liveinxs 0 Posted July 16, 2011 i found this book on amazon , looks like it would be good reading... http://www.amazon.com/Road-Big-Brother-Struggle-Surveillance/dp/1594032483/ref=wl_it_dp_o?ie=UTF8&coliid=I3PN2MKDYZF5IQ&colid=31QL4BSN37OB2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
fa chris 0 Posted July 19, 2011 I'm against CCTV in public places, as well as stop light cameras and all that other stuff. One more freedom we're slowly giving up... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rory 0 Posted July 19, 2011 I wish they had CCTV on the streets here, most times there are conveniently never any witnesses to all the violent crimes. "Privacy" is not to be expected in a "Public" place, and people have the freedom to move to an area without cameras if they so choose Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
liveinxs 0 Posted July 19, 2011 i really don't have any problem with cameras in public, could be used as a deterrent against those wishing to commit crimes... the way i see it , is if you aren't doing anything wrong, what harm could they possibly do, as far as red light cameras, again, if you don't run a light , you have nothing to worry about.... just as the cameras could be used against someone, they could be used to help someone... in fact, just today, i received this book, i thought it might be a good read, plus i got it for only 3.96 used, delivered to my door,,, it looks brand new, amazon is a good place to shop.... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Birdman Adam 0 Posted July 19, 2011 With red light cameras, (at least here in the US) you can very easily get in trouble without doing anything wrong! It becomes an almost constant worry for me when I'm driving in crazy high-tax areas like Washington, DC. Plus, its been proven that they can actually increase accidents/hyper-viligant driving because people are freaked out about getting tickets. Red-light runners are way down the list in terms of dangerous driving habits anyway! Bottom line: red light cams are simple moneymakers for the gov't. Any camera in a public place is fine by me. I enjoy spotting them, seeing what crap other people are using, and marveling at the good expensive stuff. Basically, wherever a person has a right to look around (public places...!), then a camera should be allowed to be there as well. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
fa chris 0 Posted July 20, 2011 It's not prevention, it's not keeping honest people honest, it's big brother looking for a reason to throw you in jail or issue you another pointless citation and using your own tax money to do it. Someone watching a violent crime after the fact doesn't help anyone at all. Only true prevention here would be having a conceal & carry permit. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tomcctv 187 Posted July 20, 2011 Someone watching a violent crime after the fact doesn't help anyone at all i think cctv plays a very big part after the fact. its one of the purposes of cctv. in order to provide possible evidence in criminal cases. it can also play a big part in before the fact. many times we have had a jewellery store raids and on the day of the raid all you see is guys in masks / type of cloths / shoes/ but going back a few days on the system before the raid you see the same gang entering the store to plan there raid Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rory 0 Posted July 20, 2011 Someone watching a violent crime after the fact doesn't help anyone at all. Yeah it does, it helps to find and lock the criminal up so they dont do it again. Its the same reason we have cameras anywhere. The camera is the witness. I can recount countless incidents where CCTV on the streets would have proved useful, many incidents that happened to myself. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
fa chris 0 Posted July 20, 2011 Private property is different, it's protecting assets and it's on the owners dime (not mine). I don't expect privacy in public, but at the same time I don't expect constant surveillance. When do we start putting mics everywhere, including video analytics to read lips, etc. to farther intrude on honest peoples lives in order to catch a few bad seeds? It's voyeuristic and sick in nature. If we all had GPS tracking devices installed in us we would know who was at that exact location whenever a violent crime occurred so the person can be put away... doesn't make it a good idea. And the whole "if you don't like it, simply move somewhere else" defense is crap and we all know it. If you don't like having no cameras, move into a compound somewhere with video everywhere so you'll always be watched. In our business there's a fine line between security and a giant candid camera/paparazzi gig. Massive amounts of cameras in random public places fall into the latter in my opinion. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rory 0 Posted July 20, 2011 I doubt you would think that way if you had ever been a victim of brutal crimes where the criminals were never caught, as I have been and many others have been even worse. I certainly dont have cameras to protect assetts, its so if Im murdered the criminal doesnt get away with it, in fact thats the reason Im in this industry to begin with, nothing else really matters, property can be replaced. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
