Anti - CCTV

[liveinxs 0]

this is the reason why it started. the police shot a guy dead for shooting a police officer. were infact the police officer was shot by another officer. and the police tried to hide the fact.

 

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/ipcc-man-shot-police-did-not-open-fire-164401662.html

 

 

even if its true the police tried to cover up a questionable shooting, at the end of the day, the guy was a drug dealer,was locked up 4 times for drug dealing, and he was a gang member, the way I see it, justice was served..

 

remember you live by the sword , you die by the sword...

 

no loss, nothing to see here, move on....

[liveinxs 0]

The way I see it, the reason these young people are looting everything, is because there is no immediate repercussions to what they are doing.

Yes but good people wouldnt do it regardless of repercussions or not.

Cant always depend on the police or the law to tell us what to do, we should know better.

 

 

in some communities, looting is shopping...

 

and looting is ebonics for shopping....

[fa chris 0]

for those who fear CCTV in public, and you know who you are, it looks like its gonna get a lot of use in Britain, it seems they are having a lot of issues with canadians running wild in the streets...trying to burn some town downs...

 

they are talking about using plastic bullets, i say they use some full metal jackets or better yet some hollow points, that will stop any other problems...

 

it appears the police already pulled some images from the CCTV cameras...

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-14462271

 

City of a million cctv cameras, people seem to be desensitized to being on camera everywhere and ignore them? Forget about them? They seem to have lost all their effectiveness as a deterrent and now simply record the carnage... just not in as good of quality as the news cameras and the youtubers.

 

City where only the criminals and the cops have guns, leaving everyone else defenseless. If people rioted here they'd target businesses but would think twice before kicking down anyone's door because who knows what's on the other side. I'll take my sig over a cctv cam for protection any day of the week.

[Birdman Adam 0]

City where only the criminals and the cops have guns, leaving everyone else defenseless. If people rioted here they'd target businesses but would think twice before kicking down anyone's door because who knows what's on the other side. I'll take my sig over a cctv cam for protection any day of the week.

 

My thoughts exactly! " title="Applause" />

[Numb-nuts 1]

It's all crap, there is no excuse for rioting and looting. This has no protest value whatsoever. Regardless of hoe it started, I think the best punishnment for these criminals is to leave burnt out shells where there once stood a business serving the community.

Eventually these thugs will be living in a wasteland and thats what they deserve. WHEN there are no innocent businesses to punish they'll turn on each other Let thes criminals reap what they sow.

 

Police have always recorded riot situations so that they can catch up with those that misbehave and aren't always immediately identifiable and they have a remarkable record of this in the past. When we had poll Tax riots some years ago they did the same thing and were arresting individuals from those riots right up to 2010. They NEVER stop pursuing offenders.

 

It's nothing of the kind just opportunistic thuggery and criminality. I want to see these people arrested and given a minimum term of 5 years just for being involved if police can prove they were involved in any act that contributed to the civil-disobedience.

 

CCTV can assist in making sure the guilty are arrested and charged. The unimpeachable witness CCTV my Hero

[rory 0]

I live in a country with similar "gun control" - it doesnt work, all the criminals have guns and most even more powerful than the cops guns. The head cop said the other day he didnt want to see civilians with guns, that it is his job, what else would he do if we the civilians were to defend ourselves - LOL. THing is, even though guns are outlawed here other than shotguns and some rifles for pigeon shooting, most businesses have them for self defense anyway ... im not seeing that happening in the UK though ... here there would be dead rioters all over the place, even if not from guns, from machetes and our own bottles and conch shells!

 

Looks like the UK cops are more concerned with video recording the rioters instead of putting them down where they stand.

[SecurityGeeks 0]

down here in south florida, we have cameras at every intersection. only those posted as "red light camera, including right turn" are only active for this purpose. all of the other cameras are just there for EYEs, as so flo crime rate is going through the roof. I tell ya these cams are really good, they get your plate and perect image of your face driving 60mph.

 

I am for cameras in one aspect to protect us. But i am not for it when it comes time for martial law! no body can go anywhere without being picked up.

[Numb-nuts 1]

It;s the same here Rory it's the criminals and police that have the guns.

 

By the way, anyonoe thats interested, the riots in the UK stopped after a couple of days. They have not flared up again after police made it clear anyone who took part can expect a knock on their door as everything and everyone was captured on CCTV and public CCTV and video flooded into police after the riots. Police are also using the help of the social network operators to see who was organizing and rallying others to join in. I think it's great. Who says they look daft in those tall helmets?

