400,000,000 Survalance Camaras in the UK - Do We Really Want Big Brother Watching Us?

[RadioPatrol]

400,000,000 Survalance Camaras in the UK - Do We R



coming soon to a city near you :




reading lips, crime moves to where there are not camera's, spur of the moment crime, human nature is to be bad ........ not going to deter terrorism
with cameras now your guilty until proven innocent

 

[RadioPatrol]

 

[itsbob]

They've used the cameras to catch terrorists.. crime is down where they have implemented camera use.. it did deter terrorism.. and with cameeras in use in one part of the city, frees up the police for heavier more efficient patrols in non-watched parts of the city/town..

It's actually been a VERY effective solution... and has also been VERY effective in the US where they are in use.

And they ONLY go in PUBLIC places where your privacy is not guaranteed, or protected..

AND what is Survalance exactly??

 

[dems4me]

coming soon to a city near you :

<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/doSQoIwD6vQ&rel=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/doSQoIwD6vQ&rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>


reading lips, crime moves to where there are not camera's, spur of the moment crime, human nature is to be bad ........ not going to deter terrorism
with cameras now your guilty until proven innocent

And you hate liberals Even I'm for the use of cameras and any surveillance they have to protect us any way they can from another terrorist attack

 

[nhboy]

"Inside Today's Bulletin
City Announces Surveillance Camera Installations
By: Jim McCaffrey, The Bulletin
10/23/2007

Philadelphia - Mayor John Street announced yesterday local taxpayers will pay $8.9 million for the installation of 250 video surveillance cameras here.
"Deploying video cameras as part of our overall crime-fighting strategy is a great example of using modern technology to enhance public safety and improve services to our citizens," Mr. Street said at a press conference he called to make the announcement.
The city hired Unisys, a security company, to do the installation. Unisys will set up cameras, network, software and hardware and maintain the system. Limited duty police officers and, eventually, trained citizens will monitor the system. No police will be taken off street patrols to staff the monitors.
City police will make the controversial decisions about where cameras will be installed. A police spokesman promised cameras would be deployed throughout the city in every Councilmanic District.
"This is not a panacea," the Mayor reminded his audience. "As important as this can be they don't solve the problem of crime and violence anywhere. They represent an important tool that can improve the quality of life and safety."
The first new camera will be installed at 52nd and Market. The police say they will be concentrating on public commerce areas where assaults and theft are likely to occur. They will also concentrate on high crime areas where drug dealing and violent drinking episodes are known to occur.
The 18 cameras already in use have helped police to make 60 arrests in the last year.
The money for the cameras was budgeted by City Council from the general fund this year and approved by the Mayor."

Almost all the industrialized nations are using them. I think that the use of these camera will enable the authorities to make more arrests but am not sure they will decrease the crime rate.

Bobby Busting Busts.
I saw a story a while back where two young London ladies flashed their bare breasts at a camera and the Officer manning it had them arrested.


LA Times Story

 

[AK-74me]

And you hate liberals Even I'm for the use of cameras and any surveillance they have to protect us any way they can from another terrorist attack

UK = liberals IMO, so yeah that makes sense, I hate liberals too and I am against a bunch of surveillance cameras everywhere too.

 

[Magnum]

There is a camera one street over from my Jobsite. There is some sign on it talking about DC crime watch or something like that. Shows I'm in a good part of town huh? Safe because there is a camera?

 

[GopherM]

"400,000,000 Survalance Camaras in the UK"

Are you sure of that number. Based on the latest reported population, that is just over 6 cameras for every citizen in the UK? It would be cheaper and easier to implant a camera on every man, woman and child if that number is correct.

 

[itsbob]

"400,000,000 Survalance Camaras in the UK"

Are you sure of that number. Based on the latest reported population, that is just over 6 cameras for every citizen in the UK? It would be cheaper and easier to implant a camera on every man, woman and child if that number is correct.

Good catch.. I've read that several times, and every time I read it as 400K...

I read your post and had to think.."What the hell is he talking about.. there is a LOT more than 66,000 people in the UK!!"

 

[Chainsaw Slayer]

They already have cameras everywere you go here. Almost every store and ATM has a camera.

