posted on Aug, 1 2007 @ 12:19 PM
Streets full of cameras do not prevent crimes from happening, they just record the event for later examination and investigation. In that respect
they are a bit like the police who also spend most of their time turning up after the fact to investigate a crime rather than preventing it. The
BIGGEST deterrent to crime is still us, the general public as most criminals will not commit their crimes if there are people around to identify them
The fact that there's a camera pointing at you does not necessarily mean someone is actually watching the output in some bunker somewhere, ready to
send in the SWAT teams at the first sign of a suspicious looking character.
With modern camera infrastructures in place it then becomes easy to add other capabilities to the system, such as audio transmit / receive (no
loitering, move along citizen), RFID readers, ANPR systems etc. So, the backbone for total surveillance is already in place in many areas.
It's ok to argue that if we are doing nothing wrong then we have nothing to fear, but that's a very defeatist and short sighted viewpoint. If
simply dissenting or demonstrating against the government or big corporate interests can get you branded as a criminal / terrorist (the latest BAA
injunction as an example), then these systems will be used to track your movements.
It comes down to the issue of privacy. Do we, in return, get to monitor the goings on of our elected representatives who allow these systems and more
invasive and oppressive laws? Of course not, they're above the laws that they enact for the rest of us to follow