Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Chicago, Houston Consider Cameras in Private Businesses, Homes
HumanEventsOnline.com ^ | Feb 28, 2006 | James Plummer

Posted on 02/28/2006 8:02:23 AM PST by boryeulb

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-103 next last

1 posted on 02/28/2006 8:02:26 AM PST by boryeulb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: boryeulb

It is always nice to know that our officials value freedom! (sarcasm)


2 posted on 02/28/2006 8:04:37 AM PST by sheik yerbouty ( Make America and the world a jihad free zone!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: boryeulb
Put cameras and audio bugs in the politician's homes.
3 posted on 02/28/2006 8:07:11 AM PST by ncountylee (Dead terrorists smell like victory)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: boryeulb
"VOTE NOW: Do you support proposals in Chicago and Houston that would put security cameras in private businesses and homes?"

Here's my vote: "BLAM!!! (ka-chink) "BLAM!!!" (ka-chink) "BLAM!!!"

4 posted on 02/28/2006 8:08:28 AM PST by Eastbound
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: boryeulb

..."I know a lot of people are concerned about Big Brother, but my response to that is if you are not doing anything wrong, why should you worry about it?"...

The classic response of a statist goon. If I had been there, I would have clubbed him senseless with a chair or something.

I simply can not comprehend why anyone would live or work in a city in the first place.

It seems the goons have already won, since one can not state the simple and obvious solution to this problem.


5 posted on 02/28/2006 8:08:39 AM PST by the gillman@blacklagoon.com ("If we lose freedom here, there is no place to escape to. This is the last stand on Earth!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: boryeulb
Hey, if you're not doing anything wrong... /sarcasm

Voters are idiots. I'm becoming more and more convinced of it by the day. Like stupid sheep, if you give them the tools to defeat their captors, they will just stand there, bleet at you, and go back to grazing.
6 posted on 02/28/2006 8:09:28 AM PST by mysterio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: boryeulb

I have little problem with cameras in public places. Cameras required in private homes or businesses should require a warrant.


7 posted on 02/28/2006 8:11:19 AM PST by Restorer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mysterio

Guess we just haven't yet learned to love Big Brother.


8 posted on 02/28/2006 8:11:20 AM PST by the gillman@blacklagoon.com ("If we lose freedom here, there is no place to escape to. This is the last stand on Earth!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

Comment #9 Removed by Moderator

Comment #10 Removed by Moderator

To: boryeulb
And here's the kicker: Houston Police Chief Harold Hurtt is also advocating that the local building code be changed to require that private apartment complexes install surveillance cameras. Hurtt even said he wants cameras installed, telescreen-style, in private single-family homes if he decides there have been "too many" calls for police assistance from the home.

Damn, looks like the fascists and the communists won. This is INSANE.

11 posted on 02/28/2006 8:13:05 AM PST by Centurion2000 (Islam's true face: http://makeashorterlink.com/?J169127BC)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Eastbound
"BLAM!!! (ka-chink) "BLAM!!!" (ka-chink) "BLAM!!!"

Damn straight.

12 posted on 02/28/2006 8:15:28 AM PST by CrawDaddyCA (There is no such thing as a fair fight. Thou shall win at all costs!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: the gillman@blacklagoon.com

I think polce chief Hurrt has earned himself exile with this nonsense. We as Americans can no longer put up with powerful anti-freedom authoritarians. They are the single biggest threat this country faces, a threat even more chilling and wide reaching than terrorism. They are absolutely destroying this country in a way that the terrorists only dream of.


13 posted on 02/28/2006 8:16:50 AM PST by mysterio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: boryeulb
Democrat Mayor Bill White, who appointed Hurtt, has been equivocating about Hurtt's outrageous idea as the public reaction is tested.

If he has any intention to run for governor in 2008, he'll squash this proposal.

14 posted on 02/28/2006 8:19:44 AM PST by Paleo Conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sheik yerbouty
It is always nice to know that our officials value freedom! (sarcasm)

And yet look nat the big stink they made over the NSA wiretap thing.

15 posted on 02/28/2006 8:22:12 AM PST by capt. norm (Error: Keyboard not attached. Press F1 to continue)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: mysterio

In the long run, they will use the fear of terrorism to accomplish everything they desire.


16 posted on 02/28/2006 8:23:44 AM PST by the gillman@blacklagoon.com ("If we lose freedom here, there is no place to escape to. This is the last stand on Earth!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: boryeulb; Just another Joe; CSM; lockjaw02; Publius6961; elkfersupper; nopardons; metesky; Mears; ..
Nanny State PING

Under the plan, private businesses that remain open more than 12 hours a day and bars that remain open until last call would have to install the cameras also. The bill as written now would not require that businesses hook up their mandatory cameras to city networks, but Chicago Tribune reports that eventually, "the city does plan to link cameras in office and apartment buildings and other private properties to its system."

