City Cameras

[Guest RobJohnstone]

I came across sites like this

 

http://citycams.co.honolulu.hi.us/

 

I wonder how many cities have cameras like this. Is this against our privacy? I see cameras on top of traffic lights in my small town. I do not like big brother watching me, how about you? Your thoughts?

 

--Rob

[Guest DrTom]

Is this against our privacy?

No. You have no reasonable expectation of privacy on a public street. That said, I vehemently oppose the idea of the government watching people all the time. Since most folks don't do anything wrong, stop putting systems into place that make law-abiding people feel uneasy.

[Guest RobJohnstone]

I agree Dr. Tom but what can be done to stop them?

 

--Rob

[Guest Kotzenjunge]

A lot of cities around the entire world have webcams set up in public areas, if for nothing more than to just show their city off to people. I have no problems with the cameras in stoplights either. I go to the Hamburg, Berlin, and Perth webcam sites all the time.

 

However, as Tom said, any more than what is already in place now is crossing the line.

[Guest Kotzenjunge]

I agree Dr. Tom but what can be done to stop them?

 

--Rob

It's not really a problem per se, as it's mostly government-endorsed. If you were really that hell-bent on stopping this, you could find every camera in your town that's put in a public area and smash it.

[Guest DrTom]

I agree Dr. Tom but what can be done to stop them?

At this point, it would take a philosophical change in governments. The federal government seems to believe that the best way to catch terrorist is to spy on its own people in the most thorough and invasive ways possible. State and local governments are little better. They're not really doing anything wrong, per se, but I think the ethics of it are very shady, and it's completely fucking useless as far as catching terrorists goes.

[Guest RobJohnstone]

I agree Dr. Tom but what can be done to stop them?

 

--Rob

It's not really a problem per se, as it's mostly government-endorsed. If you were really that hell-bent on stopping this, you could find every camera in your town that's put in a public area and smash it.

That would be a crime. I am just wondering how they can watch us. I am pretty sure although it is public domain, there are laws against spying on american citizens. If there is no law then we should have one. If it is to catch terrorists it is still going to far. If we have to give up freedoms to catch these idiots, they already won.

 

--Rob

[Guest Kotzenjunge]

(Obvious attempt at humor whizzes over Rob's head)

 

I think you mean Eminent Domain, but that still has nothing to do with privacy. Yes, there are various anti-wiretapping laws and such, but in light of how fast and far technology has come, the government is lagging behind on saying how new things can be used and can't be used in regards to the privacy of its citizens. Most local and state governments have to wing it pretty much, and just use their own judgement in each situation.

 

Around here, we've had cameras in stoplights and such for a while, but they were just to catch traffic violators, not terrorists.

[Guest kkktookmybabyaway]

Frankly I could give a crap if cameras are up. Personally, I like those little cameras located by stoplights. It's funny because whenever an officer used to bust someone for running a red light, the disgruntled drivers response was usually "Don't you have more important things to do?"

 

Well, thanks to these cameras, they can.

 

Of course, these more important things usually revolve hangout out the Dunkin' Donuts or something...

[Guest Mr. Slim Citrus]

I'm against the idea as a matter of principle; I read 1984 at the age of nine, and ever since then, I've had an irrational fear of being watched. I fucking hate cameras.

 

Unfortunately, the only thing that I could probably do about it is move out into the country, which is anathema to my personality.

[Guest Kahran Ramsus]

Why care? If they start putting cameras in your homes, then you have something to complain about. Theoretically, in public they are supposed to be watching you anyways. Just now they use cameras instead of in person.

[Guest evenflowDDT]

In this specific case, the webcam is being put up not to broadcast citizen's activity over the 'net, but rather to promote it as a vacation spot, so I have no problem with that. And given the general low quality of webcams and the difficulty in saving images from them, I doubt it's being used for anything more.

