 |
| |
|
|
DanS
|
 |
Kickball Capital of the World
Jan 1970
time: 00:37
|
|
...scratch your balls in public places.
Should use of these cameras be expanded for police work or anti-terrorism work? Should use be discontinued altogether? Should we have a camera watching every street corner?
This revisitation of the question is brought on in my neighborhood by the apparent usefulness of these cameras in figuring out who were the London bombers. We haven't used them too much in DC because of privacy concerns and the criminal-political complex taking over the city. We do have cameras on Metro, which, among other things, has seemed to make the system very safe.
What say you, Apolyton?
quote:
D.C. Considering More Police Cameras
London Bombings Prompt New Debate on Surveillance of Public Places
By Eric M. Weiss
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, July 14, 2005; Page B01
Mayor Anthony A. Williams (D) said yesterday that his administration will look into increasing the use of surveillance cameras in the District, as part of a study of lessons from last week's terrorist bombings in London.
The D.C. police department has 14 such cameras, most of them in the downtown area, that feed images to a high-tech operations center. Williams said he would like to see them turned on and monitored more often, and he also proposed adding cameras to neighborhoods, parks, recreation centers and commercial areas throughout the city.
"I have always been for broader use of cameras," Williams said. "I do not think that cameras are this big mortal threat to civil liberties that people are painting them out to be."
The mayor's comments reopen a debate that broke out three years ago after D.C. Council members learned about the camera system, which had been installed without their knowledge. In response to concerns from the council and some members of Congress, the police department came up with guidelines designed to ensure that privacy rights would not be abused.
Those guidelines, which the council approved, call for the cameras to be used only to monitor traffic, large demonstrations and city emergencies. The regulations also say that the cameras can be installed only in public spaces where people would have a reasonable expectation of being videotaped, and they bar police from using the devices to watch for street crime.
In an emergency, police also have access to hundreds of cameras used by Metro, the D.C. Department of Transportation, the public schools and federal agencies.
Williams made his comments during his weekly news conference when asked what steps the District is taking in response to the London bombings. Security camera footage from a London train station, which showed four men with backpacks on the morning of the bombings, has been a key piece of evidence in the investigation of that attack.
Council member Kathy Patterson (D-Ward 3), one of those who pushed for the legislation that regulates the surveillance system, said she is open to expanding the use of cameras as long as it is done within the present guidelines.
Council member Phil Mendelson (D-At Large), chairman of the Judiciary Committee, said he was concerned about the prospect of taking police officers off the street to stare at video monitors waiting for crime to happen. And he noted that the footage in London was used to confirm the identity of the bombers but did not prevent the bombing.
Police Chief Charles H. Ramsey said he supports expanding the camera program, both as an anti-terror measure and as a crime-fighting tool in neighborhoods.
"Cameras can play a vital role, and I think in terms of day-to-day crime fighting, you could see a very positive result," he said. "Again, there need to be controls that ensure people's rights are protected. But I think in public space, and with the procedures we already have in place, it would be something well worth doing and I support it 100 percent."
Some D.C. police cameras were active yesterday as part of the elevated terror alert in place since the London bombings, police spokesman Kevin Morison said.
Marc Rotenberg, executive director of the District-based Electronic Privacy Information Center, said New York, Chicago and Baltimore are among the U.S. cities that have embraced the extensive use of surveillance cameras. Chicago has about 100 of them, Morison said.
Williams suggested that one way to protect privacy rights would be to keep the tapes in the custody of civilian groups, a policy that he said Sydney, Australia, has adopted. "That's a distinction with a difference," Williams said.
The D.C. camera network was first used on Sept. 11, 2001. Police said the cameras have aided security efforts on the anniversary of the terrorist attacks, during protests against the World Bank and International Monetary Fund and in the aftermath of the 2002 sniper attacks.
Williams also announced yesterday that city police are intensifying efforts to enlist the business community in preventing terrorism. Police have sent letters to business organizations to promote an initiative called Operation TIPP -- Terrorist Incident Prevention Program.
