U.S. Develops Urban Surveillance System

Associated Press ^ | Jul 01, 2003 | MICHAEL J. SNIFFEN

[ewing]

Im surprised the Disney town of Celebration, Florida doesnt have one yet..

[agitator]

Corporate surveillance could be eliminated if people wanted it to be badly enough. Too bad they don't.

[blackdog]

I bought a Trac Fone for just such purposes and it's registered to Tom Daschle. No accounts, no records, only an amorphous Tom Daschle with a cell phone to light up the satellite tracker.

[Dark Wing]

"Americans love technological solutions."

[Carry_Okie]

Here is my favorite Orwell quote written in 1933 from Homage to Catalonia:

In reality, it was the Communists above all others who prevented revolution in Spain. Later, when the Right Wing forces were in full control, the Communists showed themselves willing to go a great deal further than the Liberals in hunting down revolutionary leaders.

[Snip]

Between the Communists and those who claim to stand to the Left of them there is a real difference. The Communists hold that Fascism can be beaten by alliance with sections of the capitalist class (the Popular Front); their opponents hold that this maneuver simply gives Fascism new breeding-grounds. The question has got to be settled; to make the wrong decision may be to land ourselves in for centuries of semi-slavery.

[The Hon. Galahad Threepwood]

The technology is going to exist. Griping, complaining, and invoking Orwell is useless. If you're concerned, you should contact your Congressman and Senators about legislating effective restrictions on the use of this technology with stiff punishment for violating those restrictions.

[cryptical]

How about making politicians records publicly available? Then we can see when our Representatives stop by the local brothel, or shop for crack, or make deposits at several banks on the same day...

Sounds like a good idea to me.

[Feiny]

They are already here. Cameras were installed in VA beach almost a decade ago....to watch for crimes against beach goers & tourists.

[microgood]

Time to develop a cloaking device we can put in our cars to shield us from this evil technology.

[Libertarianize the GOP]

http://www.freerepublic.com/perl/bump-list

[kkindt]

If I leave my house - I leave my privacy behind. There is nothing in the constitution that protects my privacy outside my own private dwelling.

If I am in a car - that car has had to be registered and it is NOT a completely private place per the law and the constitution. The windows have to be clear and people have to be able to see INTO the vehicle - that is the law.

If I walk down a public street that is not my private area.

So I fail to see how cameras in public areas recording what I do is an invasion of my privacy.

I can see why people who speed on our highways, run red lights, talk on their cell phones and crash into others - how these people do not want to be recorded in public. Sorry - that's the way it ought to be. If you interact with the public the public has a right to record what you are doing in public.

If I am standing in a public place and someone takes a picture of this public place and I happen to be there - guess what - I don't have a right to their film because my image is on it. I exposed myself to public recording when I go into public.

I am competely in favor of all public recording. I love the live web cameras you can move this way and that and look aobut in the public places and streets because it means more and more of us can be watching for criminals who have to use public places to do their public crimes. The more eyes we have watching us the better.

God's eyes are watching us all the time so it should be something we are use to - it happens that those who don't believe in God and that He doesn't see them that often get upset by public cameras.

SO GET USE TO being recorded. IT happens every second of your life by God - and the government has a right to record public events to protect us against red light runners, terrorists, speeders, etc.

[SoulStorms]

"Once DARPA demonstrates that it can be done...even people looking for deadbeat dads."

Here's how to get this accepted by the public:

Wait until it demostrates its abilities. The media runs glowing stories about this new technology and its potential to make us safe.

Wait until some parolee commits a horrible, bloody, violent crime--preferably against a child. Send out the "goverment as father figure" advocates across the media to ask: "Why didn't we use the technology we already have to save this child's life?" (Bonus points if the child is non-white, because then the answer is already implied.)

Pepper the various media with stories ridiculing the "conspiracy theorists" and right-wingnuts who would rather see Americans die than to make "reasonable use" of this technology to protect children from predators. Be sure to stress the point that there have been tens of thousands of cameras in use worldwide for years, and the sky hasn't fallen yet.

Push-poll Americans as often as possible, reporting on each poll that indicates that a majority want these "reasonable steps" taken to protect our children from predators.

As soon as it looks like most Americans have been softened up: Run a story on "60 Minutes" and print one in the N.Y. times detailing a series of horrible crimes which could have been prevented by making "reasonable use" of this technology, followed by a quote from a liberal senator who just happens to be sponsoring a bill making such reasonable and compassionate use possible.

Wait till the next bloody crime against a woman or child is commited by a felon, then:

Publicly push the bill through congress on the wave of emotion, and embarrass the President into signing it. (If he even hesitates). Assure the public that it only is intended to keep felons from killing children.

Watch everyone go back to sleep...

[Enemy Of The State]

Test it in combat and then use it at home.

I see it coming.

Most technology is developed for the military long before it reaches the private sector.

Look at the internet....

[steveo]

[Blood of Tyrants]

A country with a Constitution based on freedom ABHORS anything like this. Our founding fathers could have never envisioned that the federal government might someday have the means to monitor vertually every public place. But they KNEW of police states where people were encouraged to rat each other out and did a damned fine job of limiting the government to prevent this.

BTW, the Constitution is supposed to limit the scope of government. If it isn't in the Constitution, the federal government can't do it.

[RightWhale]

"Who's going to validate and corroborate all those alerts?"

Gil, I assume you are reading FR. Here it is, Gil: automation. Let the machine do the work. You don't have to run out and check each alarm; software can be configured to set the threshold. On orange alert, you roll some of the time; on lemon alert you stay in your ready station and watch the log; on cherry alert, you sit in your mobile unit using the remote station to direct you to the points of interest, always moving; on guacamole alert you can spend quality time with your family or mistress and keep the cell phone handy just in case. Let the machine do its job.

[appalachian_dweller]

>> The windows have to be clear and people have to be able to see INTO the vehicle - that is the law. <<

Someone needs to tell that to the Loudon County Sheriff's Deputy I passed on the way to work this morning. It was a marked cruiser, but he windows were so darkly tinted you could not see inside the car. Tinfoil aside, it was unsettling.

[DannyTN]

Now there's an idea. Actually a bipartison committee to review banking records of politicians and their close family isn't a bad idea.

We would all like to know just how many pardons Roger sold.