 

[RadioPatrol]

And you hate liberals Even I'm for the use of cameras and any surveillance they have to protect us any way they can from another terrorist attack

How are camaras going to prevent a terrorist attack ?

did it stop the London train bombings ? that attack on the Glasgow Airport ?




where did I state I hate Libs .......... ?

 

[RadioPatrol]

Good catch.. I've read that several times, and every time I read it as 400K...

I read your post and had to think.."What the hell is he talking about.. there is a LOT more than 66,000 people in the UK!!"

I just quoted the man doing the Vlog .........

 

[RadioPatrol]

About John W. Whitehead

About John W. Whitehead


"I consider John Whitehead to be a founder of the religious liberties legal movement and have great respect for his work at The Rutherford Institute."
—Jay Sekulow, Chief Counsel, ACLJ

"John Whitehead is not only one of the nation's most consistent and persistent civil libertarians. He is also a remarkably perceptive illustrator of our popular culture, its insights and dangers."
—Nat Hentoff, nationally syndicated columnist and staff writer for the Village Voice

“Your writings offer keen analysis and important points for all of us concerned with the drift in our culture. Thanks for your hard work on behalf of freedom.”
—Bob Barr, Member of Congress 1995-2003 in a letter to John Whitehead

John W. Whitehead is an attorney and author who has written, debated and practiced widely in the area of constitutional law and human rights. Whitehead's concern for the persecuted and oppressed led him, in 1982, to establish The Rutherford Institute, a nonprofit civil liberties and human rights organization whose international headquarters are located in Charlottesville, Virginia. Whitehead serves as the Institute’s president and spokesperson, in addition to writing a weekly commentary that is posted on The Rutherford Institute’s website (The Rutherford Institute), as well being distributed to several hundred newspapers, and hosting a national public service radio campaign. Whitehead's aggressive, pioneering approach to civil liberties issues has earned him numerous accolades, including the Hungarian Medal of Freedom.

Whitehead serves as a member of the Constitution Project, which seeks to formulate bipartisan solutions to contemporary constitutional and legal issues by combining high-level scholarship and public education. He also serves as a member of the advisory board for the Innocence Commission for Virginia, a nonprofit, nongovernmental, nonpartisan project dedicated to supplementing the ongoing work in Virginia through recommendations to strengthen the reliability of its criminal justice system and to reduce the likelihood of future wrongful convictions.

Whitehead has been the subject of numerous newspaper, magazine and television profiles, ranging from Gentleman's Quarterly to CBS' 60 Minutes. Articles by Whitehead have been printed in the New York Times, Los Angeles Times, the Washington Post and USA Today, among others.

Whitehead gained international renown as a result of his role as co-counsel in Paula Jones' sexual harassment lawsuit against President Clinton. Whitehead continues to speak out in defense of a woman's right to be free from sexual harassment and frequently comments on a variety of legal issues in the national media. He has been interviewed by the following national and international media (partial list): Crossfire, O’Reilly Factor, CNN Headline News, Larry King Live, Nightline, Dateline, The Today Show, Good Morning America, CBS Evening News, CBS This Morning, This Week with Sam and Cokie, Rivera Live, Burden of Proof, Late Edition with Wolf Blitzer, FOX News Sunday, Hardball, the New York Times, the Washington Post, the Wall Street Journal, USA Today, National Public Radio, BBC Newsnight, BBC Radio, British Sky "Tonight" and "Sunday," TF1 (French TV) and Greek national television.

The author of numerous books on a variety of legal and social issues, as well as pamphlets and brochures providing legal information to the general public, Whitehead has also written numerous magazine and journal articles. In addition, he wrote and directed the documentary video series Grasping for the Wind, as well as its companion book, which focus on key cultural events of the 20th Century. The series received two Silver World Medals at the New York Film and Video Festival and is now available on DVD.

Whitehead has filed numerous amicus briefs before the U.S. Supreme Court. He has also been co-counsel in several landmark Supreme Court cases as well. His law reviews have been published in Emory Law Journal, Pepperdine Law Review, Harvard Journal on Legislation, Washington and Lee Law Review, Cumberland Law Review, Tulsa Law Journal and the Temple University Civil Rights Law Review.