Better enforcement of the new smoking ban, perchance?

17 posted on 02/28/2006 8:26:28 AM PST by Gabz (Smoke gnatzies: small minds buzzing in you business........SWAT'EM)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Paleo Conservative
Democrat Mayor Bill White, who appointed Hurtt

Cheap,Democrat-knocking points. Draconian scheme that is the equal of anything in 1984, hatched by a democrat? Can't be.

18 posted on 02/28/2006 8:26:42 AM PST by ozoneliar ("The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots & tyrants" -T.J.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: boryeulb

How about live web cameras in the offices of elected public officials?


19 posted on 02/28/2006 8:27:14 AM PST by michigander (The Constitution only guarantees the right to pursue happiness. You have to catch it yourself.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: boryeulb

I fail to see how at least part of this is unconstitutional and probably all of it. Problem is, it may never be tested.


20 posted on 02/28/2006 8:29:19 AM PST by davisfh
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: michigander
How about live web cameras in the offices of elected public officials?

That's a proposal I could get behind :)

All kidding aside, until they propose such a scenario they best rethink these other assinine ideas.

21 posted on 02/28/2006 8:30:18 AM PST by Gabz (Smoke gnatzies: small minds buzzing in you business........SWAT'EM)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: boryeulb

Since most of the things that most people don't want caught on camera are not illegal, but rather, shameful, when faced with the march of surveillance, for people to remain free they need to adopt a bigger dose of "SO WHAT?" then they are accustomed to.

Yes, I bought beer. SO WHAT?
Yes, I smoked a cigar in the alley. SO WHAT?
Yes, I bought two porno CD's. SO WHAT?
Yes, I had a drink with the hottie in accounting. SO WHAT?

The whole ability to lynch people, especially politically, for little moral pecadilloes only works if most of private life of most people is not recorded.

Consider the PeeWee Herman case. Now, granted, diddling in the back of the theater was not the move of a brainiac, but the whole faux-shock: My GOD, the man DIDDLES watching PORN (GASP!!!) which ended his career...that only works because everyone else in the country doesn't have a camera in his/her shower.

You start really surveilling people - and the Hollywood types have lived under that sort of scrutiny longer - and the only possible responses are to either wilt in a puddle of self-loathing apology for being HUMAN (what your enemies HOPE you will do, so as to be able to manipulate you through the fear of "exposure" of the fact that you are a human (i.e., sinful), or you get a big dose of SO WHAT brazen bravado, precisely like Hollywood does.

Chances are, people are not going to turn into Puritans if you surveil them very long. Rather, they will lower the overall moral standards of society so that they can't be manipulated anymore by the bastards who control the cameras.

There is another option. I will call it the French option. There, there is a strict legal right of privacy, and if you start intruding on it, publishing things, etc., you get prosecuted for a crime.

Either people can protect their privacy and the current structure of morality by using the law to punish anybody who pushes a camera where it doesn't belong and attempts to use any information there, or people will have no privacy, everything will be on camera, and everyone will brazen it out.
The choice is really France, where people commit their sins and it is a criminal offense to tell anybody else about it even if you find out, or Hollywood, where everybody commits his sins on camera and doesn't give a damn.

What isn't going to happen in this life is a world where, because people are surveiled, they stop sinning. Exposed to the bright light of relentless scrutiny, people will not forego the pleasures of life in order to uphold tradition morality. Rather, they'll beat morality to death with a club so it can't both them anymore. Traditional morality always has reposed on plausible deniability and hypocrisy. If you strip away all of the ability to hide, people won't become more moral they'll become more brazen.
Hollywood is brazen because American laws don't let people hide from those who want to pry.
Paris is more discreet, because French law punishes people who pry as felons, and truth is no defense to an assault on privacy.

Because I am a fan of public morality, and think that the veneer of good manners and correct behavior is well worth the price of hypocrisy that supports it, I think that the French approach of criminalizing efforts to pry into private life is preferable to the argument "If you are not doing anything wrong, you have nothing to worry about."

Everyone is doing something wrong.
Anybody care to have a camera installed in EVERY room of their house, on ALL the time?
Didn't think so.


22 posted on 02/28/2006 8:31:45 AM PST by Vicomte13 (Et alors?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: boryeulb

bump


23 posted on 02/28/2006 8:33:06 AM PST by lowbridge (I want to die peacefully in my sleep like my grandfather. Not screaming, like his passengers.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: davisfh
I fail to see how at least part of this is unconstitutional and probably all of it. Problem is, it may never be tested.

If there is a right to privacy, and abortion under the XIV ammendment, then there is certainly a right not to have Chief 'pervert' Hurtt spying on Houstonites.

