What's wrong with CCTV?

[HAL9000]

Hey People,

I often here Americans (on this forum) using the fact that the UK uses CCTV as a negative when trying to insult the UK...? Why? I think CCTV is a great thing! It's in public areas (where there is no reasonable expectation of privacy anyway) and it means they can catch criminals. So... Where's the downside. For example if you drive into Central London you are on CCTV until the moment you leave (unless you are in private residences etc obv)

 

[bfdd]

CCTV is not a person. How can a camera possibly bear witness to a crime? Not to mention the fact these are digital feeds which can be altered. If the people in the UK seriously feel they need these cameras, you're a country of irrationally stupid and full of irrationally fearful vaginas. How you ever took over the world is beyond me seeing as a pop gun makes your criminals run for the police.

 

[HAL9000]

CCTV is not a person. How can a camera possibly bear witness to a crime? Not to mention the fact these are digital feeds which can be altered. If the people in the UK seriously feel they need these cameras, you're a country of irrationally stupid and irrationally fearful vaginas.Read up until here, you started making a good point then started hurling insults like a moron, try again next time. How you ever took over the world is beyond me seeing as a pop gun makes your criminals run for the police.

They don't accept video evidence in america from shop cameras etc?

 

[Infohawk]

I think CCTV is a great tool. People falsely believe they have a right not to be observed in public. That's never been the case. You have privacy in your home, but not in public places.

I think sometimes the British are mocked for this when they act like the US is a police state. Just like it's fair to make fun to make fun of Australians for their video game censorship when they do the same thing.

 

[HAL9000]

I think CCTV is a great tool. People falsely believe they have a right not to be observed in public. That's never been the case. You have privacy in your home, but not in public places.

I think sometimes the British are mocked for this when they act like the US is a police state. Just like it's fair to make fun to make fun of Australians for their video game censorship when they do the same thing.

Hmm yeah that makes sense. I've not heard people from the UK as a police state often, but maybe I'm mistaken. I agree, it is a great tool and don't understand the downsides.

 

[RocksteadyDotNet]

Most of the cameras are privately owned an operated.

How is that a nanny state? You can't tell people how to protect their property.

 

[HAL9000]

Most of the cameras are privately owned an operated.

How is that a nanny state? You can't tell people how to protect their property.

Really?! The CCTV in the UK is largely run by the police / local councils (as far as I'm aware)

 

[RocksteadyDotNet]

Really?! The CCTV in the UK is largely run by the police / local councils (as far as I'm aware)

http://www.techrepublic.com/blog/te...e-united-kingdom-are-operating-illegally/1269

 

[SandEagle]

i like cctvs. got 3 of them hidden in my car. makes me feel safe from the police

 

[HAL9000]

http://www.techrepublic.com/blog/te...e-united-kingdom-are-operating-illegally/1269

Ahh yep that's fair but I'm not talking about CCTV operated to protect private property, filming office buildings from the outside etc, I was talking about CCTV set up in public places by the police etc.

 

[HAL9000]

i like cctvs. got 3 of them hidden in my car. makes me feel safe from the police

Concerning.

 

[wuliheron]

There's nothing in Bible or the US constitution about privacy so I don't see what the problem is. We should have cameras everywhere including your bedroom just to be sure there isn't a terrorist or a commie under the bed!

 

[HAL9000]

There's nothing in Bible or the US constitution about privacy so I don't see what the problem is. We should have cameras everywhere including your bedroom just to be sure there isn't a terrorist or a commie under the bed!

I'm not interested in the Bible or the US constitution, they both mean nothing to me, I'm interested in logic and morality. Which is what I'm asking about here, logically/ morally where is the issue...?

 

[glenn1]

Hey People,

I often here Americans (on this forum) using the fact that the UK uses CCTV as a negative when trying to insult the UK...? Why? I think CCTV is a great thing! It's in public areas (where there is no reasonable expectation of privacy anyway) and it means they can catch criminals. So... Where's the downside. For example if you drive into Central London you are on CCTV until the moment you leave (unless you are in private residences etc obv)

If everyone in London is on CCTV constantly I don't see how this helps much - how can the police monitor that many people? If anything, it would seem that catching someone via these cameras would be more sheer dumb luck than anything, that a policeman happened to be watching that particular CCTV feed at the moment when a crime happened. This reminds me of nothing so much as how airport screening is conducted in the U.S., security kabuki meant to reassure the public that something is being done no matter how pointless.

 

[HAL9000]

If everyone in London is on CCTV constantly I don't see how this helps much - how can the police monitor that many people? If anything, it would seem that catching someone via these cameras would be more sheer dumb luck than anything, that a policeman happened to be watching that particular CCTV feed at the moment when a crime happened. This reminds me of nothing so much as how airport screening is conducted in the U.S., security kabuki meant to reassure the public that something is being done no matter how pointless.

It's not so much about pre-empting crime or catching people in the act, it's so that you can go back to the tapes afterwards, while they do have people monitoring them 24/7 the aim is more about identifying criminals after the fact.

 

[RabidMongoose]

British people are simply more subservient nowadays than most other people around the world. They bow down and pledge allegiance to one specific bloodline and they also subject themselves to being recorded as much as possible. They really have no notion of privacy or independence.

So, ultimately, it's a matter of the UK being more of a police state and the subservient nature of the British population. Really, if you can convince an entire people that they are below one inbred family, then you can basically force anything upon them.

Moreover, since the British have tumbled from being a murderous and bloodthirsty world power in the British Empire to a fairly insignificant country today, the people have a gigantic inferiority complex that does not allow them to question their overlords.

