It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


INDECT: Big Brother on Steroids

page: 1

log in


posted on Aug, 10 2012 @ 08:50 PM
You gotta see this s*** , apparently it was first tested at Euro 2012, and now tried at the Olympics, their cranking it up folks. Plenty of info online, posted a few, thoughts please.[/url]

Gil Scott-Heron, "The Revolution Will Not Be Televised"
Oh yes it will....

Footnote :- Background and context

Crime cameras are a relatively new development in crime fighting.
With the technology behind cameras and information networks advancing dramatically in recent decades, the availability and affordability of crime cameras has increased.
Cities around the world with high crime rates have, as a result, begun to test and implement crime camera programs designed to detect, prevent, and investigate crime. New Orleans, for instance - with escalating crime rates following Hurricane Katrina - has become a particularly high profile test case in the United States. This has occurred at the same time as - and sometimes as a result of - terrorism-related video surveillance programs springing up after September 11th, 2001 in cities such as London, New York, and Washington, DC.

With the growth of crime camera programs around the world, the debate over whether they are indeed a good idea has grown as well. The debate revolves around a number of important questions:

Are crime camera programs effective at helping predict criminal behavior, enabling effective crime response, deterring crime, and/or prosecuting crimes?

Do crime cameras have an important social impact on the public sense of safety? Or, do citizens resent them as an eye-sore?

Are crime cameras cost-effective or should police resources be spent elsewhere?

Are crime cameras too expensive to maintain?

Do crime cameras violate the privacy and civil liberties of citizens?
Overall, do the pros outweigh the cons, suggesting that crime cameras are good public policy?

Plainly speaking ...Lets face it, if you happen to be the unfortunate victim of a violent street crime (and God forbid none of you ever are), no amount of cameras are going to prevent it.

So whats next...RFID chips anyone...but that's another story.

edit on 10-8-2012 by WAKEYWAKEY because: (no reason given)

posted on Aug, 10 2012 @ 09:06 PM
I realise for many this is simply entertainment but it is serious with ramifications not only for future crime prevention, it is the gateway toward a greater understanding of ourselves and our position in the universe.

No camera necessary:

Thanks for the information but as usual they only share a limited perspective of the tech.

posted on Aug, 11 2012 @ 07:15 AM
reply to post by usernamehere

In Buffalo New York they have had thirty or fourty of them for several years.Just saw on the local news that this year they are going to add fourty more.

Hasn't helped the crime rate one bit. But it has helped their bottom line as people now recieve traffic tickets in the mail, And since the traffic court in buffalo has an ajudicater who justifys his existance by how much money he brings in you're pretty much guilty and can't be proven innocent.

new topics

log in