24 posted on 02/28/2006 8:33:54 AM PST by ozoneliar ("The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots & tyrants" -T.J.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: boryeulb
>>Hurtt invoked the name of Orwell's dictator in defending his radical proposition: "I know a lot of people are concerned about Big Brother, but my response to that is if you are not doing anything wrong, why should you worry about it?"<<

If I only had a nickle for every time I have seen some lamebrain on FR write that.

Of course, the police chief will be first to set a good example by installing a camera in his own home.

/sarc

25 posted on 02/28/2006 8:38:03 AM PST by SerpentDove (The internet is big. "Oprah" big.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: michigander
How about live web cameras in the offices of elected public officials?

And on the politicians person as well. A live Internet feed every second of every day. No group needs watching more than politicians.

We'll be able to spot corruption and theft immediately. As the Huston cop says "if (the politicians) are not doing anything wrong, why should (they) worry about it?"

26 posted on 02/28/2006 8:38:03 AM PST by RJL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: boryeulb
Hurtt invoked the name of Orwell's dictator in defending his radical proposition: "I know a lot of people are concerned about Big Brother, but my response to that is if you are not doing anything wrong, why should you worry about it?"

How many times have I heard people make this argument? When I'm taking a cr*p, I'm not doing anything wrong, but I don't want to be camcorded. Got it?"

27 posted on 02/28/2006 8:39:04 AM PST by Richard Kimball (I like to make everyone's day a little more surreal)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Gabz

Yep! The old slippery slope has turned into a steep hill and covered with ice.


28 posted on 02/28/2006 8:53:23 AM PST by Just A Nobody (NEVER AGAIN - Support our troops. I *LOVE* my attitude problem! Beware the Enemedia.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Eaker; humblegunner
Hurtt invoked the name of Orwell's dictator in defending his radical proposition: "I know a lot of people are concerned about Big Brother, but my response to that is if you are not doing anything wrong, why should you worry about it?"

OMG

Completely unbelievable.

29 posted on 02/28/2006 8:59:03 AM PST by RikaStrom (The number one rule of the Kama Sutra is that you both be on the same page.../Exeter 051705)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RikaStrom

This might just bite brer Hurtt in the arse rather quickly:

http://www.hurttprize.org/


30 posted on 02/28/2006 9:01:35 AM PST by humblegunner (If you're gonna die, die with your boots on.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Richard Kimball
When I'm taking a cr*p, I'm not doing anything wrong, but I don't want to be camcorded.

I think we can all agree on that :-)

31 posted on 02/28/2006 9:07:38 AM PST by lowbridge (I want to die peacefully in my sleep like my grandfather. Not screaming, like his passengers.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: humblegunner

HA! People from all over the country contributing.


32 posted on 02/28/2006 9:14:30 AM PST by monkeywrench (Deut. 27:17 Cursed be he that removeth his neighbor's landmark)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: boryeulb

Dick Daley peeping up little girls dresses coming to a bathroom near your!


33 posted on 02/28/2006 9:17:48 AM PST by Republicus2001
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: boryeulb
Democrat Mayor Bill White, who appointed Hurtt, has been equivocating about Hurtt's outrageous idea as the public reaction is tested. If enough Houstonians stand up for their rights to private property, White presumably won't push through the extreme surveillance program. But if Texans don’t stand for the idea that a man's home is his castle, the plan will almost assuredly move ahead.


34 posted on 02/28/2006 9:24:13 AM PST by steve-b (A desire not to butt into other people's business is eighty percent of all human wisdom)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Justanobody
The old slippery slope has turned into a steep hill and covered with ice.

And there appears to be no brakes on the skates.

35 posted on 02/28/2006 9:24:21 AM PST by Gabz (Smoke gnatzies: small minds buzzing in you business........SWAT'EM)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: boryeulb

Yep, the slippery slope is getting steeper.

But I remain convinced that Americans are so reflexively superstitious about "The Rule Of Law" that they will go right off the end of the slippery slope and accept tyranny, so long as the tyranny is legally and correctly instituted, rather than develop an ethic of selective observance of the law, and intentional breaking of bad law.


36 posted on 02/28/2006 9:34:37 AM PST by Vicomte13 (Et alors?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mysterio
We as Americans can no longer put up with powerful anti-freedom authoritarians. They are the single biggest threat this country faces, a threat even more chilling and wide reaching than terrorism. They are absolutely destroying this country in a way that the terrorists only dream of.

This can never be repeated enough!!

37 posted on 02/28/2006 9:56:01 AM PST by LambSlave (The truth will set you free)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: LambSlave

Sure. Powerful anti-freedom authoritarians have the law on their side. The only way to defeat them is to lessen the general, reflexive respect for "The Law", when the law is bad. If people are superstitiously obedient to the concept of "The Rule of Law", the authoritarians will always rule, because that is what they have at their command.

