Britain has surveillance cameras in downtown areas also.
mediaeater.com
This is another idea that could start a revolution here.
Since the early Nineties, when public and private spending on spy cameras boomed, crimes against property have declined. But this trend was predictable as the economy improved following the recession. During the same period, violent crime has increased, which can be partly linked to higher alcohol consumption resulting from more disposable income.
Life is not as simple as the camera proponents want it to be. And criminals soon learn how to beat them.
Big brother is big business in the battle against crime in Britain, but photo-shy villains have developed a bag of new tricks to elude the gaze of thousands of surveillance cameras that now dot its cities, towns and villages.
With 1.5 million closed-circuit television systems watching its streets, office buildings, schools, shopping centers and roads, Britain is one of the most closely monitored nations on the planet, and the government is spending another $115 million for more TV eyes.
rense.com
It has been suggested here- -and the proponents ran for cover to avoid all the brickbats. Even the ACLU opposes them.
Surveillance cameras are one such bad idea. They would not make us safer and would undermine the individual liberties that are fundamental to what we are as a nation.
archive.aclu.org
Unfortunately, our left over here is bound to discover their virtues.
The cameras were initially authorized as part of new effort to reduce traffic congestion in the city. London Mayor Ken Livingstone said, "Every traffic engineer in the world is following this, every city administration. I addressed the American Conference of Mayors on this. A lot of them said 'If it works and you get re-elected, I'll do it.'"
..................................................................................................................................................................
Here’s how it works. Drivers entering the city now have to pay a five-Pound toll charge. That is roughly eight U.S. dollars. Once a car enters the toll zone, a camera detects the car and then captures the license plate. The information is then converted and saved on a database. The toll must be paid by midnight.
The license plate in the database is then compared to the payment database. If the toll is paid, the image of the vehicle and license plate number are deleted. If not paid, the license
number is sent to another database to check registration details. The computer then
sends out penalty notices. Once the penalty has been paid, the image of the vehicle and
license are deleted. If three penalty notices have to be issued, the vehicle is impounded.
Those in charge of this highly sophisticated project hope that thousands of drivers will abandon their cars for public transportation. That would then lower the congestion in the city.
cbn.com
When word of this gets out, the war starts. The anti-car left in this country is sure to push this.
"When a system is put in place, whether it be a CCTV system, ID Card system, it will always be put in for a particular purpose," he explained. "Once it's in place the government or whichever body it is that's introducing it, will then say, ‘Now that we have this system in place, let's see what else we can use it for.’ As a consequence, whatever is being initially proposed, you can almost guarantee that in a few years down the line, there will be all sorts of new suggestions as to what further uses it can be put to."
Count on it.
The Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) recognizes that improvement and changes in technology can greatly enhance law enforcement efforts. The Department has utilized this method of crime prevention technology by strategic placement of closed-circuit television cameras (CCTV) in the District of Columbia.
Past U.S. Supreme Court and lower court decisions strongly suggest that this type of police monitoring is a valid exercise of a government's police powers. Under current interpretations of the First and Fourth Amendment, CCTV appears to represent a valid use of the state's power to protect its citizens. It does not intrude upon an individual's sphere of privacy, but rather records events occurring in public space for which individuals do not have a reasonable expectation of privacy.
In the case of Katz v. United States, 389 U.S. 347 (1967), the court held that the Fourth Amendment provides constitutional protection to those areas in which a person reasonably expects privacy. MPD believes the CCTV program can withstand legal scrutiny provided the cameras are focused on public areas and the images obtained are not used or disseminated improperly.
dcwatch.com
Safeguards will ensure that the technology is not abused.
Right. |
