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

page: 3
38
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 05:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by olaru12

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)


Don't know about 'Urban systems' of spying on us, but there is a serious issue regarding online and electronic surveillance...business strategies can be spied on, inventions and innovations stolen, politicians can be coerced and interests groups can be usurped.

There's a lot of money just there.




posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 05:11 PM
link   
reply to post by MysterX
 



You think the US is going to be any different?


Haha... No, I think we will catch up with you at some point...

I disagree that these systems will be used for that purpose. But, since that's all I'm really saying at this point, I'll stop



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 05:12 PM
link   
reply to post by MysterX
 



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.


What is porn?


So if they already do these things, what private interaction is left? That's right, a face to face conversation on the street. Well, not anymore.

I think this move is the first step in that direction. They could go in anytime and upgrade, modify or reprogram this equipment and we'd never know.



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


Many of us have. Did you miss it? Our country has been hijacked despite our efforts.
edit on 21-1-2013 by seabag because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 05:14 PM
link   
So much for taking a walk to talk in order to avoid the bugged rooms and phones.

i suppose the next thing is to change laws so anything heard can be evidence in a criminal court.



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 05:15 PM
link   
reply to post by seabag
 


Can you post the link to that article please?

Nevermind, found it!
edit on 21-1-2013 by brandiwine14 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 05:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by brandiwine14
reply to post by seabag
 


Can you post the link to that article please?


The link is below the second quote in the OP.

Is that what you're looking for?

(Edit - ok you found it)
edit on 21-1-2013 by seabag because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 05:23 PM
link   
FACT: "Gunshots" have a WIDE range in frequency. A .38 is different than a .22 etc. There will be a very WIDE range of frequency of sounds that will trigger recording... and not necessarily a gunshot alone obviously... since you have to set it up for such a wide range to include all gunshot frequencies.

Frequency ranges for human beings with voiced speech are : 75–150 Hz for men and 150–300 Hz for women and vary somewhat higher and lower.
Take it from there.




P.S. no screeching in 150-300 Hz women jokes.. or else.



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 05:26 PM
link   
reply to post by seabag
 


Yes thank you!

That is really very scary. Makes me want to take my family deep into the woods or some dirt poor country and become a simple farmer.



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 05:30 PM
link   
Am i the only one scratching my head trying to figure out, If they are listening for gunshots isn't it already to late? I mean if there are gun shots then the damage is done is it not, and no amount of detection short of reading peoples minds would make a difference. So yes I would think there is another motive here not being discussed.



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 05:43 PM
link   
reply to post by jaynkeel
 



If they are listening for gunshots isn't it already to late?


Maybe... maybe not.

Apparently, in urban areas, a good percentage of gunshots are never reported to the police.

The systems are used to dispatch police to precise locations (or help them avoid these locations)

If nothing else, they could make nice pie charts to show where and when gunfire is taken place.



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 06:16 PM
link   
reply to post by Zarniwoop
 


Yeah really worth 250k per unit. Sorry just not buying into it for pie charts. But it's funny because I thought the same exact thing just refrained from posting it. Ah well I suppose we will find out one way or the other.



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 06:18 PM
link   
reply to post by Zarniwoop
 


Well, I'll gladly risk the potential loss of privacy so the government can generate some new gun shot charts. That info would give them more ammo (pun intended) to make a case against the 2nd amendment.

**end sarcasm**



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


I was being sarcastic on the pie chart thing as well.

However, no loss of privacy with this system, unless you shoot people.


EDIT to add: ... or are in the vicinity of a shooting, shouting loudly.
edit on 21-1-2013 by Zarniwoop because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 06:23 PM
link   
reply to post by jaynkeel
 


The whole theory that is listening for gunshots is total BS..........

I am sure you can ask anyone who lives in Chicago how long does it take the police to repond to a call for gunshots and they would tell you....................whoops, my bad, Chicago doesn't have gun violence, because they have the strictest gun laws in the country........my bad.....



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 06:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by beezzer
I'd like to see someone defend this.

*waiting*


There's no reasonable right to privacy on a city street.


Phone tapping and all the other stuff they do already is way more illegal and ominous.

This "system" seems to be aimed at urban uprisings.



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 06:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zarniwoop
reply to post by seabag
 


I was being sarcastic on the pie chart thing as well.

However, no loss of privacy with this system, unless you shoot people.


EDIT to add: ... or are in the vicinity of a shooting, shouting loudly.
edit on 21-1-2013 by Zarniwoop because: (no reason given)


So you believe that gunshots are the only thing that are within the frequencies that gunshots of all kinds and caliburs fall within.. that would activate the recording??

I can hear it now... we can hear the shots and recorded "pewpew" but really cant enforce the law with sounds of "pew pew" " Kapow" " holy crap Im shot ! " alone. We definitely need video.. everywhere. Your safety is important to us and as an Amereican, its your right to live in peace and pursue happiness. Bear with us for another 1.2 Billion bucks while we tweak this to make you all safe and the scary urban areas a utopia..



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 06:34 PM
link   
reply to post by Advantage
 



So you believe that gunshots are the only thing that are within the frequencies that gunshots of all kinds and caliburs fall within.. that would activate the recording??


So you believe a system designed to identify gunshots is capable of recording individual conversations with any accuracy?



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 06:45 PM
link   
reply to post by wormtongue
 



There's no reasonable right to privacy on a city street.


That's not what the ACLU says.


It is not generally legal for law enforcement (or anyone else) to make audio recordings of conversations in which they are not a participant without a warrant.

www.aclu.org...



Phone tapping and all the other stuff they do already is way more illegal and ominous.


...also legal with a warrant, and no more ominous than any other form of eavesdropping IMO.



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 06:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zarniwoop
reply to post by Advantage
 



So you believe that gunshots are the only thing that are within the frequencies that gunshots of all kinds and caliburs fall within.. that would activate the recording??


So you believe a system designed to identify gunshots is capable of recording individual conversations with any accuracy?


Why do you keep repeating this?

I've already shown you a case where it has.



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 06:50 PM
link   
reply to post by seabag
 


No one has the right to privacy on a city street...What you are referring to is about recording conversations.

It's more ominous because a reasonable person would expect more privacy talking on their own phone in their own home rather than say on the corner of Fourth and Vine.






top topics



 
38
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join