Are law enforcement cameras an invasion of privacy?

.

As we go through our days, we are getting monitored to a much greater extent.

The cost of the hardware has been coming down at a very nice rate, so municipalities are finding it to be so cheap, why not deploy it. There is likely a bunch of money getting thrown around by the feds in the way of grants. (How much do We The People want to be paying for this? That may be a follow-up post.)

I think a great example of over use of cameras is Mill Plain Boulevard in Vancouver Wa. There are poles every 200-300 feet for a few miles.

That is flat out saturation and an assload of money spent as well as the cost of monitoring.

In many areas, you can be tracked for a majority of your day if you are in public spaces.

There are times like the “Big Game” where they actually man the cameras and use facial recognition software looking for, dead beat dads (who does anything about deadbeat moms?), people with warrants, etc (of course terrorists).

 

 

9 thoughts on “Are law enforcement cameras an invasion of privacy?

  1. If they ONLY are surveying public areas where there is no expectation of privacy, then no, they are a tool. That is not to say that I, in any way, approve of the use of public, generic, video surveillance. But there isn't much we can do to stop it unless we get the politicians to create a law to ban them. It has been tried in several states, but the law enforcement unions hold too much sway. Oddly, recently several cops have been getting into trouble because of their actions, which were caught on their tapes. But the corresponding legislation has created loopholes that allow the police to avoid charges if the only evidence is their own video tape of the event. Now if that isn't crooked from the top down, what is?

  2. I got a ticket for going brain dead at a red light and ran it a while back. It was at a photo enforced light. I deserved it. I did it.

    Now the best part, it was in my wife's car under her name, so they mailed her the ticket. She yelled at me for a couple of days. I of course thought it was very funny and told her to be careful for now on. Me and the two dogs slept in a big pile on the couch. Since then I am back in the bedroom. I won't be running any more red lights in her car, hehehe.

  3. as with the patriot act, this issue seems to be pretty easy to "boil down".

    1. If you are not doing anything wrong, what are you afraid of?
    2. but what if I'm doing something right, but the out-of-control despotic government deems it "wrong"?

    So, once again, it seems to me that the essential crux of this issue has to do with our ability (or inability) to theoretically revolt against the government. So many items seem to trace a thread back to that wild ass scenario.

    1. “1. If you are not doing anything wrong, what are you afraid of? “I lit into a fellow vet today over that same statement…It is an instant hot button for me. It has been after I connected the dots and ideologies involved.

      1. well please don't light into me over it. if its not clear, I'm mouthing the oft heard comment just to get that on the table for discussion.

        Say what you want about it, but that view is popular. I don't agree with it, but I don't think it is right to be dismissive of it.

  4. I'm saying ok in public places/area's. Might catch a few bad guy's or help with id on the perps anyway so long as they use a good camera. But don't cross the line.. there has to be a line drawn where they do not overstep into personal home property and privacy!

Leave a Reply