Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Ripsnort on October 12, 2006, 03:17:00 PM
-
Democrat Mayor Daley wants a cop camera on every corner in the streets of Chicago and wants it done before 2016. I wanted to know from Chairboy and Co. if they feel this is an infringement on their privacy as they felt it was from the Texas cop camera story early last year.
From my point of view, I think its okay. I'd personally feel alot safer walking in certain parts of the city with survellience. This system has been proven useful and has worked in the Tacoma Hilltop area in this part of the country...cleaned the crime and drug traffic up pretty fast (however I must say, they just moved elsewhere, like the city of Federal Way)
What's your take on this? You can read the story by following this link (http://www.suntimes.com/news/metro/92811,CST-NWS-bside12.article)
-
**** him. His last good idea ruined a perfectly good airport.
-
Safer? Safer you say? Rip, I had previously thought higher of you.
Cops and police are only meant to punish the crime AFTER THE FACT. Just because they have eyes everywhere, does not stop the crime from happening. Nor does it make you any safer.
-
Originally posted by lasersailor184
Safer? Safer you say? Rip, I had previously thought higher of you.
Cops and police are only meant to punish the crime AFTER THE FACT. Just because they have eyes everywhere, does not stop the crime from happening. Nor does it make you any safer.
Good point, and noted...however the chances that a criminal is caught and evidence exists for prosecution is higher...
-
That does not stop the criminal from bashing your forehead in with a hammer. It only gives him a slap on the wrist afterwards.
-
OR it captures an abductor with a young girl and leads to his, what wouldnt have happened without the camera, arrest....and that makes it all worth it
-
Boils down to a simple question...
You want to be safe, or you want to be free?
I'll go with free. To each their own.
-
Originally posted by indy007
Boils down to a simple question...
You want to be safe, or you want to be free?
I'll go with free. To each their own.
I'm still free with that camera. (shrugs) It's not stopping me from doing anything that I want to do that is within the law.
-
t's not stopping me from doing anything
Yet.
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
I wanted to know from Chairboy and Co. if they feel this is an infringement on their privacy as they felt it was from the Texas cop camera story early last year.
Of course it's an infringement. This is part of the police-state conversion and another method that can be used to eventually strip us of our rights. Daley isn't just a crook, he's a corrupt power monger and a perfect example of someone who abuses his position.
I get the impression that you thought my feelings on this would be different than before, why?
-
Not worth it. Not even if it saved the world.
I'd rather die a free man.
-
What is the difference between a policeman standing on a near by street corner watching you or a police man watching you from a near by police station using a mounted video camera? Its public property. If you are not doing anything wrong, neither make any difference to you but to add personal security for you and your families. If you are thinking about doing something wrong, maybe you will think twice and not do it. If you do something wrong, we got an eye witness from a police officer and video tape to back it up. Shame shame on you. :rofl
I remember a child that was abducted about a year or two ago. They had the perpetrator and child both caught on video. It was from a parking lot security camera or something like that. It actually showed the man grabbing the girl. You could see them both clear as a bell. I think security is good in almost any shape or fashion. As long as they don't get into voyeurism or anything like that, they can watch me if they want to. I like it.
What can they do bad with public camera idea? They might catch me picking my nose or scratching my butt and put it on the Internet. Or maybe they may put them at stop signs and catch me not coming to a complete stop. This would be bad bad.
:D
Bottom line is if you are not doing anything wrong, You probably have no worries at all. Everybody is watching everything all the time anyway already . Why shouldn't the police do it? What is the difference? Its the new age, get used to it
Also, how nice would it be if we had a video shot of that guy Steve Howards that criticized Cheney so we could see what really happened? I got an idea that may be on video. Usually malls have a lot of video security. I sure hope so
-
Originally posted by lasersailor184
Cops and police are only meant to punish the crime AFTER THE FACT. Just because they have eyes everywhere, does not stop the crime from happening. Nor does it make you any safer.
Surveillance does work as a deterrant because there's much higher likelyhood of getting caught if a crime is committed in front of surveillance cameras. Besides making it easier to identify a criminal it will be also easier to find out where a criminal fled from the scene by going through the recordings of surveillance cameras in the route of a fleeing criminal. Surveillance cameras will help to solve crimes that perhaps couldn't been solved otherwise and acts as a deterrant, therefore making it safer.
Nothing in the world can stop crimes from happening, but there are ways to reduce crime and improve investigation.
-
Originally posted by Clutz
Bottom line is if you are not doing anything wrong, You probably have no worries at all.
Did you seriously just say that without a trace of irony?
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
I'm still free with that camera. (shrugs) It's not stopping me from doing anything that I want to do that is within the law.
Wait until you get a ticket in the mail for jay walking ...
;)
-
One reason they might get away with cameras on every corner in Chicago vs a city in Texas.
(http://www.painetworks.com/photos/ez/ez2489.JPG)
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
[B I wanted to know from Chairboy and Co. if they feel this is an infringement on their privacy as they felt it was from the Texas cop camera story early last year.
k[/url] [/B]
Yes
shamus
-
Originally posted by Clutz
catch me picking my nose or scratching my butt
I saw that clip...didn't know it was you :D
-
I think a camera in daley's office, vehicles and home would be sufficient to catch quite a bit of sleaze in Chicago.
-
Look at the UK to see where this is leading too. They started off with corner cams, now they are using imaging technology to do facial recognition, even behavioural recognition (eg people loitering).
On one hand we want to use it to protect the innocent. On the other hand we are slipping down a dangerous path.
Information is power, and power corrupts.
People don't like having cookies in their browsers because they don't want people tracking their web surfing habits. Well how will you feel when the govt can track your movements, and how secure will that information be (look at the pretexting case with HP for example). Will you movement habits be sold to a PI, or maybe a marketing company, or your employer?
And I'm not talking futuristic stuff here, pluging cameras into a high performance facial recognition tied back to a facial database is what they're doing in the UK and some airports already.
-
a camera can't stop a crime, it can only record it. A armed cop or armed citizen will deter crime.
, sorry could not resist.
-
Originally posted by john9001
a camera can't stop a crime, it can only record it. A armed cop or armed citizen will deter crime.
, sorry could not resist.
No concealed carry of any kind in Chicago. Big brother will have to do.
-
Not even then John. An armed cop can stop a crime, IF he is there.
But he will not be there. I can guarantee it 99%.
-
I think that the cameras should be in every place a politician goes.
Other than that.... I don't care what they do in the blue areas anymore... you can't stop the slide toward 1984 socialism. You simply have to move farther away from the blue women.
My take is that there won't be any cameras in the offices or other public buildings where the politicians conduct their sleazy deals and.... There won't be any working cameras in the slums and gang controlled areas.
This assault on freedom will only be on the law abiding.
lazs
-
I dont like the idea of governments watching me. Plus, its an unfair advantage against crime. We must play fair!
-
Still waiting to hear back from Ripsnort. You still out there buddy?
-
Originally posted by Fishu
Surveillance does work as a deterrant because there's much higher likelyhood of getting caught if a crime is committed in front of surveillance cameras. Besides making it easier to identify a criminal it will be also easier to find out where a criminal fled from the scene by going through the recordings of surveillance cameras in the route of a fleeing criminal. Surveillance cameras will help to solve crimes that perhaps couldn't been solved otherwise and acts as a deterrant, therefore making it safer.
Nothing in the world can stop crimes from happening, but there are ways to reduce crime and improve investigation.
:aok
-
There ya are.
Originally posted by Chairboy
Rip: I get the impression that you thought my feelings on this would be different than before, why?
Still curious about this if you've got a minute.