Surveillance cameras monitor entire town....in the US

messiah

tonyb wrote: »

I'm aware

Fixed

steveinaz

Some people are content with life just "happening" to them, because being oblivious and carefree is so, well, effortless---and besides, we can't do anything about it anyway, right?

WRONG.

cokewithvanilla

brettw22 wrote: »

Saved you the rest of the typing......

I find it funny that liberals like to say that people who want their privacy and their guns are paranoid and scared. You can say just the same about the crowd that wants cameras and a police state... except you can add "naive" or "foolish" to the list.

Seriously, the only difference in opinion is where the power is and who you trust with your safety. I'd rather have the power with the people, and protect myself than put blind faith in the whimsical government

nooshinjohn

cokewithvanilla wrote: »

Seriously, the only difference in opinion is where the power is and who you trust with your safety. I'd rather have the power with the people, and protect myself than put blind faith in the TYRANICAL government

Fixed.

steveinaz

Because they want to be able to blame someone, when things go wrong, other than themselves. Read that: No personal responsibility.

brettw22

yawn.......agree to disagree, yet I'm not all wound up.......oh well.

tonyb

brettw22 wrote: »

yawn.......agree to disagree, yet I'm not all wound up.......oh well.

Thats cool Brett, but let me push you towards the edge a bit.
If the conversation was about **** rights, would that wind you up ?
If so, why ? Because it becomes personal to you no doubt. Then I have to ask, isn't your country personal to you ? If not,thats a whole nutha subject.
Sometimes as a country, decisions have to be made that sometimes don't benefit you personally. Doesn't mean you shouldn't care though. I just wish more would take an interest in the direction of their own country than being more concerned about what they can get for free. Not saying thats you Brett, but generally speaking.

cokewithvanilla

I am not wound up at all... it's funny, you defended cameras this entire time, but NEVER did mention why they were good to have. You pretty much claimed indifference... you didn't list a benefit. Meaning, if they have no benefit, then cost alone would rule them out... so...

tonyb

cokewithvanilla wrote: »

I am not wound up at all... it's funny, you defended cameras this entire time, but NEVER did mention why they were good to have. You pretty much claimed indifference... you didn't list a benefit. Meaning, if they have no benefit, then cost alone would rule them out... so...

This directed at me bro ? I'm the last person to defend camera's.

cokewithvanilla

tonyb wrote: »

This directed at me bro ? I'm the last person to defend camera's.

nah, it's to brett.

steveinaz

His response doesn't surprise me a bit. I'll let you all decide the signifigance of that observation.

brettw22

Or I’m working Steve and couldn’t rush right back here for you. When did you turn into such a **** or is this just how you've evolved?

coke, I’ve heard your comments time and time again.....and if you go back a few pages, I said if the argument was strictly cost I'm with you on that one.

I can be indifferent because I'm not arguing FOR or AGAINST them......just saying if they're there, they're there......so what. I don’t view it as my rights, or my freedom, or my mortal existence being compromised in any way/shape/form. Talking about the benefits of the negatives isn’t’ really the point, because if I am OK with them, I’m labeled un-American or anti-freedom. Not everyone looks at issues as American vs. ****/Communist/whatever idiotic comparison you choose (which is so beyond reproach that it's amazing so many people tolerate that as the typical BS from the 'other side')

It's funny......wasn't this somewhat of a flipped issue a few years ago when a President decided that 'they' could listen to whatever/whenever/whomever they wanted in the name of 'defending America' and anyone that opposed that back then was backed as un-American as well?

These two issues are ultimately the same thing = the POTENTIAL to be watched/seen/monitored. So if it's in the name of Cause A vs. Cause B that makes one more acceptable than the other? Or are both un-American?

I think that it’s a pretty big leap to honestly believe that if you jaywalk, that someone will see that, and send you a ticket or dispatch an officer to arrest you for something like that. I am in 911 dispatch centers all over the country every single week. There are cameras all over cities all over the country, and out of the literally hundreds of 911 centers I’ve been to dealing with literally tends of thousands of dispatchers, guess how many had someone sitting in front of a monitor checking for ‘random crimes?’ Zero……not a single person. They get as much ‘attention’ as the local convenience store camera system.

cfrizz

Great post Brett. Thanks.

messiah

brettw22 wrote: »

It's funny......wasn't this somewhat of a flipped issue a few years ago when a President decided that 'they' could listen to whatever/whenever/whomever they wanted in the name of 'defending America' and anyone that opposed that back then was backed as un-American as well?

If you're referring to the patriot act, yeah that's pretty much unconstitutional, and probably the only thing we will agree on regarding this subject.

