To: Morgana
Thanks for that. What strikes me is that surveillance cameras should be placed at different
levels. A low angle surveillance camera won't allow a baseball cap to obscure a face.
2 posted on
09/11/2025 9:27:32 PM PDT by
Governor Dinwiddie
( O give thanks unto the Lord, for He is gracious, and his mercy endures forever. — Psalm 106)
To: Governor Dinwiddie
He was wearing a cap and in some dark glasses. Almost as if he knew where the camera were. I figure this guy was a local and knew this campus very well.
4 posted on
09/11/2025 9:33:40 PM PDT by
Morgana
( “Abortion is the ultimate exploitation of women.” — Alice Paul 🇺🇸 )
To: Governor Dinwiddie
That’s a very good observation, although “low” surveillance cameras are easier to obstruct or damage or. Say, with a small spray paint can. Tiny hidden “low” cameras (easily camouflaged) might be the answer, and I’m taking some such steps around my place already...
26 posted on
09/11/2025 11:46:02 PM PDT by
Paul R.
(Old Viking saying: "Never be more than 3 steps away from your weapon ... or a Uriah Heep song!" ;-))
To: Governor Dinwiddie
A low angle surveillance camera won't allow a baseball cap to obscure a face. About a million years ago, they determined that cameras placed closer to the ground get smashed to tiny little bits by pedestrians.
37 posted on
09/12/2025 6:24:56 AM PDT by
GingisK
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson