If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Telegraph)   Police in London solve 1 crime for every 1000 CCTV cameras. Or about 2 for every 1984   (telegraph.co.uk) divider line 125
    More: Unlikely, CCTV, CCTV cameras, surveillance cameras, MPs, in London, local authorities, Scotland Yard, vandalism  
•       •       •

3525 clicks; posted to Main » on 25 Aug 2009 at 7:11 AM (4 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



125 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2009-08-25 12:22:28 PM
FarkinNortherner: Giblet: The public aren't the ones who support the surveillance

Sadly you are mistaken.



It's entirely possible that I get biased information. All of my Brit pals have green cards. They claim that "everyone" hates the cameras but feel helpless against an oppressive government. And they drink a lot.

In that case, maybe they bought a year or two by moving here.

I'm all for doing away with elections and moving to a conscripted government model. Four years. One term. Random selection. Mandatory service.

Couple that with an overturn of Santa Clara County v Southern Pacific Railroad, and it'd be full on win.
 
B A [TotalFark]
2009-08-25 12:28:52 PM
Nutsac_Jim: B A: MooseBayou:

I look forward to asking them to prove which of my family, with nine licensed drivers, was driving when the offense occured. No facial picture you say? Where's the proof of guilt?

I look forward to seeing you in court using that argument.

When you receive a parking ticket, do they need to prove who parked it illegally? No. If you dont pay long enough, they can just prohibit you from registering or just tow or boot your car.


A speeding ticket issued by a speed camera is charged against the TDL of the registered owner. THAT's a little different from a parking ticket.
 
2009-08-25 12:37:55 PM
Not wishing to inject any unnecessary common sense into the thread, but the vast, vast majority of CCTV cameras in the UK are privately owned, because having them reduces business insurance premiums *a lot*. My offices have at least seven that I'm aware of, and, as far as I'm aware, they have never been used in crime detection or been feeding secrits to the gub'mint or anything.
 
2009-08-25 12:46:36 PM
Giblet: It's entirely possible that I get biased information. All of my Brit pals have green cards. They claim that "everyone" hates the cameras but feel helpless against an oppressive government. And they drink a lot.

Do they also complain about the stuff in the US that they don't like?

Whining British Expats whine about the country they left and they usually end up whining about the country they go to. (In my experience).
 
2009-08-25 12:56:59 PM
images3.wikia.nocookie.net
 
2009-08-25 12:58:38 PM
Giblet:
I'm all for doing away with elections and moving to a conscripted government model. Four years. One term. Random selection. Mandatory service.


This idea is new to me and intriguing.
I would like to subscribe to your magazine.
 
2009-08-25 01:04:22 PM
+1
Well done!
 
2009-08-25 01:41:54 PM
gaslight [red road poster]

Good god that movie is incredible. I couldn't tear my eyes away from the first opening scenes to the last.
 
2009-08-25 01:50:21 PM
Bad_Seed: Giblet: It's entirely possible that I get biased information. All of my Brit pals have green cards. They claim that "everyone" hates the cameras but feel helpless against an oppressive government. And they drink a lot.

Do they also complain about the stuff in the US that they don't like?

Whining British Expats whine about the country they left and they usually end up whining about the country they go to. (In my experience).



I thought that was the sovereign domain of German expats.
 
2009-08-25 01:58:19 PM
fernandez: Glasgowsfinest: What made me laugh is that the London borough of Wandsworth has more CCTV Cameras than the entire city of Glasgow.

I think they went a bit overboard on it.


You could say that

/Forget which station I took this picture at



Great Portland Street Tube Station (new window)
 
2009-08-25 02:06:25 PM
Bad_Seed: Giblet: It's entirely possible that I get biased information. All of my Brit pals have green cards. They claim that "everyone" hates the cameras but feel helpless against an oppressive government. And they drink a lot.

Do they also complain about the stuff in the US that they don't like?

Whining British Expats whine about the country they left and they usually end up whining about the country they go to. (In my experience).


Being currently British I would agree with the over whiny-ness.

I don't like the CCTV in the wrong hands but then we understand them being added to up security for shops or bad areas. As a rule I see more CCTV used to find people or track what happened in an event that ended up with a death or injury than used for giving fines.

There are some councils - london especially - who are beggining to to use them to issue rediculous fines and they need to be shot.

For the record everyone under 80 hates speed cameras as they are revenue collection only and don't really help with stopping speeders who are dangerous (a small percentage of them).
 
