This is a mobile optimized page that loads fast, if you want to load the real page, click this text.

Should there be more CCTV in public?

Should there be more CCTVs filming the public?

  • Yes

    Votes: 20 66.7%

  • No

    Votes: 10 33.3%
  • Total voters
    30
Jump to new

prawn_86

Mod: Call me Dendrobranchiata
Joined
23 May 2007
Posts
6,637
Reactions
7
MrBurns said:
Or if you want to let creeps get away with murder scrap all the cameras, they have their privacy rights dont they ?
Click to expand...

Perhaps harsher penalties would reduce crime. Although there always has been, and always will be, crime no matter how many cameras you put up or chips you put in or penalties you impose.

The average Londoner is filmed on CCTV over 200 times per day. Has that reduced crime? I actually dont know, but i know there are still murders in London
 
On the back of the Jill Meaghers murder a few people here are suggesting that there should be more CCTV cameras filming the public in order to make crimes like this easier to solve.

What are your thoughts?
 
Personally i think no.

London has CCTV everywhere with the average Londoner filmed upwards of 200 times a day and yet crime still occurs.

Also, installing CCTV seems like a way to solve crimes rather than prevent them. There always has been, and always will be crime and people who think they can live outside the rules of society.

What i am not opposed to is harsher penalties for crimes such as rape and murder.
 
I would like to see CCTV on EVERY street in town, how can any one object to being on camera if they are not breaking the law.
 
I agree with more CCTV in public places and lots of signage to tell everyone it's there.

I see no reason why this technology should not be leveraged more to solve crimes.

CanOz
 
Re: Alcohol fueled violence


With the population density as it is now it's quite dangerous out there and the dysfunctional among us are hard to pick let alone remove from society.

The one thing we have is CCTV, the way things are now it's a no brainer to give up privacy to deter the nasties out there or at least catch them after they've done their work.

Unless your worried about being caught picking your nose or visiting a brothel the cameras in public places pose no threat to anyone ........except the nut cases and nasties as we've seen in the past week.

Women arent safe out there it's a damn shame, this bastard has not only killed someone he has taken away the confidence of millions of women out there, this could have been any one of them ...and they know it.
 
pilots said:
I would like to see CCTV on EVERY street in town, how can any one object to being on camera if they are not breaking the law.
Click to expand...

It's the erosion of freedoms which has been occuring in the Western world in the last 50 years. Same as terrorism laws how you can now be detained indefinitely, but it's ok if you haven't done anything wrong... I certianly don't know every law, but i'm fairly sure i break a few of them in my life.

By this reasoning would you be fine with a microchip implanted in yourself monitoring you where you go? Or what about microphones in your house so the government can listen in and hear if you had anything to do with crimes or were planning any crimes? In fact with the rise of UAV drones the government could have a little mircodrone with mic and camera follow everyone everywhere.

While i do understand peoples views, i just don't see any evidence that it owuld reduce or eliminate crime. It is a typical police response of catching the criminal after the offense, instead of preventing the offense.
 
Re: Alcohol fueled violence

I have moved a couple posts into this thread


Re 1, it's not so much the current use, but the future potential use.Governments have consistently proved they cannot be trusted and do not do what is best for the poeple, so by allowing them this technology along with facial recognition technology, gives them a huge big brother esque power. Suppose they decide to bring in a curfew after dark for a reason you dont agree with, then they know straight away who is out after dark. Just one basic example. Personally i just dont trust governments to do what is in societies best interest.

Completely agree with number 2, but unfortunately i don't think it could have been avoided, short of her catching a cab home, but what cab would take a 200m fare?
 
Re: Alcohol fueled violence


She was offered a lift but declined, there will be fewer that turn that offer down in future.

I'm more concerned about the Govt stuffing it up rather than abusing it, if ever that happened the people would revolt.

Speed cameras are abused for revenue raising but I fail to see how this could go wrong.

In normal circumstances I would agree with you but our population is highly and densly concentrated and that always leads to trouble especially with ethnic diversity and with many people unable to cope mentally or fit in.
 
prawn_86 said:
London has CCTV everywhere with the average Londoner filmed upwards of 200 times a day and yet crime still occurs.
Click to expand...

I lived in London for 1 year a while ago.
You get used to the cameras and don't even take any notice of them 'invading your privacy'.

Don't forget, the CCTV's in London played a HUGE role in putting the puzzle of the London bombings together.
 
DB008 said:
I lived in London for 1 year a while ago.
You get used to the cameras and don't even take any notice of them 'invading your privacy'.

Don't forget, the CCTV's in London played a HUGE role in putting the puzzle of the London bombings together.
Click to expand...

This highlights my point. They are there, filming constantly, and yet they dont seem to have reduced crime? Yet it gives the government a way to keep tabs on society as a whole and possibly use it for more sinister projects in the future...

I'm sure everyone would get used to their phones being tapped also so maybe we should do that. Same as the Internet filter Conroy is pushing, surely it is a good idea to block those websites which encourage/teach crime?

My whole concern is around the trust of government and their lack of transperancy. They could use these cameras as they see fit, but then slap a privacy law on the way they are using the data so you or the media cannot find out. Seems hypocritical to me...
 
What about the other way round -- proof that you werent there?
Cameras can back you up that you havent done anything wrong.

Works both ways.

I dont have a problem with cameras, if people are going to do something wrong, they always check for cameras first.
 

So basically what you are saying is the g'mint can do basically anything they want yeah?

I think CCTV is inevitable, private CCTV as well as g'mint installed. I agree that they will find some way to abuse it, that's what g'mints do, no reason to suspect that the future will be any different.

CanOz
 
prawn_86 said:
Also, installing CCTV seems like a way to solve crimes rather than prevent them.
Click to expand...
Solving a current crime so quickly can prevent the perpetrator from future crimes.

Years ago we lived in Brunswick and I would stumble home in the wee hours from Sydney rd pubs. Currently we live right next door to Coburg so the solving of this case has concerned us. Knowing that the perpetrator is off the streets and cannot harm another person is comforting. Knowing there are such individuals in our local community is sickening.

It's crimes like this that makes me wish we still had the death penalty. People like this give up the right to live when they take another life in such a vicious and heinous manner. Why should we foot the bill for them to live out their life in relative comfort when they denied that right to their victims?

Cheers
 

The death penalty is certainly another topic, but i have concerns that so many get wrongly convicted. I guess CCTV as Tink says could help this aspect too.

CanOz
 
prawn_86 said:
This highlights my point. They are there, filming constantly, and yet they dont seem to have reduced crime?
Click to expand...

No. You are reading my post wrong prawn.

I meant it as in 'you don't take any notice of it invading your privacy', a line that the civil libertarians harp on about and like to jump up and down about. I most certainly always had a feeling that someone, somewhere, was watching me.
 
pilots said:
I would like to see CCTV on EVERY street in town, how can any one object to being on camera if they are not breaking the law.
Click to expand...

Ipswich Qld City Council has universal CCTV coverage in the CBD and it is monitored with live surveillance. With police cooperation, lawbreakers are often apprehended in the act. It has cleaned up crime in the city.

Of course the Council of Civil Liberties people hate CCTV. They think a criminal's rights of privacy do do his dirty work overrides public safety. This is only natural as they are mainly made up of criminal lawyers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

All trading needs to cease for 14 days prior to Monday open in Sydney
2 3 4
Replies
75
Views
11K
divs4ever
D
How Much Should You Put In A Stock?
Replies
1
Views
4K
flynnmactier
F
A
Should all banks be government owned?
Replies
4
Views
4K
aleckara
A
P
My accountant saga continues.....a long story still unfolding
2 3
Replies
41
Views
10K
kitehigh
K
R
The American use of War Pretext Incidents
Replies
6
Views
9K
sptrawler
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more...