Cameras Make You Safer, Right?
- London is considered the most spied-on city in the world, courtesy of its ubiquitous CCTV cameras, purportedly there to reduce crime. But according to a recent report, there's been little or no change in London's crime rates since they were more widely installed in the mid 1980s.
Privacy activists are worried that Britain will become the bleak totalitarian society George Orwell painted in his classic novel “1984,” where citizens were spied on and personal freedom sacrificed for the benefit of an all-powerful state.
“We are sleepwalking into a surveillance society where we’re watched from control rooms by anonymous people, says Emma Carr of the BBW. “The worrying thing is that we don’t actually know how many CCTV cameras there are out there."
Remember, London is the example cited by Shortshanks as his inspiration for sticking cameras all over the place. London is years, maybe even a decade ahead of Chicago in terms of deploying camera technology, and it has had exactly ZERO effect on crime.
But hey, it' must be "for the children" or something, right? Because what could actually justify spending millions, maybe a few billion when it's all over, on something that doesn't affect crime and has never actually arrested a criminal in the history of the world.
But hey, it' must be "for the children" or something, right? Because what could actually justify spending millions, maybe a few billion when it's all over, on something that doesn't affect crime and has never actually arrested a criminal in the history of the world.
Labels: dumb ideas
posted by SCC at 12:01 AM
31 Comments:
What justifies spending millions or billions, you ask? Connected crooked contractors with ties to Daley and the democratic machine would be the answer.
These cameras are a giant scam. They don't solve any crimes in cost the taxpayers millions of dollars.
Put more cops on the street instead of those stupid cameras!!
Don't worry. It'll never happen here.
We've got the cameras, but no one's watching them.
Hi, alderman beavers here again. I would like to take a moment to clear up some of the confusion surrounding my situation. My name is "beavers" not "beiber ".
I believe this was the only time the street cameras were effective in the City of Chicago. Do you remember this numb nuts?
http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2010/11/22/man-caught-stealing-police-camera/
"But hey, it must be 'for the children' or something, right?"
Anything that's "for the children" must be right.
And if you're not "for the children", you must be against them.
rb
In spite of what you may think we are not here to do crime prevention.
How you going to generate city revenue if you prevent the crimes?
For example:
You could eliminate speeding around schools entirely for example if speed bumps were big enough and properly spread apart.
However how does one make any money off of that since the crime is being prevented?
Oh-no, cameras are much better as we let the crime happen and use that crime to generate revenue.
We can create an illusion of caring by filming, and tracking, and counting, and fighting over budgets for money to award more no-bid contracts to our friends to install more cameras, or parking meters or whatever.
We sell the public on the message of "bringing the criminals to justice" but a lot good that does when you or your neighbors kid gets blasted in the head with a thirty-eight and then is thrown on the stack of bodies over at the city morgue and left to rot.
And what is this bring the criminal to justice. With great fanfare some of the stories are published and the message is sent that.. see..you can't get away from us.
Then in the background, a short time later with little notice the so-called justice system let's them out the back door.
Look at all the jobs crime creates.
We need that crime to keep judges, lawyers, city clerks, bailiffs, cops, first responders, media reporters, busy and employed.
We don't want to prevent the crime. That will mess up certain clouted ones job security.
It's the 21st century economy. Don't f-- it up.
You don't want to eliminate crime.
If the crime numbers begin to fall import some criminals from across the border and grant sanctuary to them. That's all we do.
Preach how the illegally imported ones are only trying to make themselves a better life.
Stereo type them. Profile them, Yeah no-one complains in the media when they write about how they are ALL here to do the jobs that Americans do not want to do. ALL of them. Yes EVERYONE OF THEM...That's a nice profile eh?
This camera non-sense is about empire building not stopping crime or preventing crime.
The cameras are tools used to win the hearts and minds of the taxpayers for more personal, more money, higher taxes to keep you safe. It's part of the propaganda machine.
Oh the terrorist are going to get you. How much more freedom can we take away?
Funny...this entire process how we'll spend thousands of dollars on a security infrastructure to bring a $500 dollar Apple picker to justice isn't it?
It would be cheaper if the taxpayers just dished them out for free to anyone who wanted one.
Let's face it five days in an Illinois prison cost the taxpayers over $500 dollars that you would pay for an Iphone.
But then what would the lawyers, judges, bailiffs, do for work?
Just think about it.
These lawyers, judges, etc, earning $100k a year or more. You could easily buy 200 Iphones and hand them out for free for each one of those positions that the city cuts.
Cut enough of those jobs and there's no more Apple picking Iphone crimes.
...on something that doesn't affect crime and has never actually arrested a criminal in the history of the world.
No affect on crime. But a major affect on someone's bank account if they are well connected.
Criminals have figured out that a grainy video (if the pod is not dead like many out there) of the top of their black hoody or their ragged illegible TRP is no threat to criminal operations. Weis and daley and rahm can fool the stupid reverands but real citizens and gang bangers know better. Hairgels have been known to beleive that a blue flashing light on a pole is their back up and they grow bigger balls when they swoop down on the hapless criminals too.
All cameras do is let the next of Kin know what happened and occasionally give the public a good laugh.
Made my $100 donation For The Kids just this week.
We assume that the POD cameras work? If someone actually did an audit, we are lucky if 50% of the POD cameras actually are able to take visible pictures to use in a investigation. We have a pod unit at the academy but they have other priorities. More smoke and mirrors again. But the cameras look pretty with the blue lights.
Cameras? For home safety look into getting a "Burglar Mist" system. It uses OC spray to protect an area. Much more effective than a regular alarm system with just signals the alarm company to call the police.
Doesn't traffic radar have to be calibrated, adjusted, etc with items, including a tuning fork every 8 hours or so?
I can see many tickets being dismissed in a class action when the city can't show they were adjusted or maintained.
I like how I look on the cameras!!!! I just can't get enough "Face-Time" !!!
Cameras do not provide physical protection.Only a firearm or other weapon can provide REAL protection.
Ask you elected official why you are sentenced to death and bodily harm by not being allowed to carry firearms as guaranteed by the Bill of Rights.
shitty cameras plus shitty bosses equals shitty results.
A woman yesterday was raped on the el. The security camera caught the whole incident. Big deal. What good did it do to her. Did it stop the crime? save her from all the suffering she will have to endure? No.
The only one who benefits from all these worthless cameras is Redflex Corp.
Remember also that these CCTV cameras have had no effect on terrorist activity either, remember the London tube bombings several years back? Yeah after the fact they got one camera capturing the 4 guys getting out of a car and walking into a station, but that was after the fact and helped to deter absolutely nothing!
And, having been to London, I can tell you that they have infinitely more cameras then Chicago, and buddy they are on every single street. Oh, and they also have a camera system hooked into a tollway system where you have to pay to actually drive into the main sorta downtown part of the city itself. Its actually something that was mentioned as something to try do here in "an effort to ease congestion of traffic in the downtown chicago area," a few years back.
Cameras will never, ever be a substitue for boots on the ground, ever. They are purely reactive, and even as such, you still need people to actually go out in the field and investigate whatever the fuck you just saw on the cameras!
The only cameras that are fully operational and monitored are the red-light cameras because they bring in the "Benjamins" and when
the speed zone cameras arrive they will be monitored also for the same
reason. Chicago residents,
dig down, dig deep, and dig
often in your wallets and purses to pay for the privilege of living in this
world-class city we call home.
"Privacy activists are worried that Britain will become the bleak totalitarian society George Orwell painted in his classic novel “1984...”
Why is this always spoken of as being a prospective event -- despite the current, observable presence of millions of cameras?
It has become that Orwellian society.
1984 came and went 28 years ago.
Irresistible to someone like Richard M. Daley.
Big Brother (Little Finger) has issued a press release through Minitru (Ministry of Truth) indicating that more and more red light cameras, school zone cameras, falling TV's on kids cameras and proctoscopes WILL be thought of as ++(doubleplus) good. Anyone NOT thinking in this manner will be remanded to the Vanecko and Daley Reeducation Center for Thought Criminals.
Chicago has been reported as having the most Public Surveillance Cameras of anywhere in the United States.
We also have the most members of the Communist [Democrat] Party USA here.
It's only a matter of time till victims start suing the City if they are victimized within range of a Camera that doesn't work or is otherwise impaired. Probably has already happened. Einstein Daley would be proud. He could pay-off Ghetto Lottery winners even more with the Middle-Class Taxpayers Tax-Dollars, but of course, none of his own. . Thanks again, highly educated and All-Round Know-it-All Democrat Politicians... We know, it's OK though, because it's "For the Chiiiilllll-dren."
A woman yesterday was raped on the el. The security camera caught the whole incident. Big deal. What good did it do to her. Did it stop the crime? save her from all the suffering she will have to endure? No.