 

In regards to cameras on traffic-lights, they're only used to catch the license plates of people running red lights; they're static cameras and only take pictures when the light is red. Since that's their only use, unless you love running red lights, who cares? Sure, it's harder to dispute a ticket, but it's not like a stop sign where you can "miss" it (not that that excuse holds up in court anyway). Besides, this means that in theory some traffic laws will be upheld more efficiently and cops will concentrate on something more important. I don't see how this is any different from those radar things you pass by on the road that display how fast you were going to help uphold the speed limit.

 

In regards to being spied on, whether it's on the internet or in "their" hidden databases, it has yet to catch any terrorists (some hackers over the years, but no actual harmful terrorists), so for that frame of mind it's useless. Gasp! The government enacting useless/faulty legislation? I've never heard of that.

 

Slightly off topic, but I'd like to state for the record that I can't wait for Hate Week this year!

[Guest kkktookmybabyaway]

Anti-red-light camera people use the argument that now people will be scared to run red lights, hit the brakes and get rear-ended by another car. Of course these pinheads are leaving out the fact that if the person RAN the red light, they might get hit from the side from a motorist who doesn't see them and goes when their light turns green...

[Guest cynicalprofit]

Im not commiting crimes in public so I have nothing to fear. Its not about big brother is watching, its just nice to know in the case of a crime, big brother can go and review the tape and see what actually happened, no arguement or hassle invovled. Besides if you're not doing anything illegal, wheres teh fear from. Your in public, you have no real reason to expect privacy while being in a populated area. Its not your home, deal with others watching you.

 

Now if only the governments would stop trying to invaed my privacy by wanting to know what i do in my home, everything would be fine.

[Guest DrTom]

Besides if you're not doing anything illegal, wheres teh fear from

THen why not let the police into your house whenever they ask? Or allow your phone to be tapped? Or your snail mail and email read? After all, you're not doing anything wrong. Where is the line drawn?

 

I don't want any of those things to be done, including putting cameras up all over cities. Average citizens aren't criminals and terrorists, and they shouldn't be monitored and treated as if they were. Why should I have my rights stepped on in the name of catching a few criminals? It's just not worth it in the end, mainly because it doesn't work.

[Guest Kahran Ramsus]

THen why not let the police into your house whenever they ask? Or allow your phone to be tapped? Or your snail mail and email read? After all, you're not doing anything wrong. Where is the line drawn?

 

Because your home is not a public place. That is where the line is drawn.

[Guest DrTom]

Because your home is not a public place. That is where the line is drawn.

Actually, after the passage of the Homeland Fascism Act, that line has become awfully blurry. Law enforcement agencies now have "sneak and peek" authority, where they can basically go into your home for any reason and look around. The kicker is that they don't even have to let you know for up to two weeks. It's one of those things that came to light when the dreadfully misnamed Patriot Act was being railroaded thru Congress.

[Guest EricMM]

wait wait wait what happened to search warrents and all that? If the po come to my door I'd let them in, cuz I've got nothing to hide, but I don't HAVE to, since when were they allowed in?

[Guest DrTom]

Since the Patriot Act cynically capitalized on everyone's fear of terrorists by greatly expanding the powers of law enforcement to spy on its own people. I'm not a fan of any of these invasive, big brother-ish "answers," because none of them will do a damn bit of good when it comes to catching terrorists.

[Guest Kahran Ramsus]

Ok. I probably should have said that's where I draw the line with regards to this issue. That's what I meant.

[Guest So what? I liked bubble boy]

If your not doing anything wrong and don't plan too, then don't worry weither BIG BROTHER is watching you or not. If they really wanted to watch you, then they would and you couldn't stop it.

[Guest Mr. Slim Citrus]

You could, in fact, keep "them" from watching you; it's more of a question of whether or not you're willing to make all of the necessary personal sacrifices in order to ensure your privacy.

 

EDIT - And I disagree with your reasoning, SW?ILBB; just because I don't have anything to hide doesn't mean that I should just accept "Big Brother" watching me.

[Guest Anglesault]

Besides if you're not doing anything illegal, wheres teh fear from

THen why not let the police into your house whenever they ask?

