Big Brother in Tampa?

[ipwrcanto]

http://www.cnn.com/2001/TECH/ptech/07/02/high.tech.security.ap/index.html

Tampa using security cameras to scan the crowds of its streets for wanted criminals. Invasion of privacy or effective policework?

[molecularfire]

I'm putting in my vote for effective police work as long as they keep the cameras in "public places" I know that some people see this as an invasion of privacy, but personally, I don't have a problem with cameras in public places (except public restrooms and such I guess...). Hmmm... ok, I don't have a problem with cameras in public places where people are not likely to be naked.

[zenbooty]

Big Brother is watching you.

In London, the cameras are already everywhere. Pretty soon privacy will be a pipe dream.

[topane]

I think everyone should just walk around wearing ski masks

[coleslaw]

You mean you don't?? :hmm:

[theorangeone]

Originally posted by volfman
http://www.cnn.com/2001/TECH/ptech/07/02/high.tech.security.ap/index.html

Tampa using security cameras to scan the crowds of its streets for wanted criminals. Invasion of privacy or effective policework?

how would it be invasion of privacy if you are on a public street?
i think that if the cameras help catch the criminals, and they stay scanning on the streets, theres nothing wrong with that. if you don't like it, don't walk on streets that belong to the city.

[verve247]

I think an importamnt issue is what is done with stored footage. Who has access to the video tapes. Imagine if your a famous celebrity or politician. You now have to worry about people exploiting these cameras that are everywhere.

People can use this footage to misrepresnt others. Let's say for instance you decide to go to an adult shop and buy some "personal" items. Well, if this is caught on video tape, it can be used maliciously on you in the future, whether running for governor or deciding divorce settlements. And for those who say that this data will not be released to the public, Look what happened to Bill Clinotn. I never wanted to know about his sex life! And how can we trust those that store the video footage. Throughout the years we've been witnesses to cops on trial for corruption.
It's so easy to transmit data these days that one foolish act in public (ala priceless .jpg's) can be viewed by millions within days. And let me tell you, i do many foolish things in one day.

[zenbooty]

Originally posted by theorangeone
[QUOTE]how would it be invasion of privacy if you are on a public street? i think that if the cameras help catch the criminals, and they stay scanning on the streets, theres nothing wrong with that. if you don't like it, don't walk on streets that belong to the city.

And who, praytell, owns the City?

Just because you walk out in public doesn't give anyone the right to track your movements. Do you really trust the government (or anyone, for that matter, since our government officials tend to be very corruptible and bribable) to use these cameras "just to catch criminals?" I certainly don't.

[leemaj]

see, but if its a public place, they could just as well have undercover cops or something....there are already cameras in every store or place of business, and in lots of apartnemt buildings...if its a public street, who cares?

[zenbooty]

Originally posted by leemaj
see, but if its a public place, they could just as well have undercover cops or something....there are already cameras in every store or place of business, and in lots of apartnemt buildings...if its a public street, who cares?

Yes, but they can't have undercover police tracking EVERYBODY. They're there just to stop lawbreaking from occuring. With cameras, you can sweep over everyone, save the images, and have them for later to analyze as much as you like. You can track anybody for any reason at all, if you want, because all the video can be saved. That is the danger. With undercover cops, they can't recall what everyone was doing after the fact. They can only be looking for something in particular in advance.

A camera in a private business or residence is one thing. The owner has a right to whatever security they hope to gain out of that. I don't think our beurocracy (sp?) should be allowed to subject us to the same treatment every second we are out of doors.

[verve247]

A police state is one that rules on fear and force. I don't want to be walking down the street and feel paranoid that i can get arrested or in trouble at the slightest moment. Now i don't engage in criminal behaviors, yet i'm no saint either. When technology like this is implemented it just cuts out another chunk of our freedom. It brings paranoia to the individual and furthers the mindset of the sheep of the world--you know what i mean the people who want the governement to take care of them so they don't have to think for themselves, just drink canned beer and watch the latest reality TV show.