NYPD Surveillance

[LongBlade]

I love the idea of being able to bust bad guys more rapidly, but my enthusiasm is tapered by concern over 4th amendment concerns and the evolution toward omnipresent big brother surveillance.

The system allows New York City police to monitor thousands of surveillance cameras across the city and, in real time, collect and analyze information from relevant databases.

"The system allow us to connect the dots by instantly tapping into details of crime records, 911 calls, license plate readers and more," NYPD Police Commissioner Ray Kelly said.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2012/08/08/nypd-unveils-new-high-tech-system-to-track-crime-and-terrorism

[Staggerwing]

Ha. Forget to renew your car registration one day and the next, after you drive by a traffic cam, Johnny Law will be wait around the following street corner for you...

[Bison]

It's all good until the knocks in the middle of the night start happening.  Slippery slope the things done in the name of "security and safety".

[bayonetbrant]

holy crap - we had this out years ago in the "old country"

Any system which relies on any means - electronic or otherwise - to screen you out of the suspect pool, rather than screen you in, is completely antithetical to our system of justice, and I will always, always, always oppose it.

To save my blood pressure (which is being taxed enough right now with my current job search), I have a feeling I'm going to have to completely avoid this thread....

[mirth]

I'd be worried about Big Brother except for this -

the system developed jointly by software giant Microsoft and the NYPD

[bayonetbrant]

^^ which means it won't work as advertised for its basic features, but will have buckets of feature bloat "just in case" someone wants to use it for something else.

[Staggerwing]

I'd be worried about Big Brother except for this -

the system developed jointly by software giant Microsoft and the NYPD

Suddenly, flashing on every Police monitor: Device Not Found

[Bison]

The possibilities of an explosion of voyeurism porn set aside this is a very, very dangerous development in terms of individual freedoms and privacy being resticted.  Then again it's freaking NYC.  They would most likely not use it to catch criminals, too much of a PC nightmare, and instead would focus on the poor schlup drinking a big gulp, smoking a cigarette while spinkling salt on his hard boiled egg. 

[LongBlade]

The possibilities of an explosion of voyeurism porn set aside this is a very, very dangerous development in terms of individual freedoms and privacy being resticted.  Then again it's freaking NYC.  They would most likely not use it to catch criminals, too much of a PC nightmare, and instead would focus on the poor schlup drinking a big gulp, smoking a cigarette while spinkling salt on his hard boiled egg.

Maybe, but I would humbly suggest that this has demonstrated that the Patriot Act has outlived its patriotic duty.

The Constitution as written will do nicely. Don't like it? Offer an amendment and let's do it the right way: an open discussion of the issues and a proper vote up or down on an amendment proper. None of this pass-a-bill-that's-almost-constitutional.

[Bison]

I agree that the time has come to allow the Patriot Act to go away and the TSA with it.

[Steelgrave]

^agreed!

[Greybriar]

I agree that the time has come to allow the Patriot Act to go away and the TSA with it.

+1 It looks that way to me, too.

[LongBlade]

Add to that Orwell's prediction of Facecrime.

Neato.

It uses sensors to screen passengers for unusual physiological responses to questioning -- which can indicate a subject is lying.

"What we're looking for is changes in human physiology," said Doug Derrick, a member of the University of Arizona team behind the project.

"We've had great success in reliably detecting these anomalies -- things that people can't really detect."

Source: http://www.cnn.com/2012/08/15/travel/computer-border-official-avatar/index.html?hpt=hp_c2

[Gusington]

^That doesn't bode well for me. My face always looks like this. I can't help it.

[LongBlade]

We may be in the minority on this topic.

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 64% of American Adults believe there should be surveillance cameras at all major public spaces such as train stations, parks and sports stadiums. Only 27% disagree and oppose the widespread use of such cameras.

Apparently stop signs are excluded...

Americans continue to favor the widespread use of surveillance cameras for safety and security purposes except at traffic lights.

Source: http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/lifestyle/general_lifestyle/august_2012/64_favor_use_of_surveillance_cameras_in_public_places

It seems to me that there are two factors not fully in consideration here. First is the wording of the question - how you ask will influence how someone answers (Rasmussen links to his wording in the original article).

Also in question is the issue of an informed discussion. It's one thing to ask us if we need to watch bad guys. It's a completely different question if we have an informed debate on pros and cons of governmental reach and the potential abuses of power.

Once again, kudos need to go to the good guys for not making too many mistakes - I'm unaware of any doors that have been kicked open without good cause.

However, I'm not one to blindly believe in the good intentions of all government. Eventually mistakes, incompetence, and general abuse will creep into the system. Our Constitution was founded to check and minimize the overreach of government power, and I'm extremely reluctant to surrender that structure in the belief that it will never happen here.