[Fiona 0]

The British Government just argued for Zero Tolerance. A police concept originally implemented in New York. With Zero Tolerance, any infraction of the law results in an arrest. Spitting on the sidewalk; jaywalking; loitering; public nuisance; public disturbance; etc, may all lead to arrest and prosecution.

The increased prevalance of CCTV is an inevitable prelude to the shape of things to come.

The Roman Empire collapsed in good measure because Rome could not support the Million Man Army to 'protect' Rome and its Dominions. With CCTV, when the opportunity for crime presents itself - images are recorded and a simple bureaucratic process is implemented to hunt down the perpetrators. It's all very efficient and a Million Man Army is, in good measure, replaced by England's Two Million CCTV Cameras. What is missed by the cameras is provided by permanently recorded SMS, Twitter, emails, and phone GPS tracking. What anyone thinks, where anyone goes, and what anyone is, is subject to complete evaluation.

We are on the brink of this new and exciting moment in history: the absolute and complete surveillance of society.

[LC475 0]

CCTV is just a technology. It's not good or bad. It depends on who is using it.

 

If it is private individuals and companies using it, they are employing the tech to cut down on theft, protect their house, things like that. Admirable and legitimate uses.

 

The government, on the other hand, has suspect motives. They have the goal of making money off of red-light tickets, tracking people, torturing dissenters, imprisoning kids with illegal lemonade stands, who knows. The government is full of bad people with bad ideas doing bad things. So I would rather they not have any cameras. Surveillance is a power and I want government power to be as limited and minimal as possible.

 

I was once the victim of a crime. My laptop was stolen, along with some money and other stuff. I really wished the gas station across the street had some cameras that might have seen the car that did it. Alas, they did not.

 

So surveillance is a good thing, as long as it's the people doing the surveillance, and not the rulers. Elsewise, quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

[Numb-nuts 1]

Spitting on a sidewalk? Glad I don't have to collect the evidence!

[rory 0]

The British Government just argued for Zero Tolerance. A police concept originally implemented in New York. With Zero Tolerance, any infraction of the law results in an arrest. Spitting on the sidewalk; jaywalking; loitering; public nuisance; public disturbance; etc, may all lead to arrest and prosecution.

The increased prevalance of CCTV is an inevitable prelude to the shape of things to come.

The Roman Empire collapsed in good measure because Rome could not support the Million Man Army to 'protect' Rome and its Dominions. With CCTV, when the opportunity for crime presents itself - images are recorded and a simple bureaucratic process is implemented to hunt down the perpetrators. It's all very efficient and a Million Man Army is, in good measure, replaced by England's Two Million CCTV Cameras. What is missed by the cameras is provided by permanently recorded SMS, Twitter, emails, and phone GPS tracking. What anyone thinks, where anyone goes, and what anyone is, is subject to complete evaluation.

We are on the brink of this new and exciting moment in history: the absolute and complete surveillance of society.

All that is useless if the cops cant take control as we saw in the Riots.

Give them guns so they can clean up.

[rory 0]

Spitting on a sidewalk? Glad I don't have to collect the evidence!

Guess they will just have to spit on the road then

[Fiona 0]

'Spitting on the sidewalk' refers both to the arbitrary enforcement of the law, on the one hand, and the creation of a more elegant, civilised society on the other. In many Western nations, we acknowledge the general collapse of social standards and degenerate public behaviour. Many of these anti-social behaviours are anticipated by the laws I mentioned. With the enforcement of the seemingly trivial laws, the thug element in our society is forced to lift its game. I dare anyone to visit Singapore and spit publicly. And the goons that stole LC475's laptop may have thought twice if the full force of the law had picked them up for past minor infractions: hence the goal of Zero Tolerance.

[Numb-nuts 1]

Yes Fiona, I knew just what you meant, I was trying to bring a little levity to a discussion,

I hope you didn't feel that I was mocking you?

 

I observe a lot of youths loitering in my area, they seem to spit about 30 times an hour on average.

Now just do the math, a group of 20 youths liotering for approximately 3 hours per night. YUK!

 

That a lotta FLOB!

