http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2009/aug/10/surveillance-internet

What makes you think we don't?

YES!

yup… The government are stalkers.

yup… The government are stalkers.

Look behind you….

Look behind you….

Ulster says NO

yep.
wonder why LA's get to make requests like this, as comment on the article. only reason i can think of that's really justifiable is perhaps investigation of activity of council employees by their HR depts. otherwise – why?

of course we live in a surveillance state, thats one of the reasons crime is dropping every year,and its safe to walk the streets at night
along with the dedication of your local police in fighting crime and disorder

but dont think that the information is easy for the police to obtain, we have to apply for a RIPA each time we want to access information, and have to go through a rigorous process, with good reasons to ask for data, such as the prevention and detection of crime.
we cant just ask for anyones personal details without good reason, and would not want to.

local authorities now work very closely with the police and apply for ripa for many reasons connected with anti social behaviour, harassment etc
we were involved in a case where neighbour was using mobile to order pizzas, sand etc for delivery to next door , council applied for ripa, employed barrister etc, and we carried out arrest.interview etc

easygirl

Like that one

Two mates who live in South Dublin are always playing pranks like that on each other. One went away on Hols and came back to see his house covered in a massive Union Jack – when his mate went away the other lad (who's a builder) Blocked up his open front porch complete with pebble dash! Admittedly it did start getting out of hand a bit….

Yea well it goes both ways easygirl, because it also helps create a prevailing feeling of fear and suspicion. People feel like they wouldn't be safe just because everyone tells them so.

I think it definitely has gone way too far. There are massive covert IT projects building up profiles of us all, including our kids. Before long we will have gone beyond 1984 and it will be more like Minority Report.

We already have millions of cctv cameras, face recognition, gait recognition, mobile phone tracking, the ability for the government to use cameras other than their own – put enough computing power behind that little lot and the government can track any or all of us wherever we go. Some of you are going to say that sounds like conspiracy nonsense, but all of those things are out there right now.

dupe

easygirl – Member
thats one of the reasons crime is dropping every year,and its safe to walk the streets at night along with the dedication of your local police in fighting crime and disorder

You're having a laugh right?

Oh – plus the argument that it reduces crime kinda ignores the fact that unregulated unsolicited surveillance is a crime in itself.

easygirl is right surveillance does have it's advantages but it's best in the hands of the public look at all the violent coppers who have been cought out by cctv and mobile phones . The three who beat up the squadie in manchester, the one who got jailed for kicking and punching a member of the public in wakefield, and of course the thugs in TSG at G20. Unfortuanatly when such material is in the hands of the state or your local council it seems to break down whenever something inconvenient happens.

i'm sorry but what type of crime is "dropping" and where are these so-called streets that are safe to walk on at night.

and yes the UK is turning into a fascist state

noboby is defending violent coppers that beat up innocent members of the public, but surveillance and cctv cameras are instrumental in providing evidence to catch offenders of many different types of crime

If we didn't hold records on all sorts of everything we'd not hacve caught those MPs with their fingers in the till.

For those suggesting that we are on our way to 1984, might I respectfully suggest that you read the book before citing it in the usual neo-con media panic.

It doesn't reduce crime, it displaces crime.

What it is instrumental in is gradually chipping away and eroding of our (law abiding citizens) civil liberties. And the dilution of the definition of crime.

In 'catching' the minority we are curtailing the majority.

Unfortunately when such material is in the hands of the state or your local council it seems to break down whenever something inconvenient happens.

Likewise, a lot of personal/business/non-state CCTV systems seem 'broken' when I go in asking for copies of CCTV relating to 'inconvenient happenings' by the public themselves.

So its open to abuse? Seems to me that its not 'working' both in a general sense and in specific examples!

If it cannot be relied upon then whats it for?

You'd struggle to gain a criminal conviction in court based upon surveillance evidence alone.

no, it does reduce/detect crime, because many offenders are traced because of CCTV and surveillance operations.
i have viewed hours and hours of CCTV tracing offenders, and have never once taken any notice of normal members of the public going about their normal business.
If you were being assaulted in the street would you rather have CCTV cameras in the area , with the chance that it is either recorded or there is an operator watching the incident,
OR would you rather be assaulted and have your civil liberties in tact

i have viewed hours and hours of CCTV tracing offenders

I'd rather you were out on the street doing your job.