fa chris 0 Posted July 20, 2011 I don't plan on being a victim, and if I am, I honestly don't care about what happens to the guys after the fact. Will have other things to deal with at that point. The answer isn't spend billions to record everything, and our cameras aren't infallible. Plenty of criminals are caught on camera but never ID'd, captured, and charged. What little government surveillance we do in public places is purely for profit (ie: red light cameras), not for safety. Everything else is for asset protection. People on here don't install security cameras in hopes of catching someone assaulting them on tape. They do it to catch someone messing with their property. A sign that says "security system installed" is more prevention then a few cameras. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SEANHAWG 1 Posted July 20, 2011 I don't plan on being a victim, and if I am, I honestly don't care about what happens to the guys after the fact. Will have other things to deal with at that point. You probably share that opinion with about .00000005% of the rest of the world. Most people do care what happens to criminals after a crime is done to them. And they really start to care if a crime is done to someone they love. I seriously doubt that the camera and audio recording problem would ever get to the point of being like the fictional big brother portrayed in 1984. The only people that have to worry about that are people who are doing what they are not supposed to be doing, i.e. criminals. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
fa chris 0 Posted July 20, 2011 Maybe we need to stop people from turning to crime in the first place. There's no excuse for punishing all citizens for the crimes of a few, we've already given up enough freedoms in the name of 'security'. When constant surveillance in public places becomes ok and crime still exists, what's next? Checkpoints? Rory, I'm not sure were you're located, but it's outside of the US correct? I'm assuming the situation between here and there is very different, random violent crimes here though are very low in most areas, and people simply avoid the high crime areas. The potential for the abuse of cctv systems in public is much higher than the potential for a violent crime to be captured on camera. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tomcctv 187 Posted July 20, 2011 (edited) Maybe we need to stop people from turning to crime in the first place. issue you another pointless citation i think Barack Obama will take your side. he has not paid a UK fine while in his Beast in london. Obama's 'beast' slapped with fine American President Barack Obama has been slapped with a £120 London Congestion Charge fine. The ticket relates to the President's state visit to Britain in May, when his motorcade - including 'The Beast' - drove through central London's Congestion Charge zone. http://uk.cars.yahoo.com/20072011/36/obama-s-beast-slapped-fine-0.html Edited July 20, 2011 by Guest Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rory 0 Posted July 20, 2011 I don't plan on being a victim, and if I am, I honestly don't care about what happens to the guys after the fact. Will have other things to deal with at that point. The answer isn't spend billions to record everything, and our cameras aren't infallible. Plenty of criminals are caught on camera but never ID'd, captured, and charged. What little government surveillance we do in public places is purely for profit (ie: red light cameras), not for safety. Everything else is for asset protection. People on here don't install security cameras in hopes of catching someone assaulting them on tape. They do it to catch someone messing with their property. A sign that says "security system installed" is more prevention then a few cameras. Nobody ever PLANS on being a victim, most go their whole life without incident until they are attacked or worse murdered. Most people use cameras for security, and personal security generally comes before securing property. I think most people will want to see a murderer of themselves or a loved one off the streets so they dont do it again, there is no way monsters like that should be allowed to get away with their crimes or exist in society. I dont see what the issue is, the only people that should fear this are the criminals. I mean what happens when someone looks at you on the street? What if a cop looks at you in public, do you question their motives? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rory 0 Posted July 20, 2011 Rory, I'm not sure were you're located, but it's outside of the US correct? I'm assuming the situation between here and there is very different, random violent crimes here though are very low in most areas, and people simply avoid the high crime areas. The potential for the abuse of cctv systems in public is much higher than the potential for a violent crime to be captured on camera. Sure we have alot of violent crime here especially for how small we are, but from reports I have seen the US has more crime than most places in the world. Im sure not everyone in the US live in gated communities? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
fa chris 0 Posted July 21, 2011 We have very little crime. Most of it's victimless or white collar, and the violent crime we do have tends to be between people who know each other. The 'gang warfare' image in the media is about as accurate as thinking all Americans are gun toting cowboys (the reality is almost no one carries a gun everywhere, and probably only half of all Americans even own a gun - and even then it's for hunting or target shooting only). I live in a "bad" neighborhood and have zero issues. Most of my buddy's won't even come here at night though because of the reputation. We also have very good law enforcement. