|
|
Post by Swimmy on Feb 21, 2008 0:20:39 GMT -5
IF James Street is truly a high crime area according to statistics complied by the Police and arrests made, then IMO a "police state" is warranted. The way I look at it, it is better to have a camera shot at than it is a Police Officer doing his job. That's a very scary philosophy to adopt. I'm more akin to good ol' benny's philosophy: They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty or security. ~Benjamin Franklin On a side note, we all, of course, are presupposing that the criminals dealing on the street are smart enough to notice the cameras and change their patterns BEFORE getting caught. |
|
|
|
Post by Ralph on Feb 21, 2008 0:29:57 GMT -5
Or that they'll even care.
|
|
|
|
Post by Disgusted-Daily on Feb 21, 2008 1:17:58 GMT -5
I guess at this point it could be hats off. I hope they are not going to use these to eliminate or reduce Police Officers in the future.
My first thought of hearing this is the self checkout lanes in the stores that was supposed to replace one or two cash registers. Yeah right......go into Home Depot at certain times and thats all you see.
These cameras wont be cheap to purchase, maintain or replace when bad or broken from rocks and bottles that are thrown at them.
This will be more like a crime relocation program. Stay tuned they will soon be in your area!
|
|
|
|
Post by bobbbiez on Feb 21, 2008 1:50:07 GMT -5
What the cameras or the criminals?  We already have the criminals  , so I'm hoping it's the cameras.  |
|
|
|
Post by kim on Feb 21, 2008 7:57:15 GMT -5
There are cameras all over the place, and half the time you don't even know they're there. I've taken to looking up, smiling and waving every once in a while...just in case unseen eyes are watching me. Hey, it amuses me. ;-)
|
|
|
|
Post by frankcor on Feb 21, 2008 8:35:12 GMT -5
Exactly kim. The most common use of police cameras is during prosecution of a crime, not prevention. As facial-recognition software improves and the database grows, finding fugitives on the street will become a more common use.
I recall a few months ago when the guy who killed his grandmother up north was tracked to Utica in part by having his license plate recorded by a camera mounted on a police dashboard. When the license was entered into a search, the database kicked out a match with the time and location of the sighting.
Of course, none of that technology will be needed after we all get our implants.
|
|
|
|
Post by kim on Feb 21, 2008 9:04:12 GMT -5
Of course, none of that technology will be needed after we all get our implants. ACK!!!!! |
|
|
|
Post by dgriffin on Feb 21, 2008 9:43:10 GMT -5
>>was tracked to Utica in part by having his license plate recorded by a camera mounted on a police dashboard.>>
And I assume the same surveillance is going on as I enter the Thruway toll plaza, just to name one opportunity that comes to mind. When I was smoking, I bought a pack one day in a national gas chain convenience store that has the policy of "carding" everyone, no matter what your age! The young guy behind the counter rolled his eyes as he asked me for proof, and laughing, I said, "isn't this a pain?" He told me that although his company didn't enforce it, the actual rule was to put my license through the Lottery machine for proof of age? "WHAT?", I said. "Yes," he said, the lottery machine was connected to a state database that not only ran the lottery, but also the DMV or at least some agency that could verify my age. He was serious. So, the state has a terminal in every lottery retail point that may prove useful for verifying your "papers." Our driving license is, after all, our "papers." I've never confirmed the kid's story. Haven't tried, really.
|
|
|
|
Post by thelma on Feb 21, 2008 11:28:42 GMT -5
According to the OD today, these cameras are being placed in FOUR different "high crime" areas - James Street only being one of the areas.
These cameras are wireless and can be remotely controlled by the Police to zoom in on any scene or individual they feel is acting in a criminal manner. These cameras cost approximately $5,000 each and the money to purchase them is coming from a Grant ("free money).
If cameras are needed in certain areas to protect other innocent people that are too afraid to leave their own homes, then in my opinion, they are trade off to "individual privacy". It is very simple - don't do anything wrong and the Police will never "bother" you.
|
|
|
|
Post by Swimmy on Feb 21, 2008 12:29:20 GMT -5
Hello Big Brother Thelma. What is thy bidding for today, master?
Dave,
They've had that technology for at least 7 yrs. I remember when I was 21, an elderly woman was convinced I faked my license and that the computer was wrong. She ended up destroying my license and then denied sale to me. I had one of the attorneys I interned for send her a letter with a bill to recover my expenses in replacing the license. The letter was cc-ed to the franchise owner. I never saw her working there again.
|
|
|
|
Post by kim on Feb 21, 2008 12:37:30 GMT -5
She actually destroyed your ID? Holy shit! She should not have done that! Denied the sale, yeah, ok, but she had no right to destroy it! Did she end up paying for it?
|
|
|
|
Post by thelma on Feb 21, 2008 12:43:39 GMT -5
Hello Big Brother Thelma. What is thy bidding for today, master? . .................................................................................. Swimmy - You're NOT being nice!!!!!! I'm not the only one that feels these cameras are needed in high crime areas. Perhaps this "Big Brother" approach will help make our City a little safer for ALL. |
|
|
|
Post by Swimmy on Feb 21, 2008 12:51:31 GMT -5
I was being sarcastic.
I'm not saying you are, I'm just pointing out that your thought rationale for accepting the placement of these cameras is scary and reminds me of "1984." I'm just as concerned about public safety as you are. But I feel that it can be done WITHOUT sacrificing my rights and privileges as a law abiding citizen. Do you agree with the warrant-less wiretap program instituted by the Bush Administration? How about all the provisions of the Patriot Act?
I should not fear my government, my government should fear me. And not because I would overthrow it, but because of my power to vote them out.
Protect me all you want, but don't sacrifice my constitutional liberties under the guise that if I have done no harm i have nothing to fear. That's how liberty dies.
|
|
|
|
Post by Swimmy on Feb 21, 2008 12:53:35 GMT -5
It took her some time, but after sending a letter to her manager and the franchise owner, I finally received the money to reimburse my expenses, coupled with a letter from the manager apologizing for her behavior. The next few times I went there, she was not there.
It was only after she realized that my id was not fake and I was actually 21 at the time that she then denied me the beer because my id was now destroyed and no longer valid.
|
|
|
|
Post by thelma on Feb 21, 2008 12:59:12 GMT -5
I understand your feelings, Swimmy. I believe in our Constitutional rights as much as you do. BUT, I've lived longer than you have and during all these "extra" years, I've witnessed criminal after criminal ending up with more "rrights" than the victim - which is NOT the intention of our Constitution.
Until the day comes that I am accussed of a crime that I did NOT commit, I'm all in favor of supporting law enforcement's methods of keeping me safe and doing everything possible to keep criminals out of my City.
Remember - if we didn't have our Government watching out for us, this Nation would NOT be as great of a place to live as it still is.
|
|
We already have the criminals 
, so I'm hoping it's the cameras. 
