Cameras, Guns, Bombs, and Freedom

I was just reading over at San Francisco and Los Angeles about the precautions that were taken in London that might have tipped off police, and how ineffective they were in attack prevention. Of course, this is right on top of the GAO report on security. We’re no strangers to public surveillance here in DC, with cameras all over the city, throughout the Metro system, not to mention the cameras in elevators, offices and other places, but does it infringe upon your rights directly?

That I’m not so sure of. I’m not thrilled about the idea of prosecution-via-camera (think speed and red light cameras), but is the surveillance making public spaces more public than they already are? That I’m not convinced of either. What do you think?

2 Comments so far

  1. xian (unregistered) on July 26th, 2005 @ 7:24 am

    It seems like everytime there’s a bombing, after the attack we hear about how the police could have prevented it. It’s kind of a passive-aggressive way of blaming some entity without officially placing blame anywhere. Of course attacks could have been prevented. They’re probably successfully prevented all the time. This time they just weren’t.

    I have no problems with public surveillance cameras. The police can’t be everywhere, and I have nothing to hide. Besides if I want privacy, I stay home.

  2. Jeff (unregistered) on August 16th, 2005 @ 9:24 am

    Yesterday, I noticed some interesting “orbs” on the ceiling of the Metro car I was riding. Security cameras? I took a photo and blogged it.

Terms of use | Privacy Policy | Content: Creative Commons | Site and Design © 2009 | Metroblogging ® and Metblogs ® are registered trademarks of Bode Media, Inc.