[RESOLVED] '1984' is Fast Approaching.....

[NooToo]

With out starting trouble, I think the issue is with cameras in general. I understand the banks and security cameras, but the cameras at intersections and in public are getting outragious.

Low1 - it was public cameras on street corners that caught the footage of the bombers running away as 36 adults and children were killed by the bomb they had just detonated.

The police said they would not have been able to get a conviction without it. Nor would they have been able to respond to the emergency as efficiently.

I sincerely hope that the police continue to use publicly placed cameras for the public good.

I also think that those who think they are being scrutinised by "them" are either completely paranoid or have a breath taking level of arrogance. No dept public or private has time or the funding to go through every single second of security tape and stills of speeding cars and catalogue it all to produce a movements file on members of the public, they only start looking when there is someone they are after, and then only if they have evidence that search might be fruitful.

[LPetrarca]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by NooToo:
.............No dept public or private has time or the funding to go through every single second of security tape and stills of speeding cars and catalogue it all to produce a movements file on members of the public, they only start looking when there is someone they are after, and then only if they have evidence that search might be fruitful.[/QUOTE)

I would disagree. This is the USA where big government is a career path.

Gov't. is constantly finding new ways to protect us from ourselves.

I'm not naive enough to believe that somewhere, somehow, some politician will not realize that the review of these tapes provides an invaluable revenue generating tool. Then, there will be entire departments created for the purpose of reviewing these tapes and mailing infraction notices to citizens for every fartin' thing from J-walking to loitering.

[Pyroate]

Originally posted by LPetrarca:
How about if my wife or one of my parents is driving my car? I get the ticket?

What's wrong with this picture Mr. Orwell?

Normally I would argue anything that would make drivers more careful is a good thing but admit it that most of us have let a friend or relative drive our cars and getting a ticket for anothers wrong doings is not just or appropriate.

[medi-4]

we have those in my town ..well actualy just one or two stop light in very hevy triffic areas i try to avoid them at all costs

[BreakWindows]

We've had red light camera's here for years...of course, our fine Mayor also has cameras at every ATM, the intersections in Times Square, at Herald Square, the World Trade Center, the Financial district, and in Harlem.

You might watch TRL on MTV...that camera covers Times Square, but also points at 3 other cameras. All those Morning Talk news-shows that pan through the crowd are archived and have been used in court cases to prove a person was in the vacinity of a crime. There is about 15 feet of New York City that isn't being taped right now.

*pause* Sorry, l had to wave to the camera accross the street from my window..

PS: l got caught by a red light camera, because a construction worker waved me through. l tried to fight it, but l lost and had to pay, and l didn't have the cash to take it to higher court. For anyone who supports cameras watching over people, keep in mind that an individuals privacy and logic is more valuable than a ticket.

[WebHead]

Whatever happened to being innocent until proven guilty? I can't believe that there are people in this forum who seem to support this form of "entrapment". The police are on the streets to keep order. They should do that by prosecuting those who break the law. Bring down these cameras I say. They keep trying to do things to make it safer on the road, which if great, but now they're doing it at the expense of our inalienable rights. I say if you get in a car, and go on the road, then you should know the risks involved. And get thos cops out of the donut shops and onto the street so that we don't have to rely on cameras to entrap us. Ok,... I'm done ranting now.

[Wayward Clam]

Originally posted by AggroZone:
Whatever happened to being innocent until proven guilty?

Let's see, photographic proof of your license plate attached to a car going through a red light, not good enough for you?

Originally posted by AggroZone:
And get thos cops out of the donut shops and onto the street so that we don't have to rely on cameras to entrap us. Ok,... I'm done ranting now.

Yeah, I expect cops are REAL anxious to hear your opinions on how things should be done.

[Darren Wilson]

Like it has been said, the only ones who don't want the cameras are the ones with something to hide.

[Skatman]

Here in Utah we had these things called photo cop, .. you sped past them and you got a ticket for speeding. The issue was where does it end? Here in the US we have whats called constitutional rights to our privacy. When will they install little devices in your car to tell if you are speeding and send info to the police dept to get your ticket sent out?

When will they install little chips in you and your kids to "track" your health conditions, oh wait they have already mentioned something like this in Popular Science. When will they ... well you get what im getting at.

[Budster64]

Sorry I have to agree with wayward here.
If you have a problem with the cameras, then most likely you should have an even greater problem with sobriety checkpoints, now here's something that does hassle the person NOT drinking and driving. But do I think it's a good idea??? Yes I do, yet I don't see anyone up in arms about it. What about random drug testing? Is that certainly not being considered guilty before proven innocent?
Fine, forget all that...apples to oranges.
I say if you lend your car to someone you should WARN them that a violation by traffic camera will result in YOU getting a speeding ticket. If they then go ahead and break the law...they don't care much for you then do they?
So far all I have heard are arguments from people who want their right to break the law and not get caught. Except for LPetrarca who is afraid that someone else breaks the law and he suffers, THAT is the only legitimate complaint.


Addendum: perhaps we could free some of these cops from having to spend thirty minutes writing a ticket so they could possibly search for and arrest that guy who just robbed your house?? Or just performed some other heinous crime to you or your loved ones?...just a thought

[ShadowKing]

I do not have a problem with the cameras, because I do not speed.

As for you Paranoia Addicts, The software that was used in the SuperBowl looked at and recognized the faces of known criminals. As stated previously, no group of PEOPLE have enough funding to watch and record all the video from cameras, but its not that hard to do from software.