2/25/2012 11:19:00 AM
--WELL! As a matter of fact the camera got us an excellent image of the offender! Black male wearing dark clothing and a dark hoodie! So there!
This is further proof that daley (no capital "D" on purpose here) is not a true Irishman. No true Irishman would give credit to the british for anything, at least not until they end their occupation of Ireland.
"--WELL! As a matter of fact the camera got us an excellent image of the offender! Black male wearing dark clothing and a dark hoodie! So there!"
--2/25/2012 11:43:00 PM
As the do-nothings say today, "The issue has been addressed."
Rubber-stamp the slip of paper, put it in the "Out" box.
Next!
They collect nice paychecks for doing this.
There are several problems with cameras.
One is resolution. Until fairly recently, the resolution on video cameras was generally not good enough to do a lot with it. Everyone has seen the grainy still pictures extracted from them that could be just about anyone. A lot of them are still B/W which leaves out a lot of detail as well. Cameras available today are a lot better and might actually serve some useful purpose. But, you would have to replace the junk that already exists.
Another is archiving. The expense of archiving the footage means that mostly the footage has been written over fairly quickly so it is not available later for use unless someone retrieves it quickly. This problem has also been fixed by technology but again, the existing stuff would need to be replaced.
As for doing anything about crime in progress, it is pretty tough to suggest they can do much unless there is someone watching them 24/7. There is some interesting work being done on software to analyze video streams in real time, but it is a lot like facial recognition software. Good idea, and some solid initial work, but nothing really usable on the horizon.
Not that I"m a big supporter of CCTV. Don't like it, really.
But I would note that when those disaffected youth set off the bombs on the Tube a few years back, they were able to do quite a respectable job of tracking the little dears on the way to their awful deed.
Anonymous said...
In spite of what you may think we are not here to do crime prevention.
How you going to generate city revenue if you prevent the crimes?
For example:
You could eliminate speeding around schools entirely for example if speed bumps were big enough and properly spread apart.
However how does one make any money off of that since the crime is being prevented?
Oh-no, cameras are much better as we let the crime happen and use that crime to generate revenue.
We can create an illusion of caring by filming, and tracking, and counting, and fighting over budgets for money to award more no-bid contracts to our friends to install more cameras, or parking meters or whatever.
We sell the public on the message of "bringing the criminals to justice" but a lot good that does when you or your neighbors kid gets blasted in the head with a thirty-eight and then is thrown on the stack of bodies over at the city morgue and left to rot.
And what is this bring the criminal to justice. With great fanfare some of the stories are published and the message is sent that.. see..you can't get away from us.
Then in the background, a short time later with little notice the so-called justice system let's them out the back door.
Look at all the jobs crime creates.
We need that crime to keep judges, lawyers, city clerks, bailiffs, cops, first responders, media reporters, busy and employed.
We don't want to prevent the crime. That will mess up certain clouted ones job security.
It's the 21st century economy. Don't f-- it up.
You don't want to eliminate crime.
If the crime numbers begin to fall import some criminals from across the border and grant sanctuary to them. That's all we do.
Preach how the illegally imported ones are only trying to make themselves a better life.
Stereo type them. Profile them, Yeah no-one complains in the media when they write about how they are ALL here to do the jobs that Americans do not want to do. ALL of them. Yes EVERYONE OF THEM...That's a nice profile eh?
This camera non-sense is about empire building not stopping crime or preventing crime.
The cameras are tools used to win the hearts and minds of the taxpayers for more personal, more money, higher taxes to keep you safe. It's part of the propaganda machine.
Oh the terrorist are going to get you. How much more freedom can we take away?
Funny...this entire process how we'll spend thousands of dollars on a security infrastructure to bring a $500 dollar Apple picker to justice isn't it?
It would be cheaper if the taxpayers just dished them out for free to anyone who wanted one.
Let's face it five days in an Illinois prison cost the taxpayers over $500 dollars that you would pay for an Iphone.
But then what would the lawyers, judges, bailiffs, do for work?
Just think about it.
These lawyers, judges, etc, earning $100k a year or more. You could easily buy 200 Iphones and hand them out for free for each one of those positions that the city cuts.
Cut enough of those jobs and there's no more Apple picking Iphone crimes.
2/25/2012 03:45:00 AM
Amen to that. You forgot the entire panoply of Cook County jail and security workers, sheriffs, County building administrative staff, and THOUSANDS of other people whose jobs would go away. Crime equals jobs for many besides the obvious-police officers.
Post a Comment
<< Home