DHS Looks To Install Microphones In "Urban Areas" That Can Listen to Conversations

page: 2
38
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 03:33 PM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 



They won't use it to ease-drop the same way that TSA didn't abuse the naked body scanners at airports.


Tell me how they are going to single out specific conversations with any clarity from building tops with any precision.



Sure, they might get lucky and catch a conversation or two.

If they wanted to do audio snooping on citizens, they would most likely use a different technology than one specifically designed to determine gunfire... like microphones on every corner.

I don't doubt that day is coming, but implementation of this system doesn't set off my conspiracy radar.




posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 03:39 PM
link   
Having viewed the video and read the article, does any one else see the flaw in this system?

After watching this video and seeing how it works, consider that the following: An airhorn, a mag light, a cat toy, can in short disable or even make the authorities freak out. A mag light or a cat toy can be shined right at the video camera to disable it. An air horn or loud music can be used to disable the microphone.

So a 2 or three people can be used to disable it, one to shine a light, and the other 2 to run by the sensors back and forth to make the police think there is a riot.



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 03:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zarniwoop
reply to post by beezzer
 


I don't doubt that day is coming, but implementation of this system doesn't set off my conspiracy radar.


Ya, right! Nothing to worry about now.




This is an eyeopening video about how freely "authorities" abuse their power. Most federal agents and LE don't even know what our rights as citizens are, so it's easy for those rights to be violated.....and they often are.



Nothing to see here either.....nothing illegal!!





edit on 21-1-2013 by seabag because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 04:03 PM
link   
reply to post by Zarniwoop
 


In my prime I was once offered a spot on a NEST Team.

*Trust me, if the wanted to isolate a bunny-fart in the woods, they could.


*(Yeah, I know, it's the internet. Trust comes cheap)



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 04:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by Zarniwoop
 


In my prime I was once offered a spot on a NEST Team.

*Trust me, if the wanted to isolate a bunny-fart in the woods, they could.


*(Yeah, I know, it's the internet. Trust comes cheap)


As long as they were non-threatening farts you should be OK....

That is unless bunnies get put on the domestic terrorist list along with veterans, conservatives, gun owners, etc. In which case you'd be in trouble.



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 04:06 PM
link   
reply to post by seabag
 


I'm a privacy advocate, but I'm trying to figure out how a system that detects gunfire in an urban area is such a bad thing ?

It seems like you are expanding the OP to a much wider topic, but this system just really doesn't support your argument.



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 04:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zarniwoop
reply to post by seabag
 


I'm a privacy advocate, but I'm trying to figure out how a system that detects gunfire in an urban area is such a bad thing ?

It seems like you are expanding the OP to a much wider topic, but this system just really doesn't support your argument.


It's never about how a system is used.

It's how it can/will be abused.

Congress never says, "We're making laws to screw you over." They say, :We're making laws to save bunnies and kittens."



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 04:10 PM
link   
reply to post by Zarniwoop
 



I'm a privacy advocate, but I'm trying to figure out how a system that detects gunfire in an urban area is such a bad thing ?


Because it’s capabilities are far greater than simply detecting gun shots and would allow for recording conversations in public, which is a violation of privacy. The ACLU agrees or this issue wouldn’t be on its radar.



It seems like you are expanding the OP to a much wider topic, but this system just really doesn't support your argument.


I’m not trying to expand the topic. What specifically have I said that you take issue with?



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 04:23 PM
link   
reply to post by seabag
 


I hate to say I told you so but the moment the Patriot act was passed to "protect" us, I knew the America was on a slippery slope to fascism "1984" style. And when I used to mention this; I was called unpatriotic, paranoid and labeled a "people like you"

Boiling frogs....



edit on 21-1-2013 by olaru12 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 04:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by olaru12
reply to post by seabag
 


I hate to say I told you so but the moment the Patriot act was passed to "protect" us, I knew the America was on a slippery slope to fascism "1984" style. And when I used to mention this; I was called unpatriotic and paranoid.


I was probably one of those people saying that to you!


You were right....I was wrong...now how do we undo this mess? It seems to be getting worse, not better.



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 04:31 PM
link   
reply to post by seabag
 

Lightpole microphones are the least of your worries...they already intercept and record your email, your mobile and landline conversations, your online forum habits and postings...and they know what your taste in porn is.