2009-08-25 02:07:50 PM
Moonbarker Osbourne the Rainbow Wolf not gay: Why do people get so bent out of shape about CCTV cameras and complain about Big Brother, 1984, etc. How is it any different than posting a uniformed cop on every corner?

1. A uniformed cop can actually ACT to stop a crime in progress, rather than just recording it for use later as evidence.
2. A uniformed cop can't/isn't recording everything he sees. Sure, he might remember, but it's not recorded and distributable.
 
2009-08-25 02:17:42 PM
Evilmogwai: I don't like the CCTV in the wrong hands but then we understand them being added to up security for shops or bad areas. As a rule I see more CCTV used to find people or track what happened in an event that ended up with a death or injury than used for giving fines.


I think I see what you're saying: Surrendering a degree of privacy is worth added security, even if that added security is, for the major part, in post-facto form. Is that a fair summary?
 
2009-08-25 02:41:49 PM
"A senior Scotland Yard officer, Detective Chief Inspector Mick Neville, warned police must do more to head off a crisis in public confidence over the use of surveillance cameras."

Lie to them. That's what the government does in every other situation.
 
2009-08-25 02:43:01 PM
Good job, subby!
 
80
2009-08-25 03:00:25 PM
headline WIN
 
2009-08-25 03:27:16 PM
Giblet: Evilmogwai: I don't like the CCTV in the wrong hands but then we understand them being added to up security for shops or bad areas. As a rule I see more CCTV used to find people or track what happened in an event that ended up with a death or injury than used for giving fines.


I think I see what you're saying: Surrendering a degree of privacy is worth added security, even if that added security is, for the major part, in post-facto form. Is that a fair summary?


yes. Its sad that you can't often stop things during an incident, but when you add those kind of systems they seem to end up being turned into parking ticket generators etc. which is wrong.

Considering most of the time I actually encounter CCTV I am in a public place I would prefer to have a CCTV trail to follow than half a dozen eye witnesses who won't remember the correct details.

And its not like I can go back and remove all the cameras anyway. Now if they start adding cameras to our rubbish bins to see what we are throwing away, our cars to see the speeds we are travelling (or GPS for this) and so on then they should be hung, shot and quartered. :)
 
2009-08-25 03:54:30 PM
Evilmogwai: Considering most of the time I actually encounter CCTV I am in a public place I would prefer to have a CCTV trail to follow than half a dozen eye witnesses who won't remember the correct details.

Ah, but the problem is that they don't want to pay for people to monitor these cameras (in that classically British half assed fashion), so it's up to the Police to search through the footage. Which they hardly ever do.
 
2009-08-25 04:01:18 PM
iansouter.com
as soon as they're finished with the "upgrades"
 
2009-08-25 06:17:04 PM
MongtheMerciless: All depends on how you look at it.
OK, 1 per 1000 camera's per year is low.

But then, it equally could be spun round to read;
1000 crimes solved last year because of CCTV, and probably 1000's more averted due to presence of a camera.


"...DCI Neville said CCTV played a role in capturing just eight out of 269 suspected robbers across London in one month..."
 
2009-08-25 06:34:02 PM
Awesome headline.
 
2009-08-25 10:07:14 PM
MooseBayou: untaken_name: Where's that pic of a camera pointing directly at another camera? I think I thought I saw something like that once on Fark, why come it isn't in this thread?

That's so they can nab anyone messing with camera number one. I would go destroying redlight cameras with a pitching wedge, but I'm reasonably certain they have cameras watching the cameras.

Ugh.


That's why God invented deer rifles.
 
2009-08-25 10:08:55 PM
FarkinNortherner: Frank Booth: Or...how about we keep the civil liberties argument because it has the advantage of being right

Right or wrong, it isn't an argument that's worked against them.

just keep that it doesn't work as the response to nimrods that advocate trading rights to assuage their paranoia.

I think you've rather missed my point.

untaken_name: I detect at least 3 blind spots.

Good job they're not supposed to be providing blanket coverage, but, instead, covering exit routes in compliance with the Underground's review of public safety post Kings Cross.


Yeah it was...uh...you know what? nevermind. You won't understand.
 
2009-08-26 12:02:38 AM
If you're going to make the "oh, but how many were averted" argument for them, you'd better be prepared to defend the "how many were filmed but not seen because of negligence on the part of the surveillance personnel" argument.

I'd be much more in favor of them if monitoring them was a public service, like jury duty. It's not a good idea to put this kind of power in the hands of a few, unelected, people.
 
2009-08-26 03:20:59 AM
*snrk*

Yeah, Subby, I see what you did there.
 
Displayed 25 of 125 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report