Born in 1946 in Tennessee, John W. Whitehead earned a Bachelor of Arts degree from the University of Arkansas in 1969 and a Juris Doctorate degree from the University of Arkansas School of Law in 1974. He served as an officer in the United States Army from 1969 to 1971. Whitehead and his wife have five children.

 

[RadioPatrol]

They've used the cameras to catch terrorists.. crime is down where they have implemented camera use.. it did deter terrorism.. and with cameras in use in one part of the city, frees up the police for heavier more efficient patrols in non-watched parts of the city/town..

It's actually been a VERY effective solution... and has also been VERY effective in the US where they are in use.

And they ONLY go in PUBLIC places where your privacy is not guaranteed, or protected..

AND what is Survalance exactly??

how were terrorist caught ? maybe known terrorists ? If I decide to drive into any office building downtown with a van loaded with 2 tons of AMFO how is a camera going to stop me from blowing it up. Maybe if the security office is not destroyed in the blast the video can be used to ID the truck b4 the blast, but the terrorist act is already don't.

Help me understand why your argument holds water, I do not think it does.

 

[RadioPatrol]

from wiki

Crime registration


CCTV for use outside government special facilities was developed as a means of increasing security in banks. Today it has developed to the point where it is simple and inexpensive enough to be used in home security systems, and for surveillance. Surveillance of public areas in the United Kingdom by CCTV was developed partly in response to IRA bombings. Experiments in the UK during the 1970s and 1980s (including outdoor CCTV in Bournemouth in 1985), led to several larger trial programs in the early 1990s. These were deemed successful in the government report "CCTV: Looking Out For You", issued by the Home Office in 1994, and paved the way for a massive increase in the number of CCTV systems installed. Today, systems cover most town and city centres, and many stations, car-parks and estates. The exact number of CCTV cameras in the UK is not known but a 2002 working paper by Michael McCahill and Clive Norris of UrbanEye[1], based on a small sample in Putney High Street, estimated the number of surveillance cameras in private premises in London is around 500,000 and the total number of cameras in the UK is around 4,200,000. The UK has one camera for every 14 people.

Claims that they reduce or deter crime have not been clearly borne out by independent studies[2], though the government claims that when properly used they do result in deterrence, rather than displacement. One clear effect that has been noted is a reduction of car crime when used in car parks. Cameras have also been installed in taxis to deter violence against drivers[3][4], and also in mobile police surveillance vans.[5] In some cases CCTV cameras have become a target of attacks themselves.[6] Middlesbrough council have recently installed "Talking CCTV" cameras in their busy town-centre.[7] It is a system pioneered in Wiltshire which allows CCTV operators to communicate directly with the offenders they spot.[8] This idea is first known to have appeared in George Orwell's famous cautionary tale Nineteen Eighty-Four.
The two-year-old Jamie Bulger being led away by his killers, recorded on shopping centre CCTV.


The use of CCTV in the United States is less common, though increasing, and generally meets stronger opposition. In 1998 3,000 CCTV systems were found in New York City.[9] There are 2,200 CCTV systems in Chicago.[10]
The men alleged to be responsible for the 7 July attacks on London, captured on CCTV.
The men alleged to be responsible for the 7 July attacks on London, captured on CCTV.

The most measurable effect of CCTV is not on crime prevention, but on detection and prosecution. Several notable murder cases have been solved with the use of CCTV evidence, notably the Jamie Bulger case, and catching David Copeland, the Soho nail bomber. The use of CCTV to track the movements of missing children is now routine.[citation needed]

After the bombings of London on 7 July 2005, CCTV footage was used to identify the bombers. The media was surprised that few tube trains actually had CCTV cameras, and there were some calls for this to be increased.

On July 22, 2005, Jean Charles de Menezes was shot dead by police at Stockwell tube station. CCTV footage has debunked some police claims.[11] Because of the bombing attempts the previous day, some of the tapes had been supposedly removed from CCTV cameras for study, and they were not functional.[12] The use of DVR technology may solve this problem.[13]

Just another tool to catch a criminal after the fact, nothing to really prevent crime ........ Lets just put cameras in everyone's home, maybe that will cut down on domestic violence ...............

maybe we should have surveillance vans driving thru our neighborhoods listening in to conversations in your home, IR Camera's looking thru walls to see if your trying to kill your spouse .........

