public video camera surveillance. is it as cut and dry as "if you've done nothing wrong, why care if we watch?

Answer 1

The philosophy "if you've done nothing wrong, why care" justifies allowing the government to do house to house searches without getting warrants.

As for public camera surveillance, I support it. Especially in high crime areas. What's the difference between installing a camera and putting a cop on the beat to watch for crime?

Answer 2

I just wrote about this in another open question. The question you pose, "If you've..." is designed to not be answerable without implicating yourself, and thereby releasing the asker of any accountability for asking it in the first place. It follows closely the fallacy of "Complex Question" in which a question is so worded that to answer it either way is to implicate yourself as trying to conceal some wrong that you've done. For example, if you ask someone, "Were you always so stupid?", and they say ,"No"- they're admitting to being a dumbass in all the time prior to your asking them the question. If the person say's, "Yes", then..... The point is, no it is not so cut and dry because it's a conversational trap designed to cause you to accept that which you don't want to accept. If they can get you to accept that which you wouldn't normally accept, where does it stop? It's basically saying that unless you don't let them watch you with a surveillance camera, you must prove where you were or what you had in your pocketbook, or where were you going, etc. It's being a voyeur with the "law" to say so. The good news is that you do not have to obey any unConstitutional law and no courts are bound to enforce them. Read current US Supreme Court rulings on some of these issues.

Answer 3

It is an invasion of privacy, we all have the right to live our lives without people watching everything we do.