If you feel that cameras being set up to monitor the actions of US citizens is OK you should find somewhere else to live. Maybe a nice communist country like North Korea. Of course you're probably the same people that think it's wrong to kick illegals out of the country. Send them to North Korea too. You can all live happily ever after (they have socialized heath care).

wayne3burk

get yours today !!!!



seriously

--wayne--

F1nut

wayne3burk wrote: »

get yours today !!!!



seriously

--wayne--

Sorry, but modeling and promoting your own business idea isn't welcome here.

messiah

wayne3burk wrote: »

get yours today !!!!



seriously

--wayne--

Thank you so much for that helpful post. :rolleyes:

cokewithvanilla

wayne3burk wrote: »

get yours today !!!!

seriously

--wayne--

It always amazes me that someone who wants cameras to monitor every inch of the city is perfectly normal, while someone who wants none is completely paranoid :rolleyes:

nooshinjohn

wayne3burk wrote: »

get yours today !!!!


seriously

--wayne--

Better than going through life like this... Better to be seen as paranoid and thought a fool than be a fool that was unprepared.

sucks2beme

Wow. Still going? So how is it Big Brother gets caught on camera doing wrong as often
as the bad guys? You'd think if it was their big plot, they would know when to hit the
kill switch. There always seems to be a cop doing something wrong on camera. And
who doesn't like all those police chase videos on tv.
Reality check. Everybody has a camera cell phone on them. Most stores
have them. And they have those entry/exit sensors at the front of the store.
If you don't like it, you're going to have to move to some third world country.
Gee, using that online payment system? I'm sure they are all tracking your
spending, too. Half you guys buy into every new techie toy that comes along,
and NOW you **** about it? You can't just turn the tech off just because
you didn't like a part of it. It's a package deal, welcome to 2010.

tonyb

Um dude, they do hit the kill switch. If you ever been around a police interagation room, there are times when they turn the audio/video off.
Have you ever tried to bring a recording device into a government meeting ? Most likely you'd get tossed out on your ear. Why should they have a right to privacy and the general public has to accept "no expectation of privacy" ?

punk-roc

felt as thought I was obligated to +1 brettw22's noble struggle..

that is all.

steveinaz

brettw22 wrote: »

Or I’m working Steve and couldn’t rush right back here for you. When did you turn into such a **** or is this just how you've evolved?

I don't know how my position on this makes me a ****, but I don't like the assumption of guilt, which is the signal that 24/7 surveillance gives. Just like I refuse to show my receipt at the local Walmart on my way out of the door. Once I've paid for my items THEY ARE MY PROPERTY. If you're going to charge me with a crime, then charge me--but don't question my personal integrity by checking my items on the way out the door. Walmart is free to tell me to never come back, but they haven't yet.

Why does the integrity of EVERYONE have to be questioned, because a few bad apples? Hell there are jails that don't have complete camera coverage. Sometimes it was just the principle of the thing---and additonally in this instance, the total waste of taxpayer dollars.

Finally Brett, I couldn't care less how you feel about me, or my position on certain topics. You go on being you, and I'll go own being me, k? If you are here to not argue either side, then you're just instigating--which from 98% of your post, it seems to be an outlet for you. That's cool, but have the courage of your convictions---don't argue just for the sake of being indifferent. Your "meter" in your signature speaks volumes about your personality.

steveinaz

sucks2beme wrote: »

You can't just turn the tech off just because
you didn't like a part of it. It's a package deal, welcome to 2010.

Owning a digital camera means I should be OK with surveillance by my government? You know---the government that works for ME. That's quite a leap, is it not? Come on man.

messiah

It's ok for them to record us, but illegal for us to record them Read this and tell me things aren't out of control.

http://www.thefreemanonline.org/headline/are-cameras-the-new-guns/

bobman1235

To say this argument is going in circles would be generous.

I'd love to see a pro / con argument about this that comes out positive. It's not cost effective. It's not effective in slowing crime. So what's the point?

I often wonder at what point, as a population, we went from asking WHY we shoudl do things to asking "meh, why not?" Everything our government does for us should have a reason, a purpose, and it should fulfill that purpose. Instead we seem content to just throw money at everything regardless of its efficacy or side effects.

zombie boy 2000

punk-roc wrote: »

felt as thought I was obligated to +1 brettw22's noble struggle..

that is all.

Add me to the list. I think the reference to the Patriot Act was game, set and match. But whatever fits anyone's agenda...

messiah

zombie boy 2000 wrote: »

Add me to the list. I think the reference to the Patriot Act was game, set and match. But whatever fits anyone's agenda...

So I guess you didn't read the article that I posted a link to huh?

By the way, there is nothing noble in willingly giving up your freedom.

steveinaz

bobman1235 wrote: »

I often wonder at what point, as a population, we went from asking WHY we should do things to asking "meh, why not?" Everything our government does for us should have a reason, a purpose, and it should fulfill that purpose. Instead we seem content to just throw money at everything regardless of its efficacy or side effects.

Exactly. Do something meaningful and efficient, WITHOUT invading principle freedoms. With freedom comes responsibilities AND risks. You cannot have a decent level of personal freedoms without accepting this. If you don't have the intestinal fortitude to accept the risks, part with some of your freedoms and move to a safer country. STOP depending on the government to protect you, provide for you, and guide you. Take responsibility for yourself.

Over the past 30 years, this Countrys values have been so watered down, that it is the new "norm" for many of you, who never knew anything different. You are buying into it, because it's all you've ever known of this great Country. We're losing OUR culture as Americans everyday, because immigrants bring their political agendas with them, and want to change OUR society. That didn't happen 30 yrs ago. YOU worked hard to fit in to OUR society, we didn't fit into YOURS---you were in OUR Country. Try and take your agenda to another foreign country, see what happens to you.

zombie boy 2000

Messiah... I didn't say there was. I'm just pointing out that railing against a particular issue shouldn't just come down to party lines. Which it ALWAYS seems to do. Have your convictions. Great. I just hate it when it's so obviously a stab at either political party. I think Brett did a great job of illustrating the hypocrisy of bringing either the Dems or Republicans to the table in this discussion.