This is appalling

[bc2208]

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/2007/10/02/2007-10-02_bloomberg_calls_surveillancecamera_criti.html

LONDON - Mayor Bloomberg has a message for New Yorkers who don't like surveillance cameras: Get real.

"It's just ridiculous people who object to using technology," the mayor said, adding that he had not talked with anyone in London who wasn't "thrilled" at the presence of security cameras in their capital.

 

[silverhandorder]

Grrrr I really liked NH, I should have stayed there this weekend.

 

[rodent]

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/2007/10/02/2007-10-02_bloomberg_calls_surveillancecamera_criti.html

LONDON - Mayor Bloomberg has a message for New Yorkers who don't like surveillance cameras: Get real.

"It's just ridiculous people who object to using technology," the mayor said, adding that he had not talked with anyone in London who wasn't "thrilled" at the presence of security cameras in their capital.

Yeah, not only that:

- Our police are a bunch of thugs
- Our gun laws won't let us protect ourselves
- We get our belongings searched whenever we travel on city mass transit, which is random so you can't anticipate when it happens
- There are guys walking around Manhattan with huge guns, and they won't think twice before shooting you if something is up

I don't <3 NYC. I'm moving out of the city and I'm going to get real guns to protect myself.

 

[SouthernGuy15]

I like technology.

I BOLDLY DESPISE when technology is used to violate my privacy!!!!!!

 

[[HAF]Foxtrot]

Thats a direct violation of our Privacy in the Constitutional rights. Someone needs to bring this matter to the Supreme Court and shoot it down. They have a camera on a square, they could just as easy move that camera to look into someones home and effectivly "spy" on them.

 

[10thAmendmentMan]

"It's just ridiculous people who object to using technology," the mayor said...

As if disliking, what could be construed as, a centralized spy database makes a person a Luddite...

 

[Chester Copperpot]

What a dick.. no wonder he put that new law in place that requires media licensing if 2 people are taking pictures for 30 minutes in NYC... Heil Hitler Mr Bloomberg...How Ironic

 

[bbachtung]

So Bloomberg is taking advice on civil liberties from the British? They lost out long ago, although the American government is working hard to meet or beat the Brits in lost liberties.

 

[SeanEdwards]

If you are standing in a public place, why do you have an expectation of privacy?

 

[saku39]

If you are standing in a public place, why do you have an expectation of privacy?

Is their any reason I shouldn't expect it? Nobody likes or needs perfect strangers staring at them. The cameras are just more big brother crap.

The argument of "we'll it's public" or "if you are a law-abiding citizen you have nothing to fear" doesn't make any sense becasue the England cameras have been a failure. There was a study done that pointed out that the cameras didn't help help to solve crime. The London bombings happened even with the cameras in place.

If they didn't work, why do we need them? Why do you need to monitor the population?

 

[UCFGavin]

kinda funny, i was talking with some gentlemen from england yesterday that didn't like the cameras at all. they also said they understand why a million english are leaving their country every year.

 

[SeanEdwards]

Is their any reason I shouldn't expect it?

Is there a reason you shouldn't expect privacy while standing in a public place? Are you serious? What kind of question is that? Do you have delusions of invisibility or something? If you're walking across the street and I see you, do you honestly think I've violated your privacy? What a ridiculous notion.

Nobody likes or needs perfect strangers staring at them. The cameras are just more big brother crap.

You better start wearing a full burka in public then.

The argument of "we'll it's public" or "if you are a law-abiding citizen you have nothing to fear" doesn't make any sense becasue the England cameras have been a failure. There was a study done that pointed out that the cameras didn't help help to solve crime. The London bombings happened even with the cameras in place.

If they didn't work, why do we need them? Why do you need to monitor the population?[/COLOR]

Well that's silly. All kinds of criminals have been identified from video recordings. Sure, they don't stop a bomber from detonating a bomb, but they certainly do provide information that can lead to apprehension of the bomber after the fact.

A camera at an intersection is no different from a cop standing at the intersection. Or a reliable eye witness. In truth, the camera is more reliable, because people have crappy memories.

Cameras in banks help catch bankrobbers.

Casinos in Vegas clearly believe that cameras help with their security. And they are pros at security.

You are in a public place. People can look at you. Deal.

 

[bc2208]

So what happens when a facial recognition software program bugs out and mistakenly identifies you as a bank robber?

 

[mconder]

The mayor, who has a home in London's posh Chelsea neighborhood, said he expected to spend more time here once he leaves office.

No doubt, a neighborhood like this is a camera free zone.

 

[SeanEdwards]

So what happens when a facial recognition software program bugs out and mistakenly identifies you as a bank robber?

In a lawful society you get your day in court to set the record straight.

This isn't any different from the numerous cases of witnesses identifying innocent people as the criminal. It happens all the time.

 

[runderwo]

Thats a direct violation of our Privacy in the Constitutional rights. Someone needs to bring this matter to the Supreme Court and shoot it down. They have a camera on a square, they could just as easy move that camera to look into someones home and effectivly "spy" on them.

A Constitutional right to privacy is a myth propagated by liberal courts.

 

[mconder]

Sure, they don't stop a bomber from detonating a bomb, but they certainly do provide information that can lead to apprehension of the bomber after the fact.

Why not just implement a technology that stops bombers before the fact...they called private firearms. I can't believe we have Ron Paul supporters who want a surveillance control grid watching them 24/7. These technologies can be used for way more than traffic offenders. The camera's aren't just record, but processing information.

 

[runderwo]

I think the big problem with these cameras is that only the cops can watch you. Why can't I watch the cops?

 

[mconder]

This isn't any different from the numerous cases of witnesses identifying innocent people as the criminal. It happens all the time.

Well, if there is no difference, lets continue to operate without cameras and save some money.

 

[SeanEdwards]

Sure, they don't stop a bomber from detonating a bomb, but they certainly do provide information that can lead to apprehension of the bomber after the fact.

Why not just implement a technology that stops bombers before the fact...they called private firearms. I can't believe we have Ron Paul supporters who want a surveillance control grid watching them 24/7. These technologies can be used for way more than traffic offenders. The camera's aren't just record, but processing information.

Did you really need to change the subject?

I thought this was a thread about video surveilance in public places. Why are you now bringing up firearms?

I can't believe there's people who think they can stand in a public area, and think they are in a private place. That's an awfully self-centered attitude.