Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Chicago, Houston Consider Cameras in Private Businesses, Homes
HumanEventsOnline.com ^ | Feb 28, 2006 | James Plummer

Posted on 02/28/2006 8:02:23 AM PST by boryeulb

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-103 next last
To: michigander
How about live web cameras in the offices of elected public officials?

That's a proposal I could get behind :)

All kidding aside, until they propose such a scenario they best rethink these other assinine ideas.

21 posted on 02/28/2006 8:30:18 AM PST by Gabz (Smoke gnatzies: small minds buzzing in you business........SWAT'EM)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: boryeulb

Since most of the things that most people don't want caught on camera are not illegal, but rather, shameful, when faced with the march of surveillance, for people to remain free they need to adopt a bigger dose of "SO WHAT?" then they are accustomed to.

Yes, I bought beer. SO WHAT?
Yes, I smoked a cigar in the alley. SO WHAT?
Yes, I bought two porno CD's. SO WHAT?
Yes, I had a drink with the hottie in accounting. SO WHAT?

The whole ability to lynch people, especially politically, for little moral pecadilloes only works if most of private life of most people is not recorded.

Consider the PeeWee Herman case. Now, granted, diddling in the back of the theater was not the move of a brainiac, but the whole faux-shock: My GOD, the man DIDDLES watching PORN (GASP!!!) which ended his career...that only works because everyone else in the country doesn't have a camera in his/her shower.

You start really surveilling people - and the Hollywood types have lived under that sort of scrutiny longer - and the only possible responses are to either wilt in a puddle of self-loathing apology for being HUMAN (what your enemies HOPE you will do, so as to be able to manipulate you through the fear of "exposure" of the fact that you are a human (i.e., sinful), or you get a big dose of SO WHAT brazen bravado, precisely like Hollywood does.

Chances are, people are not going to turn into Puritans if you surveil them very long. Rather, they will lower the overall moral standards of society so that they can't be manipulated anymore by the bastards who control the cameras.

There is another option. I will call it the French option. There, there is a strict legal right of privacy, and if you start intruding on it, publishing things, etc., you get prosecuted for a crime.

Either people can protect their privacy and the current structure of morality by using the law to punish anybody who pushes a camera where it doesn't belong and attempts to use any information there, or people will have no privacy, everything will be on camera, and everyone will brazen it out.
The choice is really France, where people commit their sins and it is a criminal offense to tell anybody else about it even if you find out, or Hollywood, where everybody commits his sins on camera and doesn't give a damn.

What isn't going to happen in this life is a world where, because people are surveiled, they stop sinning. Exposed to the bright light of relentless scrutiny, people will not forego the pleasures of life in order to uphold tradition morality. Rather, they'll beat morality to death with a club so it can't both them anymore. Traditional morality always has reposed on plausible deniability and hypocrisy. If you strip away all of the ability to hide, people won't become more moral they'll become more brazen.
Hollywood is brazen because American laws don't let people hide from those who want to pry.
Paris is more discreet, because French law punishes people who pry as felons, and truth is no defense to an assault on privacy.

Because I am a fan of public morality, and think that the veneer of good manners and correct behavior is well worth the price of hypocrisy that supports it, I think that the French approach of criminalizing efforts to pry into private life is preferable to the argument "If you are not doing anything wrong, you have nothing to worry about."

Everyone is doing something wrong.
Anybody care to have a camera installed in EVERY room of their house, on ALL the time?
Didn't think so.


22 posted on 02/28/2006 8:31:45 AM PST by Vicomte13 (Et alors?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: boryeulb

bump


23 posted on 02/28/2006 8:33:06 AM PST by lowbridge (I want to die peacefully in my sleep like my grandfather. Not screaming, like his passengers.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: davisfh
I fail to see how at least part of this is unconstitutional and probably all of it. Problem is, it may never be tested.

If there is a right to privacy, and abortion under the XIV ammendment, then there is certainly a right not to have Chief 'pervert' Hurtt spying on Houstonites.

24 posted on 02/28/2006 8:33:54 AM PST by ozoneliar ("The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots & tyrants" -T.J.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: boryeulb
>>Hurtt invoked the name of Orwell's dictator in defending his radical proposition: "I know a lot of people are concerned about Big Brother, but my response to that is if you are not doing anything wrong, why should you worry about it?"<<

If I only had a nickle for every time I have seen some lamebrain on FR write that.

Of course, the police chief will be first to set a good example by installing a camera in his own home.

/sarc

25 posted on 02/28/2006 8:38:03 AM PST by SerpentDove (The internet is big. "Oprah" big.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: michigander
How about live web cameras in the offices of elected public officials?

And on the politicians person as well. A live Internet feed every second of every day. No group needs watching more than politicians.

We'll be able to spot corruption and theft immediately. As the Huston cop says "if (the politicians) are not doing anything wrong, why should (they) worry about it?"