The program is focused on gathering intelligence from business owners and workers who may get suspicious inquiries, such as requests to purchase items that could be used in terror attacks. It began in January with the operation of a toll-free telephone number for businesses and employees to report suspicious activities: 877-YOU-WATCH. |
Last edited by DanS on 15-07-2005 at 01:56
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Eli
|
|
Israel
Jul 2000
time: 07:37
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dauphin
Personally I don't fully appreciate the privacy argument, assuming that the CCTV is in a public place. You are in a public place where anyone can see you, so why be overly concerned that you are being seen by a camera.
|
Anyone can see you, but no one can keep that on tape for for as long as they want to.
Also, with improvements in recognition software it would be possible to take a huge but not really searchable database of millions of video hours and turn it into a database containing all your movemements, the people with whom you interacted, etc.
That said, the idea is good as long as it's in responsible hands and the system has various restrictions such as deleting all material older than X days/weeks/months and maybe something along the lines of having judges authorize tracking specific people, like with wiretapping.
The question is what are we going to do when/if a bad guy in power begins to abuse the system?
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Dauphin
|
 |
Caught in a tuna net
Jan 1970
time: 05:37
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Eli
Assume that you install such system in the States and that by 2009 a rudimentary but working facial recognition system is available. As you pointed out earlier, the system today is used mainly to solve crime but that is a cause of our technical inability to monitor all cameras at once. With the new software, such constant monitoring can be achieved and then, even with proper restrictions in place, all you need is another 9/11(a 99.9% probability for that happening IMO) for these restriction to go the way of the Dodo. |
You would have to have every single persons face stored on a database in order to run that comparison, and you would have to have all CCTV cameras processing hundreds, if not more, people an hour.
I do not envisage any feasible system with that much data and data requirements - if your face isn't on the database or isn't correctly input, you will not be recognised, and that much processing requirement - millions of cameras data searching the face database or vice versa. Besides that much integration, co-operation and co-ordination of millions of disparate council, private and other systems is not going to happen, even if the technology allowed.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Kontiki
|
|
Canada
Aug 2001
time: 00:37
|
|
I'm all for them. Public space is just that - public space. Don't expect privacy. And if you think the government wants to keep a constant eye on you, take off your tinfoil hat and move out of your mom's basement.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Eli
|
|
Israel
Jul 2000
time: 07:37
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dauphin
You would have to have every single persons face stored on a database in order to run that comparison |
And how is that a problem? Passports, driving licenses, ID cards, all have your picture on it even today.
quote:
, and you would have to have all CCTV cameras processing hundreds, if not more, people an hour.
I do not envisage any feasible system with that much data and data requirements - if your face isn't on the database, you will not be recognised, and that much processing requirement - millions of cameras data searching the face database or vice versa. |
Here I simply dissagree. The dataset is not that big and processing power is getting cheaper by the second.
quote:
Besides that much integration, co-operation and co-ordination of millions of disperate council, private and other systems is not going to happen, even if the technology allowed. |
That could be true.
I'm talking about more of a universal system organized by the government, who eventually is the only body who's supposed to fight crime.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Eli
|
|
Israel
Jul 2000
time: 07:37
|
|
quote:
While I think that Eli's nightmare is a technological possibility, Dauphin's defence is very much solid. And hell if that crumbles, I mean, sure, a police state can use CCTV to hunt you down like the dog you are, but the technology is already out there, and there is nothing you can do but make sure your government are not a bunch of *******s. |
It could be argued that such a system will make it easier for a police state to gain power.
quote:
Originally posted by Kontiki
I'm all for them. Public space is just that - public space. Don't expect privacy. And if you think the government wants to keep a constant eye on you, take off your tinfoil hat and move out of your mom's basement. |
Rule of thumb: If you were in charge and in control of such system, what would you do?
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:37.
Apolyton Time is 00:37. |
top of page
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
15-07-2005 00:56
|