Fortunately the corrupt cops getting arrested every year aren’t smart enough to photo-shop images like AP reporters. At least the ones getting caught aren’t…..

#23 Might be on to something.
Interesting variation, public broadcast. A variation of the old small village reaction to hearing/seeing something bad happen.

Though a bit creepy, Google is doing something similar, all on public property. With lots of people watching you have multiple personalities with multiple motivations. This constant ‘conflict’ self-corrects to a neutral position – or a battle

I hope you’re right. I hope we never see a situation such as that. However, 24/7 surveillance makes it much harder to avoid it.

That was also before I read “1984″.

I rather like the idea that it’s _not_ the police watching in Lancaster, though as the full article says, they do have to be careful to keep out various voyeurs or people with axes to grind or burglars and other felons looking for targets.

What if all such cameras were available on the Net? Would enough people watch to make a difference? Would they get involved by contacting the authorities if they witnessed trouble? How many would be criminals looking for opportunities?

I used to live in an apartment complex where a bunch of the neighborhood kids got the idea that it was fun to play with the soft drink machines by loading the slots with pennies and slugs and then trying to get out the quarters unsuspecting people would put in. The machines were right behind the complex’s office. I thought putting a cheap camera on the machines with a monitor in the office would stop the problem. I never got around to suggesting it, though, as we moved about then to be closer to work. The point is, there are situations where cameras can help, with little danger of oppression.

On the other hand, there are few more chill-inducing phrases than “If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear.”

The next phase in the UK is the use of hooded sweatshirts to disguise miscreants. “Hoodies” are getting away with a lot and defeating the purpose of the cameras.

It really is a judgment call. The country is large enough and varied enough to allow for different environments for everyone. If people in Lancaster allow it to happen, they must want the order the cameras are supposed to bring. And as I originally said, it is a much nicer place today than its neighboring city, Reading.

“So, tell me Mr. R, why have you been hanging out with members of the opposite party? You do know they have a very, very bad reputation in these parts. There’s no use denying any wrongdoing. We have evidence that shows you consorting with “them” 18 times last month.

“Oh, you want your lawyer? We do, too. How coincidental! We’ve got pictures of him driving around with a very young woman. Does this look like his wife to you? No? I wonder if his wife knows about that?

“So, tell me. What do you guys talk about when you go for your strolls?”

Nope, no way it could be used against a law-abiding citizen.

An old argument: Do you do whatever you need to get the job done. Or do you struggle against long odds to do what you feel is right?

A city of 55,000 should have 4 murders every century. Maybe it was a bad year.

I don’t like the thought of being watched all the time but parks and such need to be watched all the time.

The problem is I would like some location I can let down my guard and be myself and take off all my cloths and run in circles and scream if I wish to. This is very hard to achieve in real life any more outside one’s own bedroom.

This is something worth fighting against.

There is no damage done. If smoking were a factor of insurance rates, then your neighbour would be asked that up front upon application. If it’s not a factor, then seeing your neighbour on Google will have no effect at all. Regardless, it would cost insurance companies far more for the manpower to be searching Google street view for a near impossible chance of finding a client of theirs breaking a rule, than any benefit they might ever extract from it.

Shopping moved to Lancaster’s Park City Mall and Reading’s Berkshire Mall, both suburban centers, and the two cities’ downtowns lost assessed property value. Reading sought and received funding for corporate towers and a hockey arena, but the downtown area still emptied after 6:00.

A few months ago, I was looking at properties in both cities as places to live. Lancaster looked like a very nice, livable place – new construction, remodeled or rehabbed offices turned into residences, leafy green trees, a central farmers’ market, and of course the city square. Reading, on the other hand, looked terrible. A new IMAX theater which was supposed to bring suburbanites into the city had a riot on its recent inaugural night. There’s no train service to anywhere, and Lancaster has express service to Philadelphia and New York. The housing stock remains, for the most part in good shape. It’s simply that Reading is just another stop on the drug route between New York and Washington, DC and the rats who hung onto that enterprise were chased from there up the road.

I’m not claiming that cameras are a great idea, but I also don’t hear people complaining very much about Google’s Street View. It shows my current neighbor standing in front of his house smoking a cigarette. Big deal — but might that not boost his insurance rates if insurers went even more deeply into peoples’ lives?

The damage is done; we’ve lost our privacy. I must admit to feeling a little creeped out over the article when I read it in the NYT, but at the same time I felt comfortable thinking that an investment in a condo would not turn into a financial sinkhole.

So I say, go ahead – turn on the lights and let the rats scatter.

Not.
So many horror stories, not worth documenting.

On the other hand Smith & Wesson does work every time and usually – granted, not always – but usually does a superb job in preventing a crime.

Cameras will provide great pictures of crimes being committed and do absolutly nothing to prevent crimes.

Everyone is Not forced to carry a firearm, it’s a personal choice. But surveillance is forced on everyone – with no personal choice.

As populations get more concentrated, it becomes more difficult to maintain a safe standard of living. Having the people you hired install cameras in public places makes perfect sense. All the hand wringing over loss of freedom is bullshit. I am more free in walking down a street with security cameras than I am without. Tell me how a government official could use that against me if I’m a law abiding citizen?

The government isn’t some outside entity. They are hired management of USA citizens. If they get too personal and cocky, there are democratic ways to correct that. Putting a gun in everyones hand isn’t reasonable. It’s a stupid idea that should have died with in wild, wild west… pilgrim.