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.

 

D.C. police set to monitor 5,000 cameras

page: 1
1

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 9 2008 @ 02:38 PM
link   

D.C. police set to monitor 5,000 cameras


www.washingtontimes.com

D.C. officials are giving police access to more than 5,000 closed-circuit TV cameras citywide that monitor traffic, schools and public housing — a move that will give the District one of the largest surveillance networks in the country.

"The primary benefit of what we're doing is for public health and safety," said Darrell Darnell, director of the city's Homeland Security and Emergency Management Agency, who announced the initiative along with Mayor Adrian M. Fenty yesterday.
(visit the link for the full news article)


Related News Links:
House Staffers Livid Over Web Site
Are You Camera-Ready?: Police surveillance in nation's capital
Police to monitor 5000 cameras in DC

Related AboveTopSecret.com Discussion Threads:
DC Police using Live Cameras to Monitor 'Criminals'
The Emerging Surveillance State:Ron Paul
'Quantum Surveillance' - Project Looking Glass
Illegal Surveillance of Americans Using Manipulative Electronic Devices
House to close its door for spying bill
House challenges Bush on surveillance
UK expands surveillance

[edit on 4/9/2008 by biggie smalls]




posted on Apr, 9 2008 @ 02:38 PM
link   
I'm glad to see our politicians care about taking care of us lowly citizens. We're not capable of looking after ourselves so we need big brother to watch our every move.

Thanks for keeping an eye on me. I feel much safer now.

Did you notice the "benefit" of these cameras is for public health and safety? Does that make any sense?

How does it improve the public's health?

As for the public safety, well I guess its a matter of how you define "safe." I don't feel safer when cameras watch my every move, regardless if I was a criminal or not. This is a surveillance police state in the works, to keep everyone safe from themselves.

Not only will the streets be monitored, but schools and public housing as well. Keep everyone safer by watching, thank you big brother.

The cameras clearly will not deter crime, they will just document abuses. That doesn't sound like much help to me.


But the announcement left some civil liberties advocates and a key D.C. Council member concerned.

"We've been sort of sounding the alarm on this stuff for a long time, saying these little pieces — they grow," said Art Spitzer, legal director for the American Civil Liberties Union of the National Capital Area. "You put a camera here, it's not so bad, you put a camera there, it's not so bad. But then it turns out all the sudden, we find out there are 5,200 cameras. That's a big number."


Wow, 5200 cameras in one city. That sounds like a surveillance society to me.

I guess Ron Paul wasn't so far off now was he?


The Video Interoperability for Public Safety (VIPS) program will consolidate the more than 5,200 cameras operated by D.C. agencies — including D.C. Public Schools and the D.C. Housing Authority — into one network managed by the city's Homeland Security and Emergency Management Agency.


And we all know how well FEMA and DHS deals with tragedy. How well did they manage Hurricane Katrina? That was a disaster that no one could have foreseen, except the Federal Emergency Management Agency whose job it is to foresee such events (well I could have told the residents of New Orleans that building a city under sea level or at sea level is a terrible idea, but that's another story).

Consolidate all the cameras under 2 defunct agencies, great idea. That sure will stop crime...



BIG BROTHER

D.C. officials yesterday said they plan to link more than 5,000 cameras to form a surveillance network to help combat crime and terrorism. The following city agencies have cameras:

D.C. Housing Authority: 720

D.C. Public Schools: 3,452

Department of Parks and Recreation: 181

Department of Transportation: 131

Metropolitan Police Department: 92

Department of Corrections: 218

Office of Property Management/Protective Services Division: 468

D.C. Homeland Security and Emergency Management Agency: 4

TOTAL: 5,266


Yay for DC tyranny! Hip hip hooray for fascism!

www.washingtontimes.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Apr, 9 2008 @ 03:03 PM
link   
reply to post by biggie smalls
 


Don't you just love a nice healthy serving of a surveillance society in the morning?

I sure do enjoy my cameras and RFID chips and whatever else the government decides is in store to "keep us safe from ourselves."

What a joke. Who really are we being protected from? The boogey man? Those evil muslim terrorists over there or the evil gang bangers on the street or the students going "postal" in schools?

This is a societal problem and no amount of surveillance is going to solve anything.

Just another band-aid to cover up a sick world.

"The more things change, the more they stay the same."



posted on Apr, 9 2008 @ 03:50 PM
link   
I have a position on this that blows their crap right out of the water.

So, you want to watch us to keep us safe? You going to use MY tax-dollars to pay someone to 'watch' me?

Since I'm paying for it - I WANT ACCESS TOO. I want to watch the police.., you know.., to keep them safe. This is publicly funded use of surveillance equipment, then the surveillance equipment images are ALSO public. If 'everyone' can see, wouldn't that be a deterrent to crime? What's that? We can't be trusted with that access? Why? We could only be doing what your doing..., you're not invading privacy, right? You're not technologically 'stalking' anyone are you? It's like saying I can't look at the ocean because you're already paying a life guard to do that.

I got a million objections to this...,

BUT

The District of Columbia is NOT a state in the union. There will be all sorts of 'quasi-special' laws to restrict citizens from policing the police. Remember who's HQ is there by the way - The FED. Why are they soooo concerned that everyone needs to be 'watched' now?

PS - Think about this - If DC's not a STATE - Where's the money to pay for this great new police job - 'people watching' coming from?

[edit on 9-4-2008 by Maxmars]

[edit on 9-4-2008 by Maxmars]



posted on Apr, 9 2008 @ 05:40 PM
link   
reply to post by Maxmars
 


You know I would prefer to have this kind of technology not be used at all, but heck, if its going to be used anyway I'd like to see what goes on too.

If the police have access to the data, why can't everyone else?

Actually, the title of the thread really is a misnomer. The DHS and FEMA in DC will be watching the cameras, but they're more or less the same thing.

Columbia is a District and people do live there. They receive tax dollars from the residents and I imagine part of the federal budget is slated to fund DC maintenance of roads and what not. That's probably how they pay for it.



posted on Apr, 9 2008 @ 05:54 PM
link   
Well every camera I go buy I'm going to let them know just how i feel


We have those red light cameras here in Albuqerque and i got caught speeding, and when I got the picture in the mail, It showed my license plate and right next to it was a big bumper sticker that said 9/11 was an inside job.


So if the gov is going to watch me they are going to be getting a finger in their face every time they take a pic. Not that it will change anything. Maybe it would if everybody did it. Who knows.



posted on Apr, 9 2008 @ 06:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by theendisnear69
Well every camera I go buy I'm going to let them know just how i feel


We have those red light cameras here in Albuqerque and i got caught speeding, and when I got the picture in the mail, It showed my license plate and right next to it was a big bumper sticker that said 9/11 was an inside job.


So if the gov is going to watch me they are going to be getting a finger in their face every time they take a pic. Not that it will change anything. Maybe it would if everybody did it. Who knows.


I don't know if its true or urban legend but I hear that overseas (Germany maybe) they actually have a database of all the images of every person who has 'flipped off' their public surveillance cameras!

All I can say is - DHS and FEMA execs better do a lot of introspection on the application of this technology and what it really means to the people. Eventually there will be a very uncomfortable reckoning for this utter debasement of the concept of 'government of the people.' Unless they have been completely mind-wiped there's no way to avoid recognizing the level of abuse of power this represents.



posted on Apr, 9 2008 @ 07:24 PM
link   
This is where I will not be a skeptic and argue against most. I can not stand what is going on with this stuff. It is sad really, because many people seem not to care that we are losing our civil liberties on a daily basis.


There is NO need to watch people with cameras! Honestly, I would rather be less safe than lose the principles this country was founded on. You know if it was just for traffic I would not object "so" strongly.

But I strongly object to this.."schools and public housing." So now they are going to watch our children and our citizens. I hope there are some good constitutional lawyers out there. I am still a few years away.



posted on Apr, 9 2008 @ 07:28 PM
link   
Um you do have acess most cameras you can connect by ip and there little to no security on them there is many public security camera IP websites.

There entire Banks of Camera hubs listed on the net different cities several hundred per city.

feel free to use em lol.

some you can pan and zoom

[edit on 9-4-2008 by NWOmaskedman]



posted on Apr, 9 2008 @ 07:42 PM
link   
That is like comparing apples to oranges, really. Most all the cameras you can access online are not used for law enforcement purposes. And trust me, I am not against law enforcement. I am against violations of our civil liberties.

And um, any of these places online where you can view live webcams have 5,000 in a concentrated area?

[edit on 9-4-2008 by Comsence2075]



posted on Apr, 9 2008 @ 11:16 PM
link   
Do they plan on running face recognition software? It would be impractical to staff enough people to monitor all of those cameras. Other than face recognition software I suppose the cameras have after-action uses to.



posted on Apr, 10 2008 @ 02:07 PM
link   
reply to post by The_Future_LT
 


I suspect that since processing power increased and the availability of the next generation internet transmission lines is in place - this is the perfect 'opportunity' for some 'service' to be established using the latest face-typing algorithms on these images. Once each image can be mathematically 'typed' each country or organization can engage the service the generate the coding which can them be posted against a databases of faces and cross-reference data.

Having done that they can run a search for your 'facial image' popping up anywhere and everywhere any digital image has been captured. Soon someone will be able to type into a database and find out just where you have ever been 'imaged' within the range of their record-keeping.

Oh yeah, I trust them with that! [sarcasm off]



posted on Apr, 10 2008 @ 11:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Maxmars
Having done that they can run a search for your 'facial image' popping up anywhere and everywhere any digital image has been captured. Soon someone will be able to type into a database and find out just where you have ever been 'imaged' within the range of their record-keeping.


(Slightly off topic)
I heard that Walmart is setting up a face recognition program in the near future to keep repeat shoplifters out. I was talking to the head of loss prevention at our walmart, he said he thought it was overkill, but that it would pay for itself.
(Sorry for going slightly off topic there)



posted on Apr, 11 2008 @ 10:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by The_Future_LT
(Slightly off topic)
I heard that Walmart is setting up a face recognition program in the near future to keep repeat shoplifters out. I was talking to the head of loss prevention at our walmart, he said he thought it was overkill, but that it would pay for itself.
(Sorry for going slightly off topic there)


I don't think it's off-topic if you consider it's evidence that surveillance technology is being applied at many levels, all of which are removed from the oversight of those surveilled.

[edit on 11-4-2008 by Maxmars]



new topics

top topics



 
1

log in

join