Street cameras

Discussion in 'Ethics, Morality, & Justice' started by Norsefire, Jul 27, 2008.

?

Do you support government street security cameras?

  1. Yes, but only for major crime areas

    28.6%
  2. Yes, widespread use

    9.5%
  3. Yes, widespread use + identification and face recognition system

    23.8%
  4. No, no use at all

    38.1%
  1. Norsefire Salam Shalom Salom Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,529
    Pretty straightforward- government security cameras in public areas (not just streets)

    I personally don't see anything wrong with it, I mean, it's not like they are in your homes. And in London they've had a positive effect.

    I don't really see it as an "intrustion of privacy", because they are in streets and public areas, not on private property.


    Do you support this? I'm interested to see what you guys think.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Myles Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,553
    I think we should have more cameras. Selected families should have them installed all over the house to enable the police to monitor the activity of anyone they suspect.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. redarmy11 Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,658
    I am all for. Don't expect miracles though - large numbers of them are sans batteries and pre-18th-century in quality.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Myles Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,553
    We can import them by the million from China. A modest increase in taxation , say 10%. on the lower orders should cover the associated costs.
     
  8. cosmictraveler Be kind to yourself always. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    33,264
    As long as it doesn't interfere with daily activities then I see nothing wrong with it. What is disturbing is that cameras are being used to catch traffic violators and fine them for certain offenses. I think that should be left up to an actual police officer for the most part. Who is watching all of those cameras by the way?
     
  9. Challenger78 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,536
    In some public places, going there for some people can even allow (in extreme cases) them to be targeted and blamed for some crimes.
    So, Only in major crime areas, where the people who go there are aware.
     
  10. superstring01 Moderator

    Messages:
    12,110
    Everywhere. In every home, bathroom, workplace and car. Hell, even put them on cats and dogs. They should be attached to the heads of people as well.

    ~String
     
  11. visceral_instinct Monkey see, monkey denigrate Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,913
    I would be a bit freaked out by being watched on camera everywhere I went.

    On the other hand, better freaked out by the cameras, than robbed or beaten up.
     
  12. Oli Heute der Enteteich... Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,888
    Oh no you misunderstand.
    You STILL get robbed and beaten up, but the cameras let them get identified and caught sometime much later...
     
  13. visceral_instinct Monkey see, monkey denigrate Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,913
    Ah, well. Marginally better than being robbed and beaten up, and having them free to do the same to others.
     
  14. Myles Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,553
    I wish I had thought of that. Some of those dogs crap all over my lawn.
     
  15. Myles Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,553
    It's called being mugged, The pictures of the perpetrators are called mugshots.
     
  16. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    28,928
    There's a difference between a recording camera whose record can be examined later in case of crime, and a live monitored camera network that can be used to follow designated people around and watch over their shoulder all the time.

    Hiring neighborhood spies was always a mark of a totalitarian state. Automating the neighborhood spying doesn't change the implications much.
     
  17. Orleander OH JOY!!!! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    25,817
    I can't wait to read Asguard's post on the legality of cameras in the park.
     
  18. maxwalsh Registered Member

    Messages:
    4
    would you not feel safer if someone was watching all the time?
    In my mind if you are doing something wrong then the idea of being watched would worry you!
    safer for the female of the species too with the dodgy cab drivers and dark areas of the town centre.
    the qeustions that come to mind so far are would this have a positive or nagative cascade on society?
    what of the poor schizophrenics ? would this make them more paranoid about being watched by a definate comfirmation? would these people then become intensly more paranoid or calmer because of the lesser fear of attack?
    and would binge drinking get worse as people think there is a helping hand at all times with them?
    and those that wear the veil, there was an instance of a male bomber in london wearing the full female regaila to try and avoid being named and seen, if i remember correctly he boarded flights like this too, so what to do with those hiding via hoodies and the burker?
    the questions are endless
    regardless i think the more cameras the better if they were cheap enough we could all cctv up our houses, bring on big brother!

    interesting thought cosmic, food for thought there
     
  19. Pandaemoni Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,631
    I am of two minds. I agree that public streets are public and so there's no real right to privacy. That said there are definite shades of 1984 in any government that has the ability to tack the movements of any citizen throughout the day (even if they claim not to use it).

    I mean, suppose your employer made you wear a tracking device the entire time you were on the job. I don't think there's anything at all illegal about that either, and it's his property to monitor and he is paying you for your time, so have some right to see how you are spending it. Still, I don't think I'd want to work there.
     
  20. superstring01 Moderator

    Messages:
    12,110
    Good Point!

    ~String
     
  21. lepustimidus Banned Banned

    Messages:
    979
    vi:
    If the government were sincere about the safety of its citizens, it would allow them to walk around armed.
     
  22. Asguard Kiss my dark side Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,049
    i have to agree with oil VI. i was watching one of those crime shows and they saw a man following a young girl so the camera's focused on her and they dispatched the police. However by the time the cops arived all they could do was watch her draged off and raped. Not a huge level of safty there.

    I would rather they put the money into more police and police stations than into cameras
     
  23. lepustimidus Banned Banned

    Messages:
    979
    Asguard:
    Yet it's more like: More police operating speed traps, fewer police walking the beat.

    A stronger police presence on the streets would be of more benefit than harassment on the roads. But then, how would the government raise revenue?
     

Share This Page