26 posted on 02/28/2006 8:38:03 AM PST by RJL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: boryeulb
Hurtt invoked the name of Orwell's dictator in defending his radical proposition: "I know a lot of people are concerned about Big Brother, but my response to that is if you are not doing anything wrong, why should you worry about it?"

How many times have I heard people make this argument? When I'm taking a cr*p, I'm not doing anything wrong, but I don't want to be camcorded. Got it?"

27 posted on 02/28/2006 8:39:04 AM PST by Richard Kimball (I like to make everyone's day a little more surreal)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Gabz

Yep! The old slippery slope has turned into a steep hill and covered with ice.


28 posted on 02/28/2006 8:53:23 AM PST by Just A Nobody (NEVER AGAIN - Support our troops. I *LOVE* my attitude problem! Beware the Enemedia.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Eaker; humblegunner
Hurtt invoked the name of Orwell's dictator in defending his radical proposition: "I know a lot of people are concerned about Big Brother, but my response to that is if you are not doing anything wrong, why should you worry about it?"

OMG

Completely unbelievable.

29 posted on 02/28/2006 8:59:03 AM PST by RikaStrom (The number one rule of the Kama Sutra is that you both be on the same page.../Exeter 051705)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RikaStrom

This might just bite brer Hurtt in the arse rather quickly:

http://www.hurttprize.org/


30 posted on 02/28/2006 9:01:35 AM PST by humblegunner (If you're gonna die, die with your boots on.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Richard Kimball
When I'm taking a cr*p, I'm not doing anything wrong, but I don't want to be camcorded.

I think we can all agree on that :-)

31 posted on 02/28/2006 9:07:38 AM PST by lowbridge (I want to die peacefully in my sleep like my grandfather. Not screaming, like his passengers.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: humblegunner

HA! People from all over the country contributing.


32 posted on 02/28/2006 9:14:30 AM PST by monkeywrench (Deut. 27:17 Cursed be he that removeth his neighbor's landmark)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: boryeulb

Dick Daley peeping up little girls dresses coming to a bathroom near your!


33 posted on 02/28/2006 9:17:48 AM PST by Republicus2001
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: boryeulb
Democrat Mayor Bill White, who appointed Hurtt, has been equivocating about Hurtt's outrageous idea as the public reaction is tested. If enough Houstonians stand up for their rights to private property, White presumably won't push through the extreme surveillance program. But if Texans don’t stand for the idea that a man's home is his castle, the plan will almost assuredly move ahead.


34 posted on 02/28/2006 9:24:13 AM PST by steve-b (A desire not to butt into other people's business is eighty percent of all human wisdom)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Justanobody
The old slippery slope has turned into a steep hill and covered with ice.

And there appears to be no brakes on the skates.

35 posted on 02/28/2006 9:24:21 AM PST by Gabz (Smoke gnatzies: small minds buzzing in you business........SWAT'EM)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: boryeulb

Yep, the slippery slope is getting steeper.

But I remain convinced that Americans are so reflexively superstitious about "The Rule Of Law" that they will go right off the end of the slippery slope and accept tyranny, so long as the tyranny is legally and correctly instituted, rather than develop an ethic of selective observance of the law, and intentional breaking of bad law.


36 posted on 02/28/2006 9:34:37 AM PST by Vicomte13 (Et alors?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mysterio
We as Americans can no longer put up with powerful anti-freedom authoritarians. They are the single biggest threat this country faces, a threat even more chilling and wide reaching than terrorism. They are absolutely destroying this country in a way that the terrorists only dream of.

This can never be repeated enough!!

37 posted on 02/28/2006 9:56:01 AM PST by LambSlave (The truth will set you free)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: LambSlave

Sure. Powerful anti-freedom authoritarians have the law on their side. The only way to defeat them is to lessen the general, reflexive respect for "The Law", when the law is bad. If people are superstitiously obedient to the concept of "The Rule of Law", the authoritarians will always rule, because that is what they have at their command.

The only way to beat them is to relax the rigorous belief in "Buddy, it's the LAW". One has to develop the capacity to say "Yeah, but the law is BAD, and we're not going to abide (or obey) obnoxious and bad laws."

I don't think Americans have it in them.
They are too superstitious about law.
America is, after all, a plurality German country.


38 posted on 02/28/2006 10:01:25 AM PST by Vicomte13 (Et alors?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Gabz
And there appears to be no brakes on the skates.

So, what to do? Laugh? Cry? Fight?

39 posted on 02/28/2006 10:04:23 AM PST by Just A Nobody (NEVER AGAIN - Support our troops. I *LOVE* my attitude problem! Beware the Enemedia.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Justanobody
So, what to do? Laugh? Cry? Fight?

I say fight - and get some brakes on the skates finally.

40 posted on 02/28/2006 10:10:04 AM PST by Gabz (Smoke gnatzies: small minds buzzing in you business........SWAT'EM)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-103 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson