Decius wrote:
] ] Initially, police will place six cameras in the Cleveland
] ] Park area of east Nashville and also downtown in the
] ] tourist-heavy Second Avenue and Broadway district.
] ]
] ] If the system works out, the department plans to buy more
] ] cameras and build a more expansive network throughout the
] ] city.
]
] There were planning to record audio as well, but apparently
] they couldn't defend that politically. Soon everywhere you go
] outside the police will be watching you. Better be carefull
] about loitering in a parking lot. Especially if you look like
] you might be young or not sufficiently white or otherwise
] undesirable. I wonder if they'll start following people from
] bars back to their cars and radio dispatch to pull them over?
]
] This isn't going on in Nashville because it is particularly
] needed in Nashville. Its going on in Nashville because people
] in Nashville aren't willing to resist it.

It's kinda hard to get riled up about this simply due to the fact that there's tangible benefits that can be drawn from it. For one, having cameras on 2nd Ave isn't necessarily a bad thing. It can get pretty rowdy (not that I mind) and there have been numerous assaults and batteries over the years. Back when our offices were on 2nd Ave, it was not uncommon to see brawls after last call. The mounties and squad cars are a good deterrent, but they can't see everything. Considering how far you usually have to go to where your car is parked, it can get dicey.

The potential for abuse is there, but the public benefit seems like it would outway it. Nashville's police force is definitely not known for it's fine upstanding conduct, but I think they're not high-tech enough to take advantage of something like this. Besides, most of the officers I know are the worst offenders of DUI laws I know! So it could go both ways.

Proliferation would be a problem though because for the most part, Nashville is not pedestrian friendly.

flynn23 wrote:
]
] It's kinda hard to get riled up about this simply due to the
] fact that there's tangible benefits that can be drawn from it.

I think any surveillance system will have tangible benefits. The question is whether they outweigh the costs. I've certainly been assaulted on 2nd avenue by drunk rednecks. Some security to resolve that problem would be useful. Like actually having cops on the street at last call. On the other hand, a 2nd Avenue where laws are perfectly enforced would rapidly cease to be somewhere people went for fun, and so the cameras will chase people around the city until eventually life is rather intollerable unless you're going from your car to the mall and you never have more then one drink and you're not an undesirable.

Decius wrote:
] flynn23 wrote:
] ]
] ] It's kinda hard to get riled up about this simply due to the
]
] ] fact that there's tangible benefits that can be drawn from
] it.
]
] I think any surveillance system will have tangible benefits.
] The question is whether they outweigh the costs. I've
] certainly been assaulted on 2nd avenue by drunk rednecks. Some
] security to resolve that problem would be useful. Like
] actually having cops on the street at last call. On the other
] hand, a 2nd Avenue where laws are perfectly enforced would
] rapidly cease to be somewhere people went for fun, and so the
] cameras will chase people around the city until eventually
] life is rather intollerable unless you're going from your car
] to the mall and you never have more then one drink and you're
] not an undesirable.

Has there been a documented case of abuse with these tools yet? One of the things that I think saves us from potential abuses is the fact that there's just information overload. If you're job is to sit there and watch the videos, you generally have too much going on to worry about fucking with that negro that just left the club all crunked. I agree that it can happen, but it seems like the benefit will outweigh the risks for quite some time.

flynn23 wrote:
] Has there been a documented case of abuse with these tools
] yet?

The matter has been widely studied, particularly in Canada where there is a legal requirement to study privacy impact of new legislation.

Here is the ACLU's page: http://www.aclu.org/Privacy/Privacy.cfm?ID=13482&c=130

Privacy International also has a number of links. http://www.privacy.org/pi/issues/cctv/

The Norris and Armstrong studies are frequently referenced. The ACLU has one here:
http://www.aclu.org/Privacy/Privacy.cfm?ID=13550&c=130

Quoting:

Three out of ten people were surveilled for crime related matters, two out of ten for forms of disorderly conduct, but the largest category, nearly four out of ten were surveilled for ‘no obvious reason’. This was echoed when we examined the basis of suspicion, with only one quarter of people subject to targeted surveillance because of their behaviour. ...the most significant was categorical suspicion where people were surveilled merely on the basis of belonging to a particular social or subcultural group.

Other sources:
http://www.caslon.com.au/privacyguide20.htm
http://www.oipcbc.org/investigations/reports/invrpt12.html

Decius wrote:
] ] Initially, police will place six cameras in the Cleveland
] ] Park area of east Nashville and also downtown in the
] ] tourist-heavy Second Avenue and Broadway district.
] ]
] ] If the system works out, the department plans to buy more
] ] cameras and build a more expansive network throughout the
] ] city.
]
] There were planning to record audio as well, but apparently
] they couldn't defend that politically. Soon everywhere you go
] outside the police will be watching you. Better be carefull
] about loitering in a parking lot. Especially if you look like
] you might be young or not sufficiently white or otherwise
] undesirable. I wonder if they'll start following people from
] bars back to their cars and radio dispatch to pull them over?
]
] This isn't going on in Nashville because it is particularly
] needed in Nashville. Its going on in Nashville because people
] in Nashville aren't willing to resist it.

It sort of sounds like inviting the cops to come hangout with you every where you go. Don"t the cops need probable cause for stalking someone?