 

[itsbob]

how were terrorist caught ? maybe known terrorists ? If I decide to drive into any office building downtown with a van loaded with 2 tons of AMFO how is a camera going to stop me from blowing it up. Maybe if the security office is not destroyed in the blast the video can be used to ID the truck b4 the blast, but the terrorist act is already don't.

Help me understand why your argument holds water, I do not think it does.

Actually the bombers in London, the 'Bus Bombers' were caught on these cameras running from the scene PRIOR to the explosion.. and if I remember right the subway attackers in Japan were too.

The 9-11 hijackers were all identified on surveillance cameras, and the links made to known terrorists and terrorist cells.

It's a fact that MOST criminals don't want to be caught, and if they know there is a camera in the vicinity will NOT comitt a crime.. like rape, or mugging.. or murder somone from an opposing game..

SOME crimes (crimes of passion?) are going to occur no matter what deterrents are in place.. Terrorism is one, but if you can catch them on vidieo you may be able to prevent the next one.. You can start your trail working backwards from identity back to their source..

In Europe, one of the main problems with terrorism was Who are they?? The populace would get nailed with a car bomb, but had no idea who set it, who drove the car, so the culprits were free to travel and do it again and again.. Video cameras on more than one occasion provided the proof and identitiy, and resulted in continental manhunts and arrests of Sinn Fein, IRA, and Baader Meinhopf members. So it didn't stop that ONE incident, but it more than likely stopped the next 50 - 100 or so..

Are you suggesting crime DOESN'T decrease where cameras have been installed? Because overall, that would be wrong!

 

[itsbob]

from wiki




Just another tool to catch a criminal after the fact, nothing to really prevent crime ........ Lets just put cameras in everyone's home, maybe that will cut down on domestic violence ...............

maybe we should have surveillance vans driving thru our neighborhoods listening in to conversations in your home, IR Camera's looking thru walls to see if your trying to kill your spouse .........

It's not the cops or the governments job, or ability to prevent crime. They can deter it, they can arrest after the fact, but they can not protect you, your family or your business from crime. There is not enough money or manpower to do it.

It's your job to protect you and your own.. something lost on the Maryland Legislature.. One of the tenets of the constitution.

 

[MMDad]

How are camaras going to prevent a terrorist attack ?

did it stop the London train bombings ? that attack on the Glasgow Airport ?




where did I state I hate Libs .......... ?

I guess she means that if there had been cameras in the airport, 9/11 wouldn't have happened?

Oh, wait, there WERE cameras in the airport, but it still happened.

So, what does she mean? Dems? Could you clarify what cameras do to stop terrorism?

 

[itsbob]

I guess she means that if there had been cameras in the airport, 9/11 wouldn't have happened?

Oh, wait, there WERE cameras in the airport, but it still happened.

So, what does she mean? Dems? Could you clarify what cameras do to stop terrorism?

We identified the terrorists, and made the connection back to Al Queada from the use of cameras and found out who and what was responsible, preventing future attacks, and punishing those that were responsible.

If there weren't cameras we would have been dependent on the TSA bag checker to remember IN DETAIL everything about that morning, and trying to piece his/her memory against a passenger manifest to make a connection. Chances would have been slim at best that they would have made a connection to any individual as quick as they did with the cameras.

 

[RadioPatrol]

We identified the terrorists, and made the connection back to Al Queada from the use of cameras and found out who and what was responsible, preventing future attacks, and punishing those that were responsible.

If there weren't cameras we would have been dependent on the TSA bag checker to remember IN DETAIL everything about that morning, and trying to piece his/her memory against a passenger manifest to make a connection. Chances would have been slim at best that they would have made a connection to any individual as quick as they did with the cameras.

Yeah and 3000 people still died, like camera's stopped other bombings ........ sure in the investigation we follow the bread crumbs to a cave in Afgan. but the damage had already been done ........... Your right it is not the job of the Gov to protect us [ locally, this terrorism Counter Intel is still a national security issue to be handled by the DOD, NSA, CIA - outside the country and FBI / DHS internally ....... ]

Hmm maybe if every male of a certain age range was in the reserve and was required to carry a weapon at all times like the Israels