Lawmakers want more surveillance on the ground and in the sky

The successful — and massive — law enforcement effort to obtain public video to help identify the suspects in the Boston Marathon bombing shows the need for more government video surveillance cameras, says one congressman. Perhaps drones, too, says a senator.
There are already government closed-circuit TV systems in cities like Boston, New York, Chicago, Los Angeles, Philadelphia, Baltimore and Washington, D.C. Rep. Peter King, R-N.Y., a member of both the House Homeland Security and Intelligence committees, said the nation needs even more video cameras in public places.

usnews.nbcnews.com...

Didn't see this coming. I mean, it's not like we've had a television show about heavy handed surveillance that has been basically introducing the subject matter in a specific light here in the US. Nahhh...that's just crazy talk. What's decidedly not crazy talk is the fact that they want more cameras installed and are using yet another major, gut wrenching event in which to basically strip away even more of our privacy in the guise of "national security". The list of cities that already have CCTV systems is actually not long enough. I have seen the CCTV cameras atop high buildings in my city that have been there for a couple years now and it's not one of those cities listed. And they want more and they are willing to tromp around their "success" in catching what they believe to be the Boston Bombers using Boston's CCTV (which was probably privately owned by Lord and Taylor's).

We are in what is called the "Information Age" and ergo, information is big money. That's what so many of these cameras really represent and that's information about what average Americans who aren't doing any harm are doing on a daily basis. Why is it that every walk down the street that we make should be monitored because of the actions of a couple barbaric kids? (I say kids because that's what they are to me--don't sue me!) The price of security has always been at the loss of liberty. This is not a situation where we have a volatile public in which the necessity of cameras on every street corner because mandatory. Most of us are pretty good people at the end of the day with some level of respect for each other as respectful strangers.

Even more ridiculous is the idea that additional surveillance cameras would somehow further assist intelligence and police agencies in identifying criminals or terrorists. Tamerlan Tsaernaev had already been investigated by the FBI years prior to the Boston Bombing. The CCTV did not prevent Tamerlan's actions nor did it apparently assist the FBI in identifying him as the perpetrator. If it had, they would've picked him up on the day that the images were located because he should have been on file for comparison as being someone located in Boston under prior investigation for radical beliefs. www.washingtonpost.com... 6c-a9d9-11e2-9e1c-bb0fb0c2edd9_story.html

I watched this kind of rationale develop post 9/11 and the passage of the Patriot Act absolutely appalled me. Here we are in a similar state again with lawmakers wanting to quickly respond with more legislation that would traipse on more of our liberty. Once upon a time, the US was a place where the FBI would have to be parked in a sedan and following you from place to place. If we allow for them to increase the surveillance, they could be doing that to anyone without any hope of that person ever being aware of it and with what oversight to prevent abuse?

if all them political yahoos want more surveillance in the sky and on the ground, why don't they get off of their lazy asses and do it themselves!

reply to post by WhiteAlice


And the road to drones in the air in every American town in the Nation has been paved, why to waste an opportunity like Boston, very soon we all be carrying a state mandated camera up in our arses.

all in the name of security and for our safety.

This is just the beginning wait to see what else the is heading our way thanks to the corruption we call politicians in Washington, none of this is to benefit us the tax payers and citizens but it will benefit the private interest running the nation, a free qne open society is a danger to the status quo.

I want more cameras on everyone. Especially me. That way, I hope they can catch me getting killed by some psycho nut job. And I know I will keep my P's and Q's in order all the more because of it...

We started going wrong in this country because we took a vast majority of our police officers OFF of walking a beat in the streets and put them in patrol cars, behind dark glasses...we no longer have the opportunity to get to know our police officers on a personal level...

"national security" is an illusion created by Ohummer and his band of psychofreaks.

Originally posted by totallackey
I want more cameras on everyone. Especially me. That way, I hope they can catch me getting killed by some psycho nut job. And I know I will keep my P's and Q's in order all the more because of it...

What the hell are you on about?

reply to post by WhiteAlice


The only thing I'm surprised by is how long it took for this to come out! I can't believe they waited a whole day...

Anyway... Anybody who thinks that increasing surveillance (human or camera) will somehow improve their personal safety is a fool.

(Insert obligatory quote regarding trading liberty for security here).

reply to post by DarknStormy


The topic...

What are you on about?

reply to post by xenthuin


I am waiting for the Homegrown terrorist bill to be dusted off and back in the table in congress from the Bush era, this bills has been already drafted is just that they are waiting for the right timing.

reply to post by marg6043


it will be interesting to see just what happens in the next few months...other than the usual foaming at the mouth we usually get from our so-called "fearless leader"

reply to post by xenthuin


I do not think anyone in their right mind would believe more surveillance would increase the level of personal safety...