[Fiona 0]

The UK riots have resulted in a greater appreciation by the public for the power of CCTV – and with that a newfound respect for what we do. When the news media blitzed the airwaves with hundreds of ‘events’ recorded at fair distances they demonstrated the immense reach we have with our cameras. It is the ability to record a crime as it happens; to capture facial images; to record number plates etc.; and to catch other details that makes CCTV an anathema to ill-prepared criminals. But incredibly, there is a large demographic that believes all cameras are dummies or that no one is actually watching them as they commit the crimes. And I think there are still many Police who do not realize that we have dozens and dozens of open and shut prosecutions on our hard drives just there for the asking. Instead of ‘pounding the beat’ officers may want to liaise more closely with CCTV people and be handed the crime, the face shot and the number plate for many open and shut cases.

[fa chris 0]

'Spitting on the sidewalk' refers both to the arbitrary enforcement of the law, on the one hand, and the creation of a more elegant, civilised society on the other.

 

Dictating peoples behavior to fit into your view of what's proper seems like fascism to me. When are uniforms in public going to be mandatory for you guys?

 

You can only put so many chains on your population before they revolt...

[rory 0]

'Spitting on the sidewalk' refers both to the arbitrary enforcement of the law, on the one hand, and the creation of a more elegant, civilised society on the other.

 

Dictating peoples behavior to fit into your view of what's proper seems like fascism to me. When are uniforms in public going to be mandatory for you guys?

 

You can only put so many chains on your population before they revolt...

 

the rioters get everything for free and dont have to work for a living.

Bottom line is they are just spoilt.

[fa chris 0]

the rioters get everything for free and dont have to work for a living.

Bottom line is they are just spoilt.

 

I'm not defending or talking about the rioters by any means, those guys were simply idiots.

 

When you're creating laws to fit your ideals and looking for any infractions against those laws, you're targeting the general population, including all us working stiffs who pay for all those freeloaders.

[rory 0]

the rioters get everything for free and dont have to work for a living.

Bottom line is they are just spoilt.

 

I'm not defending or talking about the rioters by any means, those guys were simply idiots.

 

When you're creating laws to fit your ideals and looking for any infractions against those laws, you're targeting the general population, including all us working stiffs who pay for all those freeloaders.

Trust me, you wouldnt want to live in a lawless society.

[Numb-nuts 1]

 

the rioters get everything for free and dont have to work for a living.

Bottom line is they are just spoilt.

 

Rioting Works then, doesn't it?

[rory 0]

Rioting Works then, doesn't it?

huh?

Seriously, rioters in my community wouldn't last very long.

I've had to deal with kids and rock fights in my yard before, and I'm talking big boulders - it stops then and there.

If they came with "Petrol Bombs", the neighbors guns would eat them all up.

And that's if the cops with Machine guns didn't get them first.

[ljarrald 0]

fa chris, i totally agree with you. i can see why cameras on high streets would be useful in areas where there are alot of pubs/clubs and binge drinkers but when the council decided to put a 24/7 monitored PTZ CCTV camera in the alley, that was taking it too far! the council did not ask any of us if we wanted it, they just stuck it to a lamp post. i took it upon myself to speak to everyone it affected and not one person wanted a cctv camera that was monitored by a fat bloke we do not know sitting in a control room. we asked the council to take it down and they refused which is why we took it upon ourselves to disable the camera (disable, not vandalise or destroy) the council soon came and removed it.

oh, and let me point out there were NO SIGNS AT ALL and they didn't give a reason as to why the camera was installed.

 

you are right about the microphones too, how do we know there are not already microphones in some places? the government already tap into phone calls and emails.

 

this world is beginning to be a real life 'truman show' but instead of millions of people focused on one main person and a couple of hundred people related to him, its a couple of hundred people continuously monitoring millions of people.

 

here is one of the cctv cameras installed by the council. it is at the end of a street. none of the houses on the street are owned by the council and again, nobody asked for the camera. what right do the council have to know exactly what time and date the people living in these houses come and go from their homes?

 

[ljarrald 0]

It has been my experience that CCTV has set me free. Free from harassment, free from petty crime, free from teens that feel they can bully any resident and take ownership of the neighborhood, free from worry, my infallible friend, the expert witness, the witness with a perfect memory and my protector and my companion that saves the police a helluva lot of hassle. Believe me the police have noticed a sharp drop in the number of calls to this street since installing my PTZ camera.

 

Now if I need to call police or a neighbour calls police (which isn't that often) they respond in record time as they know there is a good chance of catching the offenders and a good chance of an arrest where appropriate.

