It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Surveillance Cameras Win Broad Support

page: 1
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 29 2007 @ 09:23 PM
link   

Big Brother approved: Surveilance cameras coming to a city near you


abcnews.go.com


Surveillance Cameras Win Broad Support
Majority of Americans Favor Extra Safety Factor of Cameras

Crime-fighting beats privacy in public places: Americans, by nearly a 3-to-1 margin, support the increased use of surveillance cameras — a measure decried by some civil libertarians, but credited in London with helping to catch a variety of perpetrators since the early 1990s.
(visit the link for the full news article)



[edit on 29-7-2007 by UM_Gazz]




posted on Jul, 29 2007 @ 09:23 PM
link   
Here we go...just look at London....

abcnews.go.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Jul, 29 2007 @ 09:37 PM
link   
" Surveillance Cameras Win Broad Support"


proving that uninformed citizens who are too busy to put the pieces together

have been pacified by a bunch of liars and most don't even know it


pretty sad lot.

for sure they never read 1984



posted on Jul, 29 2007 @ 10:09 PM
link   
I have a serious question. Has anyone ever seen a mainstream media report that said people were against public surveillance? Are we seeing the results of a legit poll, or is somebody trying to sell us on something that we don't really want?



posted on Jul, 29 2007 @ 10:39 PM
link   
Sometimes having the truth isn't good for the population in general. Like say for instance, a woman who gives birth will become more intelligent. It's true. But here's the problem. What if the women's still only becomes above average intelligence after the baby is born? Hitting the mark of average intelligence after five children isn't going to be useful in understanding the benefits of zero population growth, right?



posted on Jul, 29 2007 @ 10:53 PM
link   
So whats the big deal with cameras?
Think your police force is doing a "great job"? Hell no... No one thinks that.

Get these cameras in so people can feel safe again. This is rediculous... So much fear in being safe... you folks are a victim of your own ignorance.



posted on Jul, 29 2007 @ 10:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by Justin Oldham
I have a serious question. Has anyone ever seen a mainstream media report that said people were against public surveillance? Are we seeing the results of a legit poll, or is somebody trying to sell us on something that we don't really want?


Exactly. There's no way that "more than 3-1" want more surveillance cameras! Based on multiple poles, about 3-1 people believe 9/11 was an inside job... the same number support bigger big brother? I don't think so. Even folks that don't understand the NWO hate street cameras that give out auto fines etc. Where are the BB guns and ski masks? A camera shooting raid in US/UK would be nice.



posted on Jul, 29 2007 @ 11:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Justin Oldham
I have a serious question. Has anyone ever seen a mainstream media report that said people were against public surveillance? Are we seeing the results of a legit poll, or is somebody trying to sell us on something that we don't really want?


You are seeing the results of memetic engineering.

You might enjoy Propaganda: The Formation of Men's Attitudes. New York 1965. by Jacques Ellul

or

Memetic Magic by Kirk Packwood, Jaguar Temple Press April 2004

The masses say "YES!"

Hocus pocus,

Sri Oracle



posted on Jul, 30 2007 @ 12:19 AM
link   
I honestly don't doubt the validity of this survey, if it said say 7 to 1 or more,
than I might, but 3 to 1 sounds about right.


The point people don't seem to get is that these cameras are meant to only be in public places.
Guess what, cameras or not people do see you when you are in public places.

When it comes down to it, the moment you step out your door, you give up your
outward rights to privacy.



posted on Jul, 30 2007 @ 12:30 AM
link   
As much as its painstakingly obvious to see whats going on with these cameras, and as much as I am against the issue of privacy invasion, I really do believe cameras being installed are a good thing. When people get stabbed on one of the busiest streets in my city (a city of 4 million people) in broad daylight, and are able to get away with it, then theres cause for concern. At this point in time, I dont care much for being on tv screens manned by people who in reality, couldnt care less. Some people feel they are the be all and end all, that cameras filming them and everyone else walking along a street is somehow an issue of privacy. Well, theyre public streets afterall.



posted on Jul, 30 2007 @ 12:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by iori_komei
I honestly don't doubt the validity of this survey, if it said say 7 to 1 or more,
than I might, but 3 to 1 sounds about right.


The point people don't seem to get is that these cameras are meant to only be in public places.
Guess what, cameras or not people do see you when you are in public places.

When it comes down to it, the moment you step out your door, you give up your
outward rights to privacy.


What privacy are you talking about exactly? If you honestly think that anyone cares what you do, or that walking down a street is a "private" right that you exercise, then well....geez. Unless you're punching people left and right, drunk and behaving disorderly, murdering, or what have you, no one REALLY cares what you're doing. Trust me, you're insignificant for the most part.



posted on Jul, 30 2007 @ 03:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by Justin Oldham
I have a serious question. Has anyone ever seen a mainstream media report that said people were against public surveillance? Are we seeing the results of a legit poll, or is somebody trying to sell us on something that we don't really want?


You beat me to it Justin.


I would be very interested as to exactly where the figure of "3-1" was from?

Surveys can always be loaded and tailored to fit most requirements.

Personally, I think Americans should have more say in these kind of decisions that affect public spaces. More info, more choice and more control.

The spanking hand of big brother needs a slap!



posted on Jul, 30 2007 @ 03:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by Justin Oldham
I have a serious question. Has anyone ever seen a mainstream media report that said people were against public surveillance? Are we seeing the results of a legit poll, or is somebody trying to sell us on something that we don't really want?


Yeah, 3 to 1???????? If these polls are in fact real, who in the hell are they polling? If you ask some vegetable drooling in to a cup, does that response really count?

I think a lot of these so-called polls we see in the mainstream media are just made up and used to sway the masses. I think when they use the term un-scientific that could basically mean anything, including the fact that the poll is BS and nobody was really polled.

Peace



posted on Jul, 30 2007 @ 04:00 PM
link   
The simple fact of the matter is that anyone can commission a poll. There are two different polling companies right here in my home town. When you pay your fees, you as the customer can also determine the size of the sample. I think that if peole really knew what went it to poll-taking, they'd be a lot more skeptical.



posted on Jul, 30 2007 @ 05:52 PM
link   
Poll or no poll.

Is the question what right so we have in a public forum?
The key word obviously is public. It isn't at your home, or pointed at your house. How can we cry foul when the camera is placed in or on public property? We have no reasonable expectation of privacy when in public do we? Just asking . . .



posted on Jul, 30 2007 @ 06:48 PM
link   
There is a difference between law enforcement and social control. When social surveillance of public places becomes the norm, it really will be the norm for those cameras to be pointed at your house. It's a slippery slope that we can't come back from. Nothing prevents abuse in this case except moderation, which is not possible beyond a certain point.



posted on Jul, 31 2007 @ 05:29 PM
link   
I understand what you are saying Justin but why is everything presumed to have some dark, ulterior motive? Now don't get me wrong, we are on the fast track to an Orewellian society, but like I said, what is wrong with an eye in the sky?

Let me clarify to avoid any misunderstanding on where it is that I am coming from:

To me, an acceptable place for a surveillance camera would be place like a public park, business districts, shopping districts and obviously out side of maybe local and state facilities. Other than that I am not for intrusive monitoring of my life or anyone else's for that matter.

But yes, like you stated, it is a slippery slope. Is it too steep to climb back out of? I guess we shall see.

~B~



posted on Aug, 1 2007 @ 12:19 AM
link   
The real nub of the problem is this. Once we start that kind of monitoring, it doesn'tstop until there are cameras everywhere, which eventually means on and in your home. Why? Because government and special interest groups can't be moderate when it comes to this issue. Why? Becasue one legal precendent justifies the next. Why? Because we have a long-standing tradition of legalized surveillance when that surveillance is overt, above board, and advertised.

[edit on 1-8-2007 by Justin Oldham]



posted on Aug, 1 2007 @ 12:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by Justin Oldham
The real nub of the problem is this. Once we start that kind of monitoring, it doesn'tstop until there are cameras everywhere, which eventually means on and in your home. Why? Because government and special interest groups can't be moderate when it comes to this issue. Why? Becasue one legal precendent justifies the next. Why? Because we have a long-standing tradition of legalized surveillance when that surveillance is overt, above board, and advertised.

[edit on 1-8-2007 by Justin Oldham]


In your home? Lol please, there will be a revolution before that happens. Theres a need for cameras in the streets, because of what goes on them. How many people care what you are cooking this Thursday night?
No one.



posted on Aug, 1 2007 @ 12:55 AM
link   
If people think that planting those cameras are great, wait until
they get installed. Then people will be begging for them to be turned
off. It sure seems like a great idea, but you also got to think. How
much more easier does it get for the CIA to spy on you, then install
cameras in your own neighborhoods. Then you just have to wait another
10 years for another Family Jewels to be released.
Let's speculate something bad happens in the US, how much more
easy will it be for the government to control the whole population?



new topics

top topics



 
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join