Home › Forums › Open Discussion › Petition against Alki surveillance cameras
- This topic is empty.
-
AuthorPosts
-
March 14, 2013 at 5:57 pm #606786
BearsChickParticipanthttps://www.change.org/petitions/city-of-seattle-take-down-the-spd-surveillance-cameras. Someone posted a petition against the Alki surveillance cameras. Please sign it if you’re against their use.
March 15, 2013 at 1:02 pm #785924
BearsChickParticipantI’m very surprised there hasn’t been more response to this, or more folks signing the petition, based on past posts.
March 15, 2013 at 2:43 pm #785925
brewParticipantA lot of readers who comment on items on the main page do not visit these forums. If you can get mention of it on the main page, I am sure you will have many more signatures.
March 15, 2013 at 6:58 pm #785926
amaliaParticipantI’m as liberal as they come, I don’t break the law (well, rarely), I want to feel safe, and I welcome any additional means of recording illegal activities. I support the cameras. I wish there were cameras around when Georgette Guy (I believe that’s her name) was killed.
March 15, 2013 at 7:35 pm #785927
birdrescuerParticipantI support the cameras too.
March 15, 2013 at 8:31 pm #785928
Ms. SparklesParticipantMe three – my only complaint against the red-light cameras is the silly law that says they can’t be used for anything other than tickets (i.e. solving crimes)
I don’t have faith that “Big Brother” has it’s stuff together enough to be “watching” – but even if it is – as long as you’re not doing somthing illegal, why would you care? I’m perplexed by the hand wringing over this.
March 15, 2013 at 11:33 pm #785929
BearsChickParticipantIt’s okay if you’re for the cameras. That’s the great thing about the USA, we all get to express our opinions. However, if you’re against them, or like me, against how they’re being rolled out, please complete the survey.
March 16, 2013 at 12:26 am #785930
Genesee HillParticipantSome folks are ultra paranoid.
Some folks are a wee bit paranoid.
Some folks aren’t paranoid but would be happy to see wanton thugs caught.
Some people just watch Leave it to Beaver re-runs on TV.
March 16, 2013 at 12:28 am #785931
hammerheadParticipantWell I watch Rosanne and Star Trek the First Generation re-runs.
March 16, 2013 at 12:47 am #785932
Genesee HillParticipantThat is great, hammerhead. But you are an active person, and, I might add, a great person. You walk the talk, for certain.
I still don’t mind if the cameras catch a thug, or two, though.
As I have said before, they can focus on any part of my house. The creepiest thing they will see at my house, is me, in boxer shorts, with a hole in ’em. Or, a raccoon, or two, or three, digging up the yard.
March 16, 2013 at 6:57 am #785933
RagsParticipantAnother vote for the cameras….I value safety/security over privacy, and I’m just not that interesting enough for anyone to want to watch what I’m doing!
March 16, 2013 at 10:31 pm #785934
For LibertyParticipantDespite your innocence you may indeed be interesting enough to command camera attention depending on your age, race and gender; UK researchers at Hull University looking at CCTV surveillance in public space found that young black men, not involved with crime or disorder, were systematically and disproportionately targeted for ‘no obvious reason’, and one in ten women was targeted for voyeuristic reasons by male camera operators (echoing the incident the ACLU reported about the Cal Anderson Park SPD camera misused to zoom in on a girl in a mini-skirt). There is no strong evidence base supporting the idea that surveillance increases community safety. I signed the petition and sent it to everyone I know.
March 17, 2013 at 12:17 am #785935
dobroParticipantI think I know what Benjamin Franklin would have to say about it…
“Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety”
March 17, 2013 at 2:20 am #785936
RagsParticipantI don’t think any of us can presume to know what “Benjamin Franklin would have to say about it….” He lived in an entirely different world–one that was free from gangs, serial rapists and murderers, etc. etc., which is the world we live in today. I, too, wonder if the murder of Georgette Guy would be solved today had there been cameras where she was walking. I think all of you waving the banners of “liberty” would feel differently it if were your loved one who was the victim of kidnapping, rape, or murder!
March 17, 2013 at 3:51 am #785937
dobroParticipantyou know, the logical conclusion of that way of thinking is “if we had cameras everywhere nothing bad would happen”. Do you really believe that?
“I, too, wonder if the murder of Georgette Guy would be solved today had there been cameras where she was walking.”
Of course, all crimes would be solved if we had cameras everywhere. Is that really the kind of world you want to live in?
And as far as the world BF lived in, you don’t think there were rapes, murders, and criminal activity in his era? Read some history books please. Human nature and the activities it engages in are no different now than ever. The level of paranoia in the general population, fueled by 24/7 fearmongering propaganda of the type we have nowadays (BF didn’t have that) might be higher, tho.
March 17, 2013 at 6:40 am #785938
RagsParticipantI don’t believe that if we had cameras everywhere that nothing bad would happen but do believe that it would definitely be a deterrent. So, to answer your question, YES, if cameras everywhere ensures a crime-free world I’m all for it.
I recognize that there was crime in Ben Franklin’s day, but it’s illogical to conclude that his world could be directly compared to the the demographics and crime rates that exist today. Just read the Crime reports on this Blog…. seems to me like the only ones who are successfully pursuing their “liberty” are the criminals who don’t get caught!