Why the hell not?

 

Or allow your phone to be tapped?  Or your snail mail and email read?

That is very extreme, though. And anytime someone goes off ona horrified rant about the Govt doing that, I can't help but think they are hiding something or ashamed of something they are doing or may do.

[Guest cynicalprofit]

THen why not let the police into your house whenever they ask? Or allow your phone to be tapped? Or your snail mail and email read? After all, you're not doing anything wrong. Where is the line drawn?

Thats easy, your home, it is YOUR home after all, what you do in there is your business, not mine, so long as your're not commiting felonies and what not in it.

 

EDIT - And I disagree with your reasoning, SW?ILBB; just because I don't have anything to hide doesn't mean that I should just accept "Big Brother" watching me.

Everyone else can watch you when you got out into public, whats a few more eyes who are out looking for CRIMINALS who may harm you or people you care about and not you, average joe blow.

[Guest DrTom]

Why the hell not?

Because it's MY home. I have nothing to hide, but they also have no business coming into my home -- mainly because I have nothing to hide.

 

And anytime someone goes off ona horrified rant about the Govt doing that, I can't help but think they are hiding something or ashamed of something they are doing or may do.

Not at all. I just don't like the idea of someone monitoring my communications. I'm not doing anything wrong, so why bother with me? Go after the people who ARE doing things wrong. Go after the people who actually might be terrorists or have ties to terrorism, instead of harassing your own citizens and making them even more distrusful of the government THEY elected.

[Guest RobJohnstone]

Why the hell not?

Because it's MY home. I have nothing to hide, but they also have no business coming into my home -- mainly because I have nothing to hide.

 

And anytime someone goes off ona horrified rant about the Govt doing that, I can't help but think they are hiding something or ashamed of something they are doing or may do.

Not at all. I just don't like the idea of someone monitoring my communications. I'm not doing anything wrong, so why bother with me? Go after the people who ARE doing things wrong. Go after the people who actually might be terrorists or have ties to terrorism, instead of harassing your own citizens and making them even more distrusful of the government THEY elected.

Damn straight tom. I have nothing to hide in my house but, if anyone tries to enter my home, including government, let it be known that I will give one warning and then someones head is coming off. I am grateful shit like that doesn't happen in the Great commonweath of Pennsylvania.

 

--Rob

[Guest Scarlet Pimpernel]

This issue of privacy has become quite large in my country, as the federal government has recently passed legislation allowing the federal police to investigate any house at any time they please. However, to do so, one must have sufficient evidence of the occupants having connections with various terrorist organisations.

 

Still, at this point in time, I think there's nothing too much to worry about, and I believe that any complaints on red traffic lights is absurd.

[Guest Mr. Slim Citrus]

Everyone else can watch you when you got out into public, whats a few more eyes who are out looking for CRIMINALS who may harm you or people you care about and not you, average joe blow.

Which is one of the reasons I said sacrifices. If one were determined to have their privacy, what's to stop them from purchasing some land out in the middle of nowhere and becoming a hermit or something?

[Guest cynicalprofit]

Which is one of the reasons I said sacrifices. If one were determined to have their privacy, what's to stop them from purchasing some land out in the middle of nowhere and becoming a hermit or something?

one you're gonna want food sometime, and no matter what you do, you have to buy supplies from someone. And if u go live as a hermit, the government will probably look into you because you fight the crazy loner type.

[Guest Mr. Slim Citrus]

People still farm, don't they?

 

Look, I know I'm sounding extreme here, but I'm just saying that where there's a will to protect your privacy, there's a way. It's just a question of how many amenities you're willing to give up to protect said privacy.

 

My ex-wife's family lives a little south of Amish Country in West Pennsylvania. While some of them do occasionally venture into town in order to trade or whatever, they pretty much do a good job of cultivating everything they "need" on their own. I'm fairly certain that they can get along just fine without the need to compromise their privacy (although that has nothing to do with why they live the way they do.), so why couldn't anyone else?