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Numb-nuts 1 Posted July 21, 2011 i really don't have any problem with cameras in public, could be used as a deterrent against those wishing to commit crimes... the way i see it , is if you aren't doing anything wrong, what harm could they possibly do, as far as red light cameras, again, if you don't run a light , you have nothing to worry about.... just as the cameras could be used against someone, they could be used to help someone... in fact, just today, i received this book, i thought it might be a good read, plus i got it for only 3.96 used, delivered to my door,,, it looks brand new, amazon is a good place to shop.... Red light cameras can help to prevent quite nasty accidents so long as people are very aware they are there. but I agree with you that law abiding people have nothing to fear from CCTV it can only improve their safety. In some jurisdictions, they can be misused by government to track the movements of individuals unfairly, but in the free world, the USA and the UK have legislation to protect us against that. There is also the right to film or photograph in public to consider, you can't legislate for one type of camera and not another because it would be unenforceable or at least riddled with difficulties. There is no point. Local Police fully support my using a PTZ camera to film individuals that loiter in the area and that regularly behave in an anti-social manner in public. One neighbour has been placed on a reduced tenancy because the video I supplied my landlords and police has shown a pattern in the troublemakers being associated with particular households in this street. I have no sympathy on those who object to CCTV in public places. I give them the benefit of the doubt that they are genuinely worried for the right reasons but governments make legislation to protect against misuse of such systems and generally CCTV is there to protect the innocent and the vulnerable. I had a cursory read of that book, you are right I think it would be worth a read. I may buy a copy to understand the other side of this interesting debate. Yes CCTV does enpower the operators ( I feel mine has changed the dynamics of the game), but most have CCTV to protect their interests and those of their customers and that extends to police and government protecting us in fact more so official departments. Good thread.... PS I live in a reasonably good neighborhood, I am damned if I will allow it to gain a bad reputation. Once that gets established it attracts the wrong sorts and puts the right type of neighbors off, coming to the area. THATS NOT GOING TO HAPPEN HERE! I WON'T ALLOW IT TO HAPPEN. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
fa chris 0 Posted July 21, 2011 In some jurisdictions, they can be misused by government to track the movements of individuals unfairly, but in the free world, the USA and the UK have legislation to protect us against that. More and more legislation... that doesn't work because ultimately nobody in the government is responsible. Look how much Homeland Security in the US has abused wire tapping laws. All legislation has loopholes, "oh we had reason to believe they were involved in terrorist activities. No, we cannot reveal those reasons, it might hurt national security". Someone will abuse the systems, and at the cost versus the potential for abuse and what they will actually accomplish... just not worth it. Never give up your freedoms in the name of being "safe", when you do, the criminals win. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Campbell 0 Posted July 21, 2011 Never give up your freedoms in the name of being "safe", when you do, the criminals win. What freedom have I given up by allowing CCTV in a public place? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
fa chris 0 Posted July 21, 2011 Never give up your freedoms in the name of being "safe", when you do, the criminals win. What freedom have I given up by allowing CCTV in a public place? What's next though? I already pointed out the wire taps. So next up? Checkpoints right? I mean, if you aren't breaking the law what freedoms are you giving up for a few checkpoints? Getting frisked, checked over, making sure you're a nice proper legal citizen. Then we can all start wearing GPS tracking devices so law enforcement can verify our whereabouts whenever a crime occurs. I'm not even taking it to the extreme here, it's stuff they already do with DUI checkpoints and people under house arrest. CCTV in itself isn't intrusive (you're only giving up a lot of tax dollars), but in my opinion constant surveillance is towards the beginning of the slippery slope. Really, why do you want to be a prisoner in your own country? Even better, you get to fund it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rory 0 Posted July 21, 2011 I'd like to see CCTV on every single street corner in the country (but only if I get paid to install it ) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rory 0 Posted July 21, 2011 I live in a "bad" neighborhood and have zero issues. it cant be a very bad neighborhood then, as bad implies there would be issues, eg. stabbings, fights, shootings, etc. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
liveinxs 0 Posted July 21, 2011 We have very little crime. Most of it's victimless or white collar, and the violent crime we do have tends to be between people who know each other. The 'gang warfare' image in the media is about as accurate as thinking all Americans are gun toting cowboys (the reality is almost no one carries a gun everywhere, and probably only half of all Americans even own a gun - and even then it's for hunting or target shooting only). I live in a "bad" neighborhood and have zero issues. Most of my buddy's won't even come here at night though because of the reputation. We also have very good law enforcement. the way i see it, and this comes from a retired firefighter, before that i was a policeman for 11 years, your police force can't be too good/effective, if you would describe your area as a Bad neighborhood.... you don't say what state you live in, i myself reside in new jersey Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