March 17, 2013 at 6:45 am #785939
RagsParticipantPS. In case you haven’t noticed, there are already cameras everywhere…….most businesses now have them as well as many homes so what difference does it make if there are some on the streets?
March 17, 2013 at 7:25 am #785940
dobroParticipantCrime rates have steadily declined in the US since the 1990s and are currently comparable to the 1960s. If all you ever read are crime reports on the blog then I guess it looks like there’s lots of crime because the only thing they ever talk about in the crime reports is…crime.
Businesses are private enterprises that can do what they want. If I don’t want to be on their camera I’m free to find a place that doesn’t have one. Public streets are public. I have rights accorded me by the Constitution and one of them is a right to privacy. That’s the difference. The gov’t doesn’t have a right to see everything I do.
If the authorities decided we’d all be safer if everyone had a camera trained on their house and required all home owning citizens to place a camera on their property, do you think that would be a good idea?
March 17, 2013 at 7:53 am #785941
RagsParticipantI don’t know where you get your crime statistics, and it really doesn’t matter since if I, or a loved one, am the victim, it’s simply one too many, and I’m sure you feel the same about your family and friends.
i’m also not a Constitutional law expert, but I really don’t think your rights to privacy applies to you walking down a public street. Don’t fool yourself that you can detect which businesses have cameras–I’ll make it easy for you…they all do, and they’re not just inside so watch the sidewalks and parking lots, too, so you don’t get caught on camera.
This whole thing reminds me of the brouhaha that took place when TSA installed the x-ray cameras, and people were concerned that someone would see their naked body…..like anyone would want to! This too shall pass!
March 17, 2013 at 3:19 pm #785942
Talaki34ParticipantThere are cameras everywhere. Not just the stores, banks or at our neighbor’s house. We are being watched by many people. Video on cells allow for instantaneous transmission of everything we do. Cameras are small, concealable and capable of live feed to millions of individuals. If any of us use a webcam to talk to friends or family, there is a chance someone is watching you or even your kids. Stories continually crop up of cameras and video equipment being found in bathrooms, other public spaces and even placed in people’s homes. Jack McClellan and people like him are in all places, watching.
Quoting Benjamin Franklin? We all like to quote others in support of our arguments for or against something. I often do it myself. In truth, it is very difficult to apply a quote taken from one kind of event and apply it to another successfully, especially when the components of one could not have been foreseen.
March 17, 2013 at 3:39 pm #785943
dobroParticipantI got my crime statistics from the FBI Uniform Crime Reports. Here’s a link if you’d like to look…
http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/uscrime.htm
“Quoting Benjamin Franklin? We all like to quote others…”
The point is not who said it. The point is what it says. They are words I agree with.
So since there are cameras everywhere already I should just get over the fact that I once had a right to privacy? I notice neither of you addressed this question…
If the authorities decided we’d all be safer if everyone had a camera trained on their house and required all home owning citizens to place a camera on their property, do you think that would be a good idea?
March 17, 2013 at 11:44 pm #785944
Talaki34ParticipantFor me, it isn’t a matter of giving up my privacy. I already know I don’t have any while I travel in public.
As for training cameras on each and everyone’s house? I am not sure where you came up with this.
March 18, 2013 at 12:30 am #785945
dobroParticipant“As for training cameras on each and everyone’s house? I am not sure where you came up with this.”
I’m trying to figure out if those of you who think gov’t run cameras all over the place are ok think there should be any lines at all between our rights and our “safety”.
From your post, Talaki34,it seems that you think all details of our lives are out there already and life is pretty much an episode of 24. (Did you mean Jack Bauer? I don’t know who Jack McClellan is) Rags seems to think our world is riddled with crime, more so than at any time in history, and is willing to surrender any rights for “safety”.
So my hypothetical question ponders whether you think there is any line that can’t be crossed before our rights are compromised. And, if so, what is that line. Gov’t ordered cameras trained on your house for public “safety”. Would that be a line you’d be unwilling to cross?
March 18, 2013 at 1:13 am #785946
BearsChickParticipantthanks everyone to those that have signed! keep it up!
March 18, 2013 at 2:02 am #785947
For LibertyParticipantI share Rags’s desire to live in a safe community. If you read the literature on evidenced based, proven crime prevention strategies (check out http://www.crimesolutions.gov), streetlighting and community oriented activities win again and again. An engaged, active community is proven to increase public safety, so if there are variables entering the picture that could discourage community engagement – like surveillance cameras, then this could have a detrimental effect on safety. I’m not a criminal, but I know that anonymity is often necessary for the full expression of free speech and assembly; I hate walking by that camera surveilling our Statue of Liberty Plaza. I’m choosing instead to walk in Lincoln Park for now. One of our Alki residents said on the news that he will move to a different neighborhood if the cameras remain – a man who cares enough for his community that he took the time to speak up at a Council meeting; we need MORE neighbors like this, not less.
And re: safety from terrorist attacks – surveillance cameras will not prevent or defeat Al Qaeda. Its a toxic ideology that will only be defeated by education and a better ideology – these are born of free speech and assembly, both of which are suppressed by omniscient surveillance.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.