ACLU, NAACP oppose police cameras

Washington Times ^ | 6/14/02 | Brian DeBose

[kattracks]

The ACLU and NAACP yesterday joined critics of Metropolitan Police Department plans for video surveillance of public spaces.

Nkechi Taifa, a member of the NAACP's Police Task Force and a Howard University law professor, said the cameras could lead to racial profiling and spying by police.

[Jen]

Pay up.
Ammo costs.

"We have to stay vigilant, we have to fight, we can not let the RATS
destroy our Republic! We have made a difference. Free Republic is that tool for
us to gather, meet like minded individuals and fight for all we believe.
Keep this web site running. The liberals hate us, so we must be on the right track!"
- WIMom

---

Free Republic is funded solely by donations from readers.
Donations and official correspondence should be mailed to:
Free Republic, LLC, PO Box 9771, Fresno, CA 93794

Support Free Republic by secure credit card.

Send PayPal direct to JimRob@psnw.com

---

[Jen]

This one?

[goodieD]

yeah but do we really want these creeps on our side?

[Lucius Cornelius Sulla]

This one?

You think this guy looks like my screen name? Looks like I need to have a long discussion with you about Roman history!!

[mn12]

The cameras, police officials said, will be used to counteract terrorism and domestic criminal activity. The cameras are monitored in a central control center that is activated, police say, only during times of crisis.

If these cameras are used "only during times of crisis", how would they prevent terrorism and criminal activity?! In the event of a major crime or terrorism act, aren't the eyewitnesses and media coverage enough? I have a feeling that a "crisis" would be defined as any time when Tom Ridge's rainbow of terrorism isn't blue.

I never thought I'd simultaneously agree with the NAACP and ACLU on an issue. First time for everything, I suppose..

[Jen]

Would you please hold the history lesson till tomorrow, General? I'm heading to bed now. hahahaha

[SoDak]

No doubt. I must be way overtired. I agree with them too.

[backhoe]

Photo_Radar:

To find all articles tagged or indexed using *Photo_Radar, click below:
	click here >>>	Photo_Radar	<<< click here
(To view all FR Bump Lists, click here)

I agree with 'em too-- sonoffagun!

[Prodigal Son]

The article keeps mentioning London as if that's the only place over here that has the cameras. They are everywhere! The little village where I live in Scotland doesn't even have a traffic signal it's so small- but it has these cameras! Don't ever let them get this going in the States. Once they get 'em anywhere they'll be everywhere and you won't be able to get rid of them. You won't be able to destroy them- the camera you missed will have caught you in the act. George Orwell would fall over dead from shock if he were in the UK right now.

[usadave]

Nkechi Taifa, a member of the NAACP's Police Task Force and a Howard University law professor, said the cameras could lead to racial profiling and spying by police.

Wow, so these cameras could lead to racial profiling. I notice that the article made no mention of HOW the cameras could supposedly lead to racial profiling. But that seems to be the latest fad with certain groups, just say that something could lead to racial profiling, and because of that, we better not do it.

[glc1173@aol.com]

"Don't ever let them get this going in the States. Once they get 'em anywhere they'll be everywhere and you won't be able to get rid of them. You won't be able to destroy them- the camera you missed will have caught you in the act."

B.S. Even over there in no-gun Britain, spy cameras can't even protect themselves. The London Telegraph reports successful destruction of spy cameras and traffic cameras in such innovative close-range ways as just lassoing them with ropes tied to car bumpers. BTW, spy cameras work poorly at night.

Learn what a roadway spy camera looks like (photos)!

[Khepera]

Whatever works. I don't want spy cameras put up. Do you?

[Prodigal Son]

So am I safe now? Are all the spy cameras gone? They quit putting them up? Wow! Let me run down to the village and check!

(sound of running feet)

Nope, they're still there. Darn.

[glc1173@aol.com]

"So am I safe now? Are all the spy cameras gone? They quit putting them up? Wow! Let me run down to the village and check! (sound of running feet) Nope, they're still there. Darn.

Ever read your "mainstream" dailies in Britain? Notice that those two girls who just got kidnapped and murdered weren't videod in any stage of the crime?

[Prodigal Son]

So what's your point. I live here and I'm telling you these cameras are all over the place. That they didn't catch the two girls on film is the least of my concerns. My concern is that they regularly monitor my ordinary activities when I am just walking down the street minding my own business.

I warn Americans to not let them be installed because the darned things are so innocuous you scarcely notice 'em. They put one up, you might think about it for a day or two, but after that, it's just another part of the scenery and in the mean time they do manage to solve a crime or two with 'em and the general public begins to lend their support to 'em- hence "they never come down after they go up".

I've asked many many people here if the cameras don't bother them and they invariably say "no, they make me feel safe". If you bring up the George Orwell angle, invariably what you get is "Oh like Big Brother is watching me? Ach, well, if you've done nothing wrong, you've nothing to fear..."

I'm telling you. These things are here (in this country) to stay. You need to fight 'em tooth and nail in the States before you let 'em put these cameras up. It's literally the slippery slope dynamic.

BTW, you'd have to be a Pecos Bill type lasso throwing fool to rope most of the ones around here. They put 'em way up on poles, twenty or thirty feet off the ground in odd, hard to see corners. Usually, the way they have 'em rigged up in a town, if you tried to do something to one, another camera will undoubtably catch some clue it was you. Sure, the speeding cameras are no problem to destroy- but the CCTV cameras that police use to monitor the public are a bit dicier to get at.

Also, I haven't bought a newspaper in a long time. Actually, damned if I can even remember when I did buy the last one. I read one on a plane about half a year ago- but that was given to me by the stewardess. And I refuse to own a television- I watch DVDs on my computer. I get 100% of my news from the internet. Why should I buy a paper when I have the entire world of newspapers for free online?

[glc1173@aol.com]

"I warn Americans to not let them be installed because the darned things are so innocuous you scarcely notice 'em. They put one up, you might think about it for a day or two, but after that, it's just another part of the scenery and in the mean time they do manage to solve a crime or two with 'em and the general public begins to lend their support to 'em- hence "they never come down after they go up"."

Here, we're nowhere near as complacent as the Brit sheeple. Rest assured that - throughout the U.S. heartland - as soon as one goes up, most every guy and gal in the area is thinking about a good final firing position to take out its control box unseen or is thinking about simply spraying the lens with one of those big powerful dry-chemical fire extinguishers that shoots 50' while wearing a mask on Halloween.

[Prodigal Son]

Here, we're nowhere near as complacent as the Brit sheeple.

Yeah, well, that's my gig with the Brits as well. But as far as Americans taking out the cameras- what happens when they put 'em in the big cities? They put the cameras in the big cities, what are we going do? You figure there are that many people in the big cities that want to risk being taken down by a SWAT team to shoot the cameras?

More than likely what will happen is they'll put them in high crime areas. They'll use them to catch a lot of criminals. They'll make the case to the public that the cameras are a good thing. The public will agree. Oh, you'll have dissenters but then those that would destroy the cameras will be just another criminal to lock up. The precedent, meanwhile, will be set. The cameras will then move to smaller cities. Then to towns. People will die destroying them, of this I have no doubt. But I also do not doubt that eventually most people will just shrug their shoulders and not want to make any waves. They'll tell themselves that the cameras are a good thing. A camera will get taken out here and there- it'll be replaced with two more or three. Stiff criminal penalties will see the camera destroyers sitting behind bars for considerable lengths of time.

All the while you'll have the computer and surveillance industry lobbying Congress with major bucks to implement more of the surveillance stuff. This is the way it works. You've got Oracle right now wanting to sell a National ID card system to the gov't. Corporations with their facial recognition software. NASA with its Airport Brain Scan. We're talking about big bucks being thrown at already corrupt politicians to pass the laws and convince their constituency. It's happening as we speak.

This is why we must never allow the cameras to come to the USA in the first place. We musn't allow the legal precedent to be set. It's like the camel getting his nose under the edge of the tent.

And don't kid yourself. We, as a nation (the USA) are far more complacent than you think. Where were the massive riots to protest the Patriot Act? Where is all the dissent over the draconian airport security? Where is even the public outcry over illegal immigration? Most people don't care. Or they just don't care enough.

[glc1173@aol.com]

"We, as a nation (the USA) are far more complacent than you think. Where were the massive riots to protest the Patriot Act? Where is all the dissent over the draconian airport security? Where is even the public outcry over illegal immigration?"

Ask the three major airlines now in bankruptcy or on the verge of it. Americans have voted with their feet against being treated like prisoners as the price of flying - by just driving any short trip instead of flying!

The revolt against illegal immigration is at the ballot box; increasingly, schools can't pass tax referendums because American parents feel the raised taxes would only go to aliens' kids; this was a front-page article in USA Today within past couple years.

The sole reason why you don't see riots over the Patriot Act is that a social truce exists; the only people Washington is hassling are Moslem aliens. The social truce simply is that Washington and the heartland are leaving each other alone now - unlike under the Klintons.

You doubt big-city people will shoot spy cameras? Maybe you're right - but the things will be "blinded" by minority slum kids spraying their "eyes" with "borrowed" fire extinguishers that shoot a jet of powder 50'! All the lobbyists infesting Capitol Hill can't keep that from happening - any more than they now keep those same kids from tagging walls in those neighborhoods with spray-can graffiti.