I'd have thought people would have kicked up more of a stink about all of that tbh.



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 04:31 PM
link   
reply to post by seabag
 



Because it’s capabilities are far greater than simply detecting gun shots and would allow for recording conversations in public, which is a violation of privacy. The ACLU agrees or this issue wouldn’t be on its radar.


I wouldn't say "far" greater. There is one isolated incident in the history of the system in which a a garbled shouting match on a street corner was captured, which helped police string together some events that might help convict someone of a murder. The ACLU is involved only because of the larger issue of conversations recorded without a warrant being admissible in court, not because they think this type of system is any huge threat to that.


I’m not trying to expand the topic. What specifically have I said that you take issue with?


[EDIT] Sorry, I see now that the videos you posted were in response to a comment I made

My point is that this type of system is not intended for recording conversations, and that DHS likely has no intentions of using them in this capacity. It doesn't make any sense.

edit on 21-1-2013 by Zarniwoop because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 04:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by seabag

Originally posted by olaru12
reply to post by seabag
 


I hate to say I told you so but the moment the Patriot act was passed to "protect" us, I knew the America was on a slippery slope to fascism "1984" style. And when I used to mention this; I was called unpatriotic and paranoid.


I was probably one of those people saying that to you!


You were right....I was wrong...now how do we undo this mess? It seems to be getting worse, not better.


I don't know! I don't even know who the bastards are that want to usurp the Constitution. I know we differ on many things but up holding the Constitution is of prime importance to this wild eyed liberal.



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 04:36 PM
link   
reply to post by Zarniwoop
 




My point is that this type of system is not intended for recording conversations, and that DHS likely has no intentions of using them in this capacity. It doesn't make any sense.



If recording street conversations doesn't make any sense to you, why do you think they listen in and record every other communications you have then?

Surely, if recording live conversations isn't sensible, then online or remote conversations don't make sense either...yet they have the worlds largest domestic eavesdropping system in the world...closely followed by my own governments.
edit on 21-1-2013 by MysterX because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 04:45 PM
link   
reply to post by MysterX
 


You misunderstood...

Implementing gunfire detection systems in urban areas to record conversations makes no sense. They are not meant for that and they don't work well for that purpose.



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 04:58 PM
link   
There must be a financial component to urban surveillance as well. Who profits, who gets the kickbacks and tickets to the superbowl for granting contracts to private companies installing the mic and cameras?
Big business always lurks somewhere in the background concerning monitoring and control of the proletariat, as someone has to manufacture, install, repair and monitor all the high tech gear.

www.stryker.uk.com...
edit on 21-1-2013 by olaru12 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 05:04 PM
link   
They want gun recognition for Patriots.

This whole system being designed is for low-intensity insurgency.

Setting up the technological snares for the future battleground environment.



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 05:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zarniwoop
reply to post by MysterX
 


You misunderstood...

Implementing gunfire detection systems in urban areas to record conversations makes no sense. They are not meant for that and they don't work well for that purpose.


Ahh..the old 'gunfire detection system ploy' eh? (kidding)

But, with everything else they are up to decimating your right to privacy, there's no way, no way in the slightest, they are not going to rig those microphones to record casual conversations...it most certainly will be monitoring everything anyone is saying in range of them.

They are doing exactly the same thing in the UK, but because everyone and his dog are so desensitized to being watched constantly by around 300 CCTV cameras per citizen (or some equally ridiculous number of cameras), and were gullible enough to believe our government that it will only affect criminal plotters and terrorists (yep, the T word) most Brits swallowed it, and probably most have forgotten they are even there now.

You think the US is going to be any different?

Not. A. Chance.

Apologies if you feel i misunderstood you, but i think you are underestimating the gaul of your government agencies.

Time will tell.
edit on 21-1-2013 by MysterX because: added comment



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 05:08 PM
link   
reply to post by olaru12
 

That's what I was wondering. Which politicians and DHS officials have a stake in this company that will supply the equipment. Post 9-11 security is the new growth business.
edit on 1/21/2013 by roadgravel because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 05:08 PM
link   
Obscene. Don't know if they plan to do it in Canada, but I'll remember to sprinkle my conversations with directions for all minions of nazi's to turn themselves into the people and make U-Turns and that they need to side with the people, and freedom and equality. If they want to spy they're going to hear a continual earful!!!!




new topics
top topics
 
38
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join