So long as that person is not the Government I don't care if your out in public then your out in public no problem. I do have a problem with a government that will video people anywhere without there consent and they have not commit or are suspected of committing a crime.
2 votes
Apr 13, 2015
Reply to this opinion
subscribe
share/challenge
flag
Discussion (7)
::unhide-discussion::
Um, the government videos you all the time in public. It may not be so in a small town in Minnesota, but you can be sure that in any medium or large city the local government is filming you from a variety of sources. Street light cameras, cop car cameras, police officer lapel cameras, public square or park cameras, public building cameras.
Wiki says 30 times a day per person in the US are the average times you get video taped in a day. wiki.answers.com/Q/How_many_times_a_day_are_you_photog...eotaped?#slide=2
For those who would rather hear it from FOX, they say 75 times a day on one local affiliate story. fox16.com/news/local/story/How-many-times-are-you-caug...ZbpkSHz4SE6XAmNg
The addition of Google Glass makes no appreciable change to numbers like that!
reply
subscribe
share/challenge
flag
::unhide-discussion::
1 vote,
Apr 13, 2015
I understand what your saying what I said was the Government should not be allowed to video tape you at all unless your under investigation for a crime. I still support that view I think you do also. What a private citizen does is much different than what a government does.
reply
subscribe
share/challenge
flag
::unhide-discussion::
1 vote,
Apr 13, 2015
What about "safety"? Cameras on public transportation and cameras in schools. These are two examples of the government video taping the public. These might deter some types of crimes and are certainly useful when something does happen.
A blanket statement that the government shouldn't be involved in video taping the public would keep cop cameras out of the car making it more difficult in today's atmosphere for them to do their job. Traffic cameras could be turned over to private industry, but are they any better than the government? At least with the government, we have a chance at some kinds of control over what is done with the data. With private industry we have NO control over the data at all. We all like our traffic reports. Big cities use those cameras to operate those big message boards and direct emergency crews to accidents and problem areas.
I agree that we should have some limits as to what is done with the data, but we live in a video, tweet and selfie age. Doing away with the technology just isn't going to happen.
Do remember that the Supreme Court of our great land (US) has given the right of personhood to corporations. That means that the corporation may be treated as an individual in ever expanding ways. (We will see if they expand that personhood again with the Hobby Lobby decision). I am beginning to think that while we are focusing on Government intrusion into our lives, we will wake up soon wondering how the corporation became Big Brother!
reply
subscribe
share/challenge
flag
::unhide-discussion::
0 votes,
Apr 13, 2015
Tell me do you feel better and safer if you know your being watched. I don't. How many videos can you find on you tube of crimes being committed how did that stop the crime. Fact it has not. Good citizens who are willing to get involved are the answer to crime not cameras.
reply
subscribe
share/challenge
flag
::unhide-discussion::
0 votes,
Apr 13, 2015
No, I don't necessarily feel safer.
The point I was trying to make, however, was that people like the services that the information from the cameras makes possible. People like that traffic cameras provide smoother flows of traffic. They like traffic reports so their commute is faster. They like having a video when they are involved in a crime (when they are the victim at least). They like thinking their kids are safer because the schools have cameras that are presumably being watched.
reply
subscribe
share/challenge
flag
::unhide-discussion::
0 votes,
Apr 13, 2015
You never know if a public camera stopped a crime if the crook did not commit it because of the camera. If your neighbor's homes were robbed and the camera helped catch the robber before your home was robbed would you demand the camera be removed. There are times that the camera may keep you from being charged because it proves you did not commit the crime.
What is the difference between a lapel camera or a handheld video camera and Google Glass.
reply
subscribe
share/challenge
flag
::unhide-discussion::
0 votes,
Apr 13, 2015
The valid point I just made was made by you your neighbors camera not the camera the government placed on the pole outside your neighbors home. Thanks we agree
reply
subscribe
share/challenge
flag
Challenge someone to answer this opinion:
Invite an OpiWiki user:
OR
Invite your friend via email:
@
click for template
OR
Share it:
Share this opinion via OpiWiki smartlink:
OR
Opinion's page
Click the @ to see full topic's discussion.
Status:
Active
Replies:
7
Main replies:
1
subscribe
For new main reply notification
Voting
(27 votes)