for ALL Americans to be treated the same.

1.