 

[wuliheron]

I'm not interested in the Bible or the US constitution, they both mean nothing to me, I'm interested in logic and morality. Which is what I'm asking about here, logically/ morally where is the issue...?

So, what kind of logic do you prefer and what do you prefer to base your morality on if not the Bible and Constitution?

All of western religion and politics incorporate at least Aristotelean logic.

 

[Doppel]

British people are simply more subservient nowadays than most other people around the world. They bow down and pledge allegiance to one specific bloodline and they also subject themselves to being recorded as much as possible. They really have no notion of privacy or independence.

So, ultimately, it's a matter of the UK being more of a police state and the subservient nature of the British population. Really, if you can convince an entire people that they are below one inbred family, then you can basically force anything upon them.

Moreover, since the British have tumbled from being a murderous and bloodthirsty world power in the British Empire to a fairly insignificant country today, the people have a gigantic inferiority complex that does not allow them to question their overlords.

Despite a sprinkling of hyperbole there is in fact some truth to this.

CCTV itself may not cause a problem but is symptomatic of the UK mindset which is that the government can protect them at times when it cannot. Many question the efficacy of CCTV through studies. But a lot of Brits feel safe with it there, they have an eye keeping watch. It encourages a sense of subservience to the machine. This is why also there are literally countless new examples of government in the UK overstepping boundaries that a decade or two ago would have been sacrosanct. The country lives in fear of terrorism, or crimes, of any number of things. America is only a little better but going down the same path.

 

[Veliko]

They are an expensive waste of time.

 

[Veliko]

Despite a sprinkling of hyperbole there is in fact some truth to this.

CCTV itself may not cause a problem but is symptomatic of the UK mindset which is that the government can protect them at times when it cannot. Many question the efficacy of CCTV through studies. But a lot of Brits feel safe with it there, they have an eye keeping watch. It encourages a sense of subservience to the machine. This is why also there are literally countless new examples of government in the UK overstepping boundaries that a decade or two ago would have been sacrosanct. The country lives in fear of terrorism, or crimes, of any number of things. America is only a little better but going down the same path.

I don't know of anyone here in the UK who feels safe with those cameras there nor anyone that lives in fear of terrorism. The US has a bigger fear of terrorism than we do.

 

[Doppel]

I don't know of anyone here in the UK who feels safe with those cameras there nor anyone that lives in fear of terrorism. The US has a bigger fear of terrorism than we do.

And yet your authorities can hold a person without charge for, what, is it a month now? Or is it up to 42 days? Of course, you don't have Gitmo or virtual strip-searches (yet) to fly.

 

[rudder]

Where's the downside. For example if you drive into Central London you are on CCTV until the moment you leave (unless you are in private residences etc obv)

Is there that much crime in London? The downside I see is cost. These cameras are digital and I wonder if the London police own the network... other wise they would have to lease lines to each camera. Does the government own the network or is there a monthly lease?

I don't know of anyone here in the UK who feels safe with those cameras there nor anyone that lives in fear of terrorism. The US has a bigger fear of terrorism than we do.

http://www.cityoflondon.police.uk/CityPolice/Advice/TrafficTravel/numberplate.htm

Shit like this would not fly in the U.S. Here in Tennessee we have cameras that monitor the interstates near major metropolitan areas. These are run by DOT people and not law enforcement and camera do not look at smaller roads. The purpose is to quickly dispatch help trucks to keep traffic flowing if there is an accident. I do not know of any city in the U.S. that monitors and checks on each and every car entering the area.

 

[Veliko]

http://www.cityoflondon.police.uk/CityPolice/Advice/TrafficTravel/numberplate.htm

Shit like this would not fly in the U.S. Here in Tennessee we have cameras that monitor the interstates near major metropolitan areas. These are run by DOT people and not law enforcement and camera do not look at smaller roads. The purpose is to quickly dispatch help trucks to keep traffic flowing if there is an accident. I do not know of any city in the U.S. that monitors and checks on each and every car entering the area.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guantanamo_Bay_detention_camp

Shit like this would not fly in the UK.

People in the US and the UK bringing up individual examples like this as 'proof' that the other nation is more of a police state than the other is pretty silly.

 

[rudder]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guantanamo_Bay_detention_camp

Shit like this would not fly in the UK.

People in the US and the UK bringing up individual examples like this as 'proof' that the other nation is more of a police state than the other is pretty silly.

Your example is much better. My point is that you said people in the UK are not afraid of terrorism. Yet the London police website says Because of its high business and financial profile, the City of London is an attractive target for terrorist attacks.

The detention center at Guantanamo was a result of not having anywhere else to put the combatants from Afghanistan. If you recall, Afghanistan was home to numerous terrorist training camps and provided safe haven to osama bin laden and his cohorts who coordinated that 9/11/2001 terrorist attacks in the U.S. The camp does not exist so the U.S. government can pluck Americans off the street and send them there for interrogation. Guantanamo is run by the U.S. military. The U.S. military has no law enforcement jurisdiction other than on military bases.

Comparing the monitoring who is entering and exiting a city to Guantanamo is like comparing apples to tiddly winks. The topic is CCTV's.

 

[Macamus Prime]

When I was in the UK, I found it odd that there were cameras EVERYWHERE.

It's fine with me. I never did anything bad, nor do I want to do anything bad. However, I can understand the reservations someone would have over the "type" of person in charge of the feeds. What is to say that they do not get altered?

What assurance does everyone have that things aren't compromized?

Worse yet, what if that blow job I got from a hooker (who I SWEAT to GOD I thought was a chick) gets all over the internet?

People afraid of cameras are just drama queens looking to cause a stink. Shut the fuck up and stay in your own country. No one wants you in their country getting video taped buying crack, weed and oral pleasure from a woman with an adam's apple.