 

It's okay to have the upper hand, but I am also conscience, but it's a mistake to crow about it in public as criminals will see that as a challenge to their street cred. I don't threaten anyone with CCTV, I merely hand over footahe to police and loow tem to do their job, they are appreciative as the last thing they want is to arrest normally law-abiding citizens.

 

There's many a person out there that uses weed and doesn't see themselves as a criminal, but that's just what they are.

Nobody is seeking to report these people to police unless their actions start to affect the peace in their community by bringing undesirables to the area. I do not decide who is an undesirable by a person's race religion etc but by their effect on the wider community. Anyway I don't need to decide that's the job of law enforcement and I allow them to get on with it, assisting when I can. The gangs think they have it made but I say to them I have a bigger gang than you do their color is Blue.

(depending where you live)

 

I think policing is not just the responsibility of the police that serve the community. If you see CCTV as an infringement of civil liberty then why aren't you complaining that there is a police force in every civilized community in the world? Because police are there to protect us and protect our free society. You wouldn't object to policing and laws protecting us would you? CCTV is just a tool that assists police in their very difficult task. Police spend far too much time dealing with petty crime, if they are aided by a tool that helps them do their job who has the right to object?

 

Anyway I respect everyone who has an opinion to express even when they don't see things the same way I do. My experience is that of a lot of folks and if you have never been harassed by gangs of teens out of their heads on booze and damaging everything in sight, then you can't imagine what a relief it is to change things and I always feel happier where there is CCTV.

My only problem with CCTV anywhere is that I tend to inspect it and it must look suspicious to the operators and if I am in a bank you can see the tellers starting to sweat

 

Anyway I love CCTV more than most of my friends.

 

half agree, half disagree. cctv is good but monitored cctv where it is not needed is not!

i think that if cctv was on every street corner, i would feel uncomfortable. i think where it is needed (town centers, high streets with pubs and clubs on) cctv should be monitored and controlled by a control center. however where it does not need to be monitored i think it should only record and only be replayed if for example, a car has been stolen. or someone has been attacked, or if the police are tracing the path of a murderer or rapist or something.

 

private CCTV is another matter. i have put CCTV around my house and even on my neighbours houses (after them showing a keen intrest and me offering). although the risks that cctv footage of me falling on my @rse in the ice is more likely to be posted on youtube if captured by personal cctv and the chances are non existent with council operated CCTV, i prefer private systems as they do not have the power to track my exact movements from A to B, only my movements in or around their property which is fair enough.

 

one of my cameras came under attack by a guy who liiked about 16ish. he walked up the alley, looked at the camera, shoved his face into it (clever boy!) and then lobbed a brick at it. thankfully the anti vandal camera survived, but that is not the point. in the first couple of weeks after the cctv was installed i saw gangs of youths who i know (i say know, i know who they are) and they know that i live there all sticking up fingers, shouting, swearing, bigging up (u wot, u wot) to the cameras (i find it funny that they were bigging up to an inadamate object). this intimidated me as i felt like if i bumped into them in the street i would get **** off them. i have not yet bumped into them since the cameras going in.

bottom line is, i could of: A: given the stills and footage to the police, let them do their enquiries and got the kid done for criminal damage (though it would probably only come to a caution) but then the kid would come back, kill the camera and then kill me if he saw me (because scum can't think logically) or i could leave it. i decided to leave it but i have the file saved, so if he does it again i will send both lots of images to the police.

 

is it legal to post some stills of him and what he did on here? he did break the law so does that make it okay?

 

EDIT:

--------------------------------

forgot to say... i also check out the cctv systems in banks and stuff. i often think 'i could do such a better system for probably the same amount, or less than they paid!

[ljarrald 0]

lastly.

anyone that has problems with public CCTV cameras must also have problems with it in stores and also problems with cell phones and digital cameras - cant have it one way and not the other.

If you want to get rid of CCTV cameras then also get rid of cell phones and digital cameras, and go tell wall mart take their cameras down as its impeding on your privacy.

 

WRONG! you CHOOSE to go into shops with CCTV. yes, we CHOOSE to go on the streets that have cctv, but most of the time it is the only way to get to point B. we should not be forced to be under CCTV. there is every right for wall mart and the like to have CCTV as it is a private premises!

 

i don't understand where cell phones and digital cameras come into it (unless you are talking about how they can track our phones at any time weather on or off.)