Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Digital Photography -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Mike Buckley who wrote (7769)	5/22/2004 8:13:42 AM
From: Crocodile	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 21631

A couple of years ago, I read something about London going to an extensive system of surveillance cameras so that it would be next to impossible to move around without being "on camera" almost all the time. There was a bit of an uproar about it at the time. I guess they went ahead with it anyhow. The interesting thing about banning the shooting photos and film is that I don't think it will stop those who are determined to do so for covert purposes. Instead, while the ban may stop the average citizen, it will drive others "underground" and make it less easy to detect their actions. Is that what the authorities really want? Wouldn't it be better to leave things as they are and just devote more vigilance to detection of those who are behaving suspiciously? What I especially don't like is that I think cameras have the potential to do much good, so banning their use seems counter-productive -- not to mention representing yet another erosion of personal freedom and expression under the guise of national security.