So as well as displacing crime (what about violent crime in the home? statistically more likely than a random street assault), it is also displacing resources.

easygirl that argument is a bit duff. I would prefer that I'm not filmed and that the likleyhood of an assult could be reduced instead through harsher sentences and not allowing criminals to hide behind shit new human rights legislation. Your argument is like the local mafia suggesting that "terrible things could happen" if I don't pay them a slice of my earnings. I really object to the current politically-correct Police State telling me what's best for my safety and well being, it's well beyond their remit.

I'd rather you were out on the street doing your job.

I thought her job was catching criminals and enforcing the law?
Sounds like she is doing it just fine.

(what about violent crime in the home? statistically more likely than a random street assault)

How would you solve that? A personal bobby in every house? A camera in every room?

Thats my point how far do we go?

I'd rather see a police presence rather than someone in a room pawing through 'hours and hours' of CCTV footage. Like I said, displacement of resources.

Well for one are happy that Easygirl and colleagues are doing their job, be it walking the streets as a deterrent, viewing CCTV footage to you know investigate crimes or talking to relatives to support them while we put their loved one a body bag.

where are these so-called streets that are safe to walk on at night.

I happily walk the streets here at night and would in many a town but then I don't take the media hype way out of proportion.

Yes – just dont try and get footage when you need it.

MrMM – currently awaiting my insurance paying out to a prat who reversed into me then claimed whiplash…… 👿
Junction covered by CCTV – you betcha. Footage available, apparently not……….. 👿

Like I said, displacement of resources.

Yes, but what isn't clear to me is how you think NOT displacing those resources (i.e. more bobbies on the beat rather than CCTV rooms) would solve any domestic violence cases?

catching criminals and enforcing the law?

When has dropping litter, dog fouling, having things delivered repeatedly to neighbours been against the law? (I'd have loved to have been at that interview – You've been arrested on suspicion of delivering pizas)!! :-)Antisocial yes, illegal no. Thats what I meant in my earlier post about the dilution of the definition of crime. It adds to peoples misunderstanding of the law.

And in some local authorities god forbid if you want to move house to get your child into a good school.

I personally feel we have gone far too far.

Yes, but what isn't clear to me is how you think NOT displacing those resources (i.e. more bobbies on the beat rather than CCTV rooms) would solve any domestic violence cases?

?

My point is that statistically assaults happen away from the glare of CCTV. Therefore the crime is displaced rather than reduced.

i have spent many, but not excessive hours over the space of 20 years as a bobby viewing cctv, a small but important part of my time.
if i am dealing with a assault, theft, street robbery etc, part of my investigation will be to contact the cctv control room, ask them to view the area with specific times(if Available).
I will continue with my investigation while they do an initial search, if they find something of use, they will burn it to dvd, provide a statement and i will collect and then view, so the statement that i sit wasting hours viewing cctv is totally incorrect.
i am a very busy person who spends most of my time investigating crime,and arresting people who have stolen from, assaulted, & robbed people like yourselves.
i am proud to do that, its my job, i do get very frustrated with this forum by the one sided, totally biased views of some of you.
The view that all police officers are violent, stupid thugs that do nothing but waste time and tell lies.
If you truly have that opinion i do genuinly feel sorry for you , as it is plain to me that the vast majority of police officers in this country work hard to prevent the thugs of this country running amok and taking over.
If we went on strike tomorrow, i guarantee you by the end of the week there would be total anarchy in this country, with scroates entering your houses ,& taking what they wanted from you.
So a plain, Thanks for your hard work officer will be all i need to keep me happy

Just playing devils advocate to demonstrate my views on surveillance culture. The police do an excellent job in difficult circumstances. Please don't take my arguments personally, they are not aimed directly at you.

CCTV, demonstrably has not reduced crime. Arguably it has displaced it. I personally feel that its not working and would argue that we are getting to the point of surveillance for surveillance sake. I personally resent being watched and the amount of information that is held on us.

To say we live in a surveillance state is to miss the point. We live in a society characterised by intensifying visuality. Sometimes this occurs through surveillance (watching from above), other times through sousveillance (watching from below) and the ability of citizens to monitor and document the activities of powerholders or their agents. Either way, there's no turning back on this one.

I'm more concerned about all the personal information held on various databases (both statutory & commercial) than I am about appearing in a few CCTV videos.

it is true that there is now a great deal of personal information held on every one, any can be obtained by law enforcement agencies, IF there is a specific reason for requesting it.
What we cant do is trawl through people personal information just for the hell of it

FFS! I fought for the freedoms of this country, I did not sign up for people with 'access' to everything anyone has done. The issue is we have swapped taking crims out for 'collecting information and wasting police time'

I never thought I'd say this but I'd much rather have the Garda Síochána than anyone else policing this country…