Surveillance Cameras Win Broad Support

ABC News ^ | July 29, 2007 | MICHELLE LIRTZMAN

[montanajoe]

What is scary is that so many people dont see it as a problem...

[AFreeBird]

LOL...

Yea, and computerization/robotics/AI haven't progressed at all in the last 330/20/10/5 years. Or if they have, we've hit the upper limit. And all those supercomputers the government buys are only used for playing Solitaire.

Sure.

Dream on my friend. Dream on.

I guess what ever you have to tell yourself to justify the incremental raising of the heat on the pot of water...

Ribbit, ribbit...

[AFreeBird]

It’s no different than putting a cop on the street corner, except it’s more efficient.

Except that once you have the infrastructure in place, it only becomes a matter of degrees as to what constitutes a crime.

A degree here, and a degree there, and then you end up talking bout a rolling boil.

At least the cop on the corner is IN the environment and understands the context of it.

Ribbit... Ribbit...

[LeGrande]

If you don't think that privacy isn't an issue, try violating a EULA in a software download. Some things such as intellectual property, real propertys threats, personal property are covered, and you may want the press, rather than the law, to be your friend. Act accordingly.

Yes, we are gradually losing our rights one small piece at a time. The RIAA statutes, not to mention the RICO statutes, are just another right gone.

I remember a time in the not so distant past, when if I bought something it was mine.

[LeGrande]

You still have to get a warrant, and there has to be probable cause. Your suspicions are not adequate. You'll have to show us your own stash first for us to believe you evern now what MJ is supposed to look like.

I remember a time when the cops did have to have reasonable cause. Now all it takes is a wino whispering in a cops ear and the cops can toss flash bangs and raid anyones house they feel like.

Is it just me, or does it seem that we don't have any rights left at all? Am I guilty of a hate crime now?

[Issaquahking]

I remember a time in the not so distant past, when if I bought something it was mine.

With a EULA, it's a contract that you legally say you will not violate, or, if you do, we will come after you. It's typical "boilerplate language" used to get you what you will use, and hopefully enjoy, or profit, by whatever it does for you, via the software activity.

There were no computers in the days that the Constitution was drawn up, but I'd stake money on it that Ben Franklin would be happy to know, that people can still have a contract on something, such as intellectual property. You should be rewarded for your effort, as many times as you can re-create it. Just wish that I had thought it up before someone else.

[Major_Risktaker]

I’m in favor of it. If you want privacy, stay in your house.

That has to be the most idiotic statement
I have every read about privacy.

You have earned the second
class citizen Big Brother Award.

[ExGeeEye]

Several straw men. I'm sure you know the difference between standing on a opublic street and permitting your number to be listed in the white pages. By the logic in your post, you should never go outside before putting on a burqa.

While the information you list is considered public information, the presence of my face on a public street is a whole 'nuther level of public. I have had the peculiar pleasure of seeing my face on national TV because I wore it in public at an event; that the cameras were owned by WOOD-TV instead of the GRPD actually made my countenance more widely visible.

There is no difference between these cameras and having a cop standing on the streetcorner seeing you with his own eyes.

[xcamel]

The very nature of the word “public” kind of blows your statement...

[saganite]

It’s called sarcasm. Some folks don’t get it so:

SARCASM

There, feel all better now?

[Brilliant]

You guys really are worried about nothing. They’ve already got cameras in virtually every store and public building. Give me an example where someone ended up in jail unjustly because of it. I’m a lawyer, and the government has had my fingerprints on file for 24 years. So far, the guys with the balls and chains have not shown up at my house to take me away.

Remember last year when the terrorists struck in Britain, they had them in custody within hours. If that had happened in the US, we still would have no clue who did it.

[enough_idiocy]

and yet the NSA spying issue was unconstitutional and too intrusive. makes no sense.

[Balding_Eagle]

I’m glad they caught the guy.

Your children and grandchildren will pay a tremendous price for the system that caught him.

My relatives paid for it with their lives back in the USSR.

[xcamel]

apples and oranges.

[live+let_live]

“Government employees live this every day they work for the government. They learn how to deal with it and so can you.”

As do the citizens of North Korea.

[William Terrell]

You get these kinds of articles when the proponents and users of a system begin to get overwhelmingly negative comments about it.

[Wolfie]

...privacy in public places...

Uh, ok.

[Wolfie]

The WOT is trumped by business cronies who want cheap labor. And that sums up the border situation.

[-YYZ-]

If surveillance cameras are so good for fighting crime, then I suppose England would have about the lowest crime rate in the developed world, since they have so many of the damned things. Errrr, no?

People are idiots.

[LeGrande]

There is no difference between these cameras and having a cop standing on the streetcorner seeing you with his own eyes.

Well actually there is. For one thing a cop can't simply write down your license plate number and send you a ticket. The camera operators can.

The cop doesn't permanently record your action, the camera can. The cop can't follow you around watching everything you do, the cameras can. The cop can't see into your house, the camera can. The camera can even see through walls. In fact the edited camera's recording can even be a better liar than the cop.

The point you seem to be missing is that even though you may be innocent, if you let someone get too much information about you, they own you. That is why you don't freely give out your SS number and your bank account numbers. Those numbers certainly aren't private, and you didn't do anything wrong with them, so why not let anyone who wants to know them see them? What do you have to hide?

May you enjoy licking your Masters boot.