Do you approve of CCTVs installed around your neighbourhood to keep you safe?

Question

Apparently, Britain has millions of CCTVs in the country. Are you willing to sacrifice a little privacy for the name of your safety and follow suit in your neighbourhood?

Eric: I understand the laws that government retains the rights to take pictures in the public, but that doesn't mean they do. CCTV camera is a different issue, they ARE taking pictures 24/7 and the film are retained for a certain span of time.

Barry: good point, we already have satellite versions of CCTVs. How naive we are pretending no one can see us on the streets..

Answer 1

If the police force was properly run instead of being bogged down in paperwork there would not be the same need for surveilance.

It's not just CCTV this government wants installed on every corner, it's a transmitter in every car that lets them know exactly where you are and identity cards that have chips that can be monitored so all they have to do is bring you up on a computer to know exacly where you are all the time.

They say at the minute that it wouldn't be compulsory to carry your ID, but unless you have to carry it the scheme is a pointless waste of money.

Do you believe they would spend all that without an ulterior motive?

Already your DNA is stored on a database even if you are just a witness. The suggestion that babies DNA is logged at birth has already been made.

This is fast becoming a police state. Already we have lost the freedom to express our opinions.

Just look at recent incidents:
15 year old boy arrested for calling another boy a poof in the playground at school.

14 year old girl held in jail for hours because she had refused to work with a group of asian girls in class, not because she was racist, but because they did not speak english.

70 year old lay preacher charged with incitement to riot for preaching about sodom and gomorrah which resulted in him being beaten up by a gang of homosexuals. They were not charged despite the severe beating the pensioner received.

The journalist interviewed by police because she had opposed civil partnerships as immoral in a debate on the radio.

The shop owner called to his shop and warned by the police because he had 3 golliwogs in the window.

The catholic adoption agencies forced to close because their beliefs prevented them placing a child with sexual perverts.

The list goes on and on with perfectly ordinary words suddenly becoming offensive. A blackboard is just that, but must be called a chalk board. The chairman or chairwoman having to be refered to as a chairperson.

It goes on and on. The most ridiculous incident I have encountered was being told in a coffee shop in London that I was being racist asking for a white coffee!!!!

The CCTV is just the thin edge of the wedge!

Answer 2

It is true that,as Eric states, in public you have no legal expectation of privacy.

But we also have our society set up so that we do not live in a Big Brother state either.

IOW, it is worth examining in if the lack of expectation of privacy has a time component to it. Doe it mean that we in fact want a society where the government is allowed to capture and record, and eventually search everything that happens in public everywhere, and use that information against you?

There may be a loophole in both our legal system in this regard, and our awareness of what could happen. As a Silicon Valley and Nasa image processing veteran, I can assure you that the hardware and software pretty much already exists to do that , it is a matter of paying for the scale of it to make it happen.

I could imagine a public situation in the post 9/11 eara where such a system could be presented tot he public and justified as a "safety" matter and also as a huge "public works" pork barrel thing.

I think the public should learn from not having anticipated 9/11 and the future effects on our rights and consider this scenario of introducing (or removing) time from the concept of "expectation of privacy", especially as it related to the 1st, 4th and 5th Amendments.

Answer 3

What privacy would be sacrificed?

Once you are in public, you have absolutely NO expectation of privacy. The government, private citizens (paparazzi), anyone, can film you and take your picture.

Answer 4

Wild rabbits are actually not something like domesticated rabbits. they are going to be greater aggressive, much less probable to bond with you, and might have wild instincts and urges that have been bred out of kin rabbits. additionally, you possibility bringing illness into your domicile. terrific component to do may be to study protecting kin rabbits. as quickly as you have finished the mandatory study, evaluate getting a kin rabbit, particularly of taking a wild rabbit out of its domicile. lower back, it does not make a competent puppy besides.

Answer 5

Absolutely. It serves both as a deterrent to crime, as some people will not do croiminal acts if they know they are being recorded and in addition it will aid law enforcement in solving crimes and prosecuting criminals when crimes do occur. There are numerous examples of recording being used to prosecute criminals. In addition the video can also be used to absolve people named as suspects who were not involved in the crime.

Answer 6

Just because of the fact that you think someone is watching doesn't mean you're safe. There still is crime in Britain.

Answer 7

I had a choice?
I would be furious if they started pushing it forward that fast. And NO, I have plenty of safety for my square of the neibhorhood.

Answer 8

No, absolutely not.
I don't want to live in a nanny state.
I don't want to live in 1984.
I don't want to be watched watering my lawn or getting the paper.
Who is watching the watchers?

Answer 9

I like the idea. It would make a difference for the good.

Answer 10

Wow... lucky you guys. We can't even get decent streetlamps in our neighborhood to keep us safe. At night, my neighborhood is seriously dark!