I do believe more surveillance would DRASTICALLY improve the chances of authorities capturing/killing the bad guys though...so I am all for it...

reply to post by totallackey


Indeed... Too bad so many are seemingly not in their right minds.

But who are you (or anyone) to offer up *my* rights for *your* desire to help law enforcement? If you want to open your person or property to a warrantless search, thats fine... but don't offer mine! If there are cameras everywhere, there is no way to opt out (aside from becoming a hermit).

reply to post by xenthuin


I take it by your reply, you think people believe this.

Well, I do not think people are as stupid as that...AFAIK, the reason offered up for increased video/surveillance/drone activity is to increase security...AFAIK, security also includes the part where the good guy catches the bad guy after the act...does it not?

When you are in "public," there is no right to privacy...you do understand this point, correct? There is no warrantless search being performed on your person or property. Stop being facetious...

ETA: No one is offering up your rights to sacrifice...If you choose to go out in public, then that is the environment you will be in...but it will be your choice.
I do add the right to your belongings should still be protected by the Fourth Amendment (right to be secure in your person and property, against UNREASONABLE search and seizure)...

Now, we can disagree on defining the term UNREASONABLE, but I do not think it is unreasonable search and seizure to take photographs or video surveillance of roadways, public gathering places, theaters, sporting venues, and the like...and like I said, you are not being searched and neither is your property...

reply to post by totallackey


Regarding the first comment... I sadly KNOW people who believe this very thing. Maybe I exaggerated their prevalence, but they do exist. Or maybe I am just associated with more foolish people than yourself.

I am not trying to be facetious... I am just stating my opinion. Having cameras owned and operated by the government that use facial recognition or other such technologies to identify me in order to run a background check or something similar constitutes a search without probable cause, in my opinion.

If I am not actively committing a crime or behaving in such a way that would give a LEO on the corner enough probable cause to identify me by searching my wallet for ID, then I contend that the eye in the sky must follow the same rules. Once the surveillance is behind closed doors, how do we know they are playing by the rules?

reply to post by WhiteAlice


Might be BARELY TOLERABLE in special court ordered cases

IF

AND ONLY IF AND ONLY AFTER 12 MONTHS OF

24/7 CAMERAS AND GPS TAGS ON EVERY CONGRESS CRITTER AND LAWMAKER IN THE LAND . . . particularly infrared on whatever they do in the dark.

.
With all such camera, signal feeds posted 24/7 on the web. A computer could block out below the belt . . . activities with whomever.

Sheesh what arrogant traitors. Tyranny loves to march around with its nose in the air . . . cue Obama's nose-in-the air pic.
.

reply to post by xenthuin


Interestingly the cameras and surveillance in this nation is run by private contractors no the government itself. So all that new surveillance will be done by the same private interest that will be making a killing with a drone program, database programs and new cameras.

reply to post by marg6043


Why don't they just get out their list of illegals who overstayed their visa's and pay each and everyone a visit?

Why don't they secure our borders?

Oh, that might fix a problem.

As far as cameras in public - doesn't every idiot out there have a cell phone and spend all their time making videos of everything? I don't get that - I refuse to have a cell phone. I hate answering my land-line.

Just wait - what they really need is your picture, like in the national ID's - so they can readily identify you on all the CCTV's -and then everyone's DNA on computer list - they were taking and keeping every baby born in the state of MN - until someone sued.

That's coming too.

Originally posted by Happy1
reply to post by marg6043

 

Why don't they just get out their list of illegals who overstayed their visa's and pay each and everyone a visit?

Why don't they secure our borders?

Oh, that might fix a problem.

As far as cameras in public - doesn't every idiot out there have a cell phone and spend all their time making videos of everything? I don't get that - I refuse to have a cell phone. I hate answering my land-line.

Just wait - what they really need is your picture, like in the national ID's - so they can readily identify you on all the CCTV's -and then everyone's DNA on computer list - they were taking and keeping every baby born in the state of MN - until someone sued.

That's coming too.

The illegals are needed for a list of reasons--particularly some destructive to the culture ones.

And, actually, without them, the Judeo-Western culture in the USA would not survive our low replacement birthrate.

Certainly the picture ID and DNA stuff is Draconian. And it will get worse and worse. They are determined to make individuals serfs, slaves, mere cogs in their great tyrannical machine. We were warned in Revelation, Daniel etc. 2000 years ago about this era.