ACLU blasts Chicago's network of cameras

Peoria Journal-Star via A.P. ^ | Feb 08, 2011 | Sophia Tareen

[Graybeard58]

CHICAGO —

A leading civil rights group wants Chicago to stop expanding its network of thousands of cameras covering the city because of privacy issues, First Amendment concerns and a lack of regulation, according to a report released Tuesday.

The American Civil Liberties Union of Illinois called for a full review of the cameras — which number at least 10,000 and are at locations from skyscrapers to utility poles — saying city officials won't release basic information like the exact number, cost and any incidents of misuse.

Those concerns, along with city officials' plans for expansion, put Chicago a step closer to a Big Brother invasion of privacy, the ACLU alleged.

"Chicago's camera network invades the freedom to be anonymous in public places, a key aspect of the fundamental American right to be left alone," the report states. "Each of us then will wonder whether the government is watching and recording us when we walk into a psychiatrist's office, a reproductive health care center, a political meeting, a theater performance, or a book store."

The system, which started less than a decade ago, has been called the most extensive and integrated camera network of any U.S. city by former Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff. Chicago police have praised the cameras' use and Chicago Mayor Richard Daley has even called for cameras to be installed on every city corner to help fight crime.

Chicago police and Daley have lauded the cameras and defended their use, saying they help authorities respond more quickly and have led to more than 4,000 arrests. Daley's office didn't respond to requests for comment about the report.

The network includes private cameras and those installed by city agencies, like the Chicago Transit Authority. While many of the cameras are visible — like those with flashing blue lights

[Paladin2]

Chicago needs to include cameras in the bedrooms of the ACLU members.

[pointsal]

Wanna bet the political types have cameras placed in front of their opponents financial sugar-daddy's house or near the secret apartment of a councilman's girl friend?

The potential is only limited by the imagination of the police state.

Maybe the locals could post the GPS locations on something like EveryTrails or Googlemap. What a great scavenger hunt!

[thethirddegree]

I wonder how much it is costing Chicago to pay people to watch the feeds from the cameras.

[GeronL]

The ACLU is only worried about the civil rights of criminals who might get caught not the average American. They’re just incidental here

[docbnj]

When you are on a public street, you are not entitled to exemption from being merely observed.

I am fed up with all the impediments groups like the ACLU place in the way of safety and law-enforcement. They have no consideration for the individual members of society who suffer as a result of their policies.

ACLU is a sicko organization with very bad origins (formerly an outright Communist front). They are a socially destructive group.

[docbnj]

When you are on a public street, you are not entitled to exemption from being merely observed.

I am fed up with all the impediments groups like the ACLU place in the way of safety and law-enforcement. They have no consideration for the individual members of society who suffer as a result of their policies.

ACLU is a sicko organization with very bad origins (formerly an outright Communist front). They are a socially destructive group.

[philman_36]

"Chicago's camera network invades the freedom to be anonymous in public places, a key aspect of the fundamental American right to be left alone," the report states. "Each of us then will wonder whether the government is watching and recording us when we walk into a psychiatrist's office, a reproductive health care center, a political meeting, a theater performance, or a book store."
I'm not keen on security cameras as the potential for abuse is very great, but I find this reasoning illogical.
Unless everyone has already been, or can be (such as facial recognition through a drivers license database), identified by the government or unless everybody knows who everyone else is then we're all still pretty much anonymous.
It's specious thinking and my initial reaction is that there is an ulterior motive.

[bunkerhill7]

Chicago Launches Chollywood`s Midwest Street Performer Idol Contest

Applications Available at any of 10,000 City Streetcorner Locations=-

Watch for the Flashing Blue Light! [or no light at all]

Go For it!.

[VRWCtaz]

When you combine facial recognition technology with ever increasing computing power, cheap vast memory capacity, and a network of surveillance cameras you have a recipe for abuse. I do not have a solution to this as the proverbial genie is out of the bottle. I'm just saying the concepts of privacy and anonymity are, in a word, quaint.

[Oldpuppymax]

Not to worry, ACLU. Most of the cameras don’t even work...and no one is actually WATCHING on those that do. These are just tools to make it look as though Mayor Shortshanks gives a damn.

[zeugma]

Isn’t Illinois one of those police states where you can be arrested for filming a cop?

[JimRed]

Let me guess: too many of the protected minorities are being caught?

[philman_36]

I do not have a solution to this...
Nor do I. However, being aware of the potential problems is never wrong
...as the proverbial genie is out of the bottle.
It may not be out of the bottle completely just yet as there have been no specific occurrences of identities being used in the manner indicated in the article, but it's definitely looking out of the cracks.
If the genie were out of the bottle and there was in incident to use you have to wonder if the ACLU would even put up a fight or just brush it under the rug. They have remained silent in the past about other encroachments.