Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Baltimore Surveillance Network

Discussion in 'Legal' started by BryanP, Jun 11, 2004.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. BryanP

    BryanP Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2003
    Messages:
    2,420
    Location:
    Lavergne, TN
  2. Ham Hock

    Ham Hock Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2002
    Messages:
    50
    "Believe" and just in case you don't, we're going to tape ya!
     
  3. DesertEagle613

    DesertEagle613 Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2004
    Messages:
    221
    I don't really see a problem. If the surveillance is restricted to public areas, it is perfectly legal. The tricky part is making sure it stays restricted...

    The other tricky part is that this makes repealing stupid laws even more necessary, but that should happen anyway.
     
  4. carpettbaggerr

    carpettbaggerr Member

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2003
    Messages:
    1,676
    I'm having trouble seeing the problem with surveillance cameras. How is it different from having lots of cops walking around?

    Remember, it was a camera which caught Joe Smith when he abducted Carlie Brucia in Sarasota FL.
     
  5. Jrob24

    Jrob24 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2002
    Messages:
    434
    Location:
    taxachusetts
    Because we don't want to be treated like sheep that need to be constantly monitored and herded around.

    When people get used to being watched they believe more that big brother is watching/"protecting" them. Individual responsiblity takes a hit because big brother is taking care of you and you become more dependent on the government. People will wonder how they survived before gov't surveilance. Then the regular CCTV cameras could be replaced by special cameras that identify people by face/gait and track their movements and track cars too. Then they can spread out of the cities and into nearly every town allowing the government to track our movements everywhere as if we are property. :uhoh:
     
  6. Waitone

    Waitone Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2002
    Messages:
    5,406
    Location:
    The Land of Broccoli and Fingernails
    Yea, Charlotte is going ape over cameras. They now get to see people killed on camera. See, problem solved!
     
  7. Chris Rhines

    Chris Rhines Member

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2002
    Messages:
    3,773
    Location:
    Potomac, Maryland - Behind enemy lines!!
    Jeez. Looks like it's time to make a last trip to Brewer's Art... :(

    - Chris
     
  8. dev_null

    dev_null Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2002
    Messages:
    1,338
    Location:
    Austin TX
    Orwell was an optimist. :mad:

    - 0 -
     
  9. 7.62FullMetalJacket

    7.62FullMetalJacket Member

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2003
    Messages:
    2,991
    Location:
    Cedar City, Utah
    Hey, if you have nothing to hide, then there are no problems with cameras :rolleyes:

    Anonymity and freedom of movement, without monitoring, are keystone, fundamental rights in a FREE society.

    We had the 9/11 hijackers on tape too. Alot of good that did :scrutiny:
     
  10. anapex

    anapex Member

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2003
    Messages:
    1,043
    Location:
    Free at last in PA!
    The problem I see is that this is just going to be a big freaking waste of taxpayer money. I'm trying to remember the name of the city but I'm pretty sure I remember another place doing this and then canning the project because it wasn't worth the cost.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page