The only way to beat them is to relax the rigorous belief in "Buddy, it's the LAW". One has to develop the capacity to say "Yeah, but the law is BAD, and we're not going to abide (or obey) obnoxious and bad laws."

I don't think Americans have it in them.
They are too superstitious about law.
America is, after all, a plurality German country.


38 posted on 02/28/2006 10:01:25 AM PST by Vicomte13 (Et alors?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Gabz
And there appears to be no brakes on the skates.

So, what to do? Laugh? Cry? Fight?

39 posted on 02/28/2006 10:04:23 AM PST by Just A Nobody (NEVER AGAIN - Support our troops. I *LOVE* my attitude problem! Beware the Enemedia.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Justanobody
So, what to do? Laugh? Cry? Fight?

I say fight - and get some brakes on the skates finally.

40 posted on 02/28/2006 10:10:04 AM PST by Gabz (Smoke gnatzies: small minds buzzing in you business........SWAT'EM)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: PretzeLogic

ping


41 posted on 02/28/2006 10:10:06 AM PST by hobson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

Comment #42 Removed by Moderator

To: Flyer

Who is the keeper of the Houston ping list?


43 posted on 02/28/2006 10:11:58 AM PST by hobson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Vicomte13

I agree... Americans don't have it in them. I read somewhere that only 4% of all Americans participated openly in the American Revolution until victory seemed assured. I think it is always like that; the 4% willing to die for freedom, and the rest who will take any amount of oppression because it comes from legitimate authority and will simply march right into the "Mandatory Population Reduction Centers".


44 posted on 02/28/2006 10:15:07 AM PST by LambSlave (The truth will set you free)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: boryeulb

Oh this article just reminded me: time to buy more ammo.


45 posted on 02/28/2006 10:16:50 AM PST by Sir Gawain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LambSlave

I don't think they'll go so far as to accept death, at least not en masse. But they won't defy, or advocate defiance of, the law when it's a few people being rounded up and killed by the many.

Think carefully about the Terri Schiavo case.
Millions of people said she was being MURDERED.
But when it came down to it, nobody was willing to actually ATTACK the authorities to stop the murder of an innocent woman. Was it because she was disabled?

There are millions others who think abortion is MURDER. But they oppose any sort of lawlessness to suppress it.

Now think about the Lynching Era, from the 1880s to the 1910s, when every other day someone in America was lynched, generally publicly, often with great fanfare (official photographers and postcards). There were plenty of people outraged, and motions were put before Congress. But in the end, nobody was willing to turn loose force on the local authorities.

Think carefully, even, about Hitler. Americans were willing to let Hitler devour Europe, including England, and kill whomever he wanted to. It was only a direct Japanese attack and a German declaration of war that finally forced the Americans to act.

Philosophically, Law and the Rule of Law is the very pinnacle of American moral values. Respect for the law supersedes obedience to the tenets even of religion. It's an extraordinary feature of American culture, which certainly does make America a very good place to do business: in obedience to their law, Americans will gun people down in order to protect your duly documented and recorded property rights; they'll evict people from their homes of 70 years if you have a court order that lets you develop their land for your own private business purposes, even if you're French.

Lex dura, sed lex.


46 posted on 02/28/2006 10:27:02 AM PST by Vicomte13 (Et alors?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: boryeulb
Under the plan, private businesses that remain open more than 12 hours a day and bars that remain open until last call would have to install the cameras also.

Doesn't every bar serve until last call? Even if you close at 9:00 PM you would serve until last call, right?

If I owned a business that had to operate under these rules, I would:
Close for 5 minutes every 11 hours and 55 minutes for a regular business and;
Stop serving at my bar without calling "last call"

This way I would be exempt.

47 posted on 02/28/2006 10:31:59 AM PST by BlueMondaySkipper (The quickest way of ending a war is to lose it. - George Orwell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Vicomte13

I should have put a sarcasm tag on the last part; I believe your statements are all very accurate. As long as it does not affect them directly, en masse they will complain but not act. The Terri Schiavo case and abortion mills are excellent examples, as are Ruby Ridge and Waco.


48 posted on 02/28/2006 10:38:05 AM PST by LambSlave (The truth will set you free)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: albertp; Allosaurs_r_us; Abram; AlexandriaDuke; Americanwolf; Annie03; Baby Bear; bassmaner; ...
If this goes through in the chicago or houston area I will move out of the country and not come back and unlike the balwins i actually havethe courage of my convictions

Libertarian ping.To be added or removed from my ping list freepmail me or post a message here

49 posted on 02/28/2006 10:52:01 AM PST by freepatriot32 (Holding you head high & voting Libertarian is better then holding your nose and voting republican)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Wolfie


50 posted on 02/28/2006 10:53:27 AM PST by freepatriot32 (Holding you head high & voting Libertarian is better then holding your nose and voting republican)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-103 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson