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.

 

I guess part of the answer is to install cameras everywhere...

page: 1
5

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 17 2011 @ 10:58 AM
link   
Observing police tactics and realizing the war that has been waged on U.S. citizens, the only thing I can see sort of a full revolution, is for every citizen to arm themselves with surveillance equipment.

Homes should be equiped with cameras inside and out. So if police kick in your door everything is recorded.

Our vehicles should have video and audio equipment all around which record every encounter.

Lastly, people should have video and audio equipment on them just in case.




posted on May, 17 2011 @ 10:59 AM
link   
reply to post by DZAG Wright
 


Here's a better idea. Stop committing crime and then there would be no reason for them to exist.



posted on May, 17 2011 @ 11:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by zookey
reply to post by DZAG Wright
 


Here's a better idea. Stop committing crime and then there would be no reason for them to exist.

The problem with that is that a lot of laws now days are not designed to improve life for the common citizen. Many laws now days exist for the exploitation of the law makers.
edit on 17-5-2011 by binkbonk because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 17 2011 @ 11:04 AM
link   
Every police office should have a personal recorder that records their every action, spoken word, or command. If the recorder is not on the officer, the officer is not on duty and is a regular citizen.



posted on May, 17 2011 @ 11:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by zookey
reply to post by DZAG Wright
 


Here's a better idea. Stop committing crime and then there would be no reason for them to exist.


Better, huh? Yeah, just stop, everybody! (That always works, eh?)

I agree that as Conscious Entities, Humans have the right to record Their perspective. And this in turn can be used as evidence if needed. I think it's an awesome idea to keep the means to record handy.



posted on May, 17 2011 @ 11:59 AM
link   
reply to post by DZAG Wright
 


Its better to build transparent rice size reflectors and spray them everywhere. And when activated they produce camera images in every location why they are building a combined visual of everything.



posted on May, 17 2011 @ 12:07 PM
link   
reply to post by DZAG Wright
 


Sounds good, but in some states that is breaking the law.

Are Cameras the New Guns?


In at least three states, it is now illegal to record any on-duty police officer.

Even if the encounter involves you and may be necessary to your defense, and even if the recording is on a public street where no expectation of privacy exists.


I think that when someone signs up to be a civil servant that they should expect to be filmed while on duty. It is tax dollars that funds their paychecks.



posted on May, 17 2011 @ 01:00 PM
link   
Would HATE to live in a society such as that. A camera isnt going to stop you from havign your ass whooped by cops or stopthem from breaking down your door illegally. However, you might feel better having "evidence" against them, but we all know who's side the courts are on. Cops get off with ALOT, thats not going to change until society is over turned. Installing camera's is like being prepared to live with the problem, not solve it.



posted on May, 17 2011 @ 02:22 PM
link   
reply to post by binkbonk
 


John Austin...'Speaking for Acting.' A law is nothing but the pronouncement of an idea that, in theory, should exist. The words are imbued with some authoritarian power, but in reality they are still just words, organized into a string that evokes a thought in the mind of the reader. This is why the Supreme Court has to "interpret" the law and set "precedent" (i.e., a formalized meaning based on the circumstance - i.e., a law on top of a law). I think Godwin noted that every law is found insufficient for every new circumstance, because context dictates everything.

It's all quite intriguing, nevertheless flawed. I hope I'm not put on a list somewhere for paraphrasing Godwin.

EDIT: So as not to derail the thread:

The problem with using video cameras to combat surveillence issues and privacy issues is that, as the old saying goes, you are using the master's tools to dismantle his house. I wouldn't go against prudent use of video recording to support one's side in a he-said, she-said scenario where the other typically has their own surveillance, but you - as victim - are left without. It can and will be abused, and in the end, may be State-sanctioned anyway (much as the old post-revolutionary law here dictated that all men over a certain age had to bear arms, munitions and other accessories). We may find that such a tactic will be co-opted by the so-called the PTB and used against us in an increasing race to the bottom of surveillance and counter-surveillance.

On a side note, who else thinks that voyeurism will be the resulting sexual fetish of the culture?
edit on 17-5-2011 by Sphota because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 17 2011 @ 02:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by zookey
reply to post by DZAG Wright
 


Here's a better idea. Stop committing crime and then there would be no reason for them to exist.





So you think everyone assaulted by police have committed a crime?

Even if they have, do we live in a society where you're guilty until proven innocent?



posted on May, 17 2011 @ 07:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by SearchLightsInc
Would HATE to live in a society such as that. A camera isnt going to stop you from havign your ass whooped by cops or stopthem from breaking down your door illegally. However, you might feel better having "evidence" against them, but we all know who's side the courts are on. Cops get off with ALOT, thats not going to change until society is over turned. Installing camera's is like being prepared to live with the problem, not solve it.


I'm thinking that if cops have nothing to hide...They would not worry about the public recording Them.

And if the courts are really in Their court (so to speak), They wouldn't worry about being filmed.

Given that police are worried...I have to conclude there is a reason.




top topics



 
5

log in

join