That said, If I was ticketed by a camera, I would challenge it, because I am innocent until proven guilty. My car is registered in both mine and my wife's names, who gets the ticket? Unless you have a picture of the driver, how can you prove "beyond a shadow of a doubt" that it was me driving? I start feeling concerned when our constitutional rights are being challenged for expediency.

In Canada they also have those auto-ticket cameras, but they photo the driver to positively identify the speeder. (I know they sent my sister the photos with the ticket :-)

[Budster64]

Originally posted by ShadowKing:
In Canada they also have those auto-ticket cameras, but they photo the driver to positively identify the speeder. (I know they sent my sister the photos with the ticket :-)

There you go shadowking, if they photo the driver who just ran a red light and it's not you, then your constitutional rights are protect, and heck they might even ID that guy who just ran a redlight with your stolen car! Now if they were taking photos of EVERYONE who crossed that intersection...that I would have a definite problem with.

People don't get me wrong, I am a strong advocate of our constitution and I do not want ( as Shadowking stated) our rights trampled over for mere expediency.

[BreakWindows]

Originally posted by Darren Wilson:
Like it has been said, the only ones who don't want the cameras are the ones with something to hide.

You're right, l do have something to hide. My personal life. My privacy. Where l go and what l do in my free time. l do nothing illegal, hell, nothing immoral, but that doesn't mean l want to give the government the right to watch people who they don't have reason to suspect are guilty of crimes.

l'd love to see the pro-camera people getting their houses raided by armed officers, searching for anything illegal, grinning their silly little asses off and saying "hey its cool, you can ransack my personal stuff without probable cause or a warrant, l have nothing to hide".

And to preempt any ridiculous arguements: No, it is not differant. ln a free country, the people own the roads, the sidewalks, the curbs. The government has no jurisdiction over them; and a cop may not stop you or follow you without reasonable suspicion any more than they may enter your home uninvited. Of course, traffic cameras aren't the issue here. Read my above post, where l mentioned Giuliani put cameras to monitor the sidewalks, the streets, the banks and random buildings...then read the 4th ammendment of the US Constitution, and Title 42 Chapter 21 of the US Code.. There is a problem.

---
"Enslaving a single innocent man enslaves the nation alongside him. lt is not worth enslaving a thousand guilty men if it includes a single innocent man."

[ShadowKing]

Originally posted by BreakWindows:
In a free country, the people own the roads, the sidewalks, the curbs. The government has no jurisdiction over them...

Correct, WE ARE THE GOVERNMENT. Did you vote? Do you vote for your congressman/representative? We vote on the laws that we choose to abide by. Here in WA we voted to have the speed limit raised on the freeway to 70. In this country the laws are decided by the people. We then must abide by our own decisions.

[Darren Wilson]

Originally posted by BreakWindows:
You're right, l do have something to hide. My personal life. My privacy. Where l go and what l do in my free time. l do nothing illegal, hell, nothing immoral, but that doesn't mean l want to give the government the right to watch people who they don't have reason to suspect are guilty of crimes.

When you are out in public though on the highways that isn't private life though is it? The lights are there for a reason are they not? They are to try to allow traffic to flow from all directions at set intervals. What would happen if the lights were not there???? Major chaos. It would be as bad when people jump red lights. IT IS ILLEGAL. No arguement there. I fyou do something illegal then you shold be wiling to suffer the consequence of it. If you are not , then you shouldn't do it. It isn't as if the cameras are pointing through your bedroom window are they?

l'd love to see the pro-camera people getting their houses raided by armed officers, searching for anything illegal, grinning their silly little asses off and saying "hey its cool, you can ransack my personal stuff without probable cause or a warrant, l have nothing to hide".

If any police want to raid my house then they have to have a warrant simple as that. I have nothing to hide. They have to have good enough reason to do so though in the first place. Back to the first point, if you don;t jump the lights or speed then you don't have anything to worry about, same thing applies for this as well. The police will not charge you if your car isn't the one caught on camera so why should they want to ransack your house if they have nothing on you???

And to preempt any ridiculous arguements: No, it is not differant. ln a free country, the people own the roads, the sidewalks, the curbs. The government has no jurisdiction over them; and a cop may not stop you or follow you without reasonable suspicion any more than they may enter your home uninvited. Of course, traffic cameras aren't the issue here. Read my above post, where l mentioned Giuliani put cameras to monitor the sidewalks, the streets, the banks and random buildings...then read the 4th ammendment of the US Constitution, and Title 42 Chapter 21 of the US Code.. There is a problem.

---
"Enslaving a single innocent man enslaves the nation alongside him. lt is not worth enslaving a thousand guilty men if it includes a single innocent man."

The reason the cameras are there on the sidewalks is to PROTECT you not to spy on you. Put yourself in a 80 year old's shoes, if they are being mugged. Nobody else around, the cameras are on. Muggers are caught on camera. Same goes for the cameras in shops & banks. They are not to spy on you but to protect the staff and the property. The cameras on the lights are there to protect other road users from the idiots that blatently jump the lights.

OH & BTW in the UK did u know that digital camera evidence is not admissable in court as it can be altered easily So much for these new digital speed cameras that are going up a lot over here. I know at least 7 people who have gotten off speeding tickets because of this 'quirk' in the system. Not that I condone speeding or jumping lights. I just don't want to be one of the poor people wo get injured or lose a loved one in an incident caused by reckless driving like this. Hence why I am all for them.