Traffic Cameras Used for Pedestrian Monitoring

Quixote writes "A couple of days ago, there were news reports about a traffic camera near Univ. of Alabama being actually used to checkout passersby by someone at the state troopers' office. Today, there's a news report about 3 people being arrested for 'public misconduct' by the same camera (including one man for grabbing his crotch (don't ballplayers routinely do this? ;)). This story highlights an issue which most privacy advocates worry about: the extension of a surveillance technology to cover areas it was not intended to cover. This camera is a traffic camera: it was installed for monitoring the traffic conditions on the road. Now it is being used to monitor people (albeit the 'monitoring' was for some <ahem> other purposes in the beginning). I will submit that in a public place you have no right to privacy; but this yet another example of something to keep in mind when considering other 'privacy eroding' technologies."

Comments

Only the guilty have anything to fear

[kinnell]

At last, we can rid society of the terrible menace of public crotch grabbers.

Context

[ErisCalmsme]

I think the context of a person's actions is just as important as the action. Cameras can not take into account the entire context for what happens in front of them. Maybe this guy had a bad case of jock itch? I mean it sounds silly, but it's not impossible. Where is the line drawn?

Time to fight back...

[MarkusQ]

Anyone near the camera should go there and do something unusual but not illegal. (Drink from an imaginary bottle; blow soap bubbles and then snap at them like a dog; pointedly hide your forehead; open an umbrella for no reason; etc., etc.)

-- MarkusQ

Re:Time to fight back...

[gantzm]

Take a video camera out and videotape the traffic camera. That will make them wonder what you're up to!

Re:Time to fight back...

[SpaFF]

I will approve of ubiquitous surveillance cameras only when there is universal access to watching them.

That's how this was discovered. They are braodcasted on a cable channel here in town, and you can watch them online here

reciprocity?

[frAme57]

I wonder what the local police would think if I put up web cams showing their station entrances or their parking lots. Or even better: multiple web cams on the impound lot where, according to recurring rumors, our men in blue go shopping for car stereos and accessories.

before you get too upset

[Hubert_Shrump]

the article says the camera was broadcasting to the whole town -- so it's not like they were keeping it to themselves.

Re:before you get too upset

[clonebarkins]

the article says the camera was broadcasting to the whole town -- so it's not like they were keeping it to themselves.

This has to violate some kind of FCC rule!

What's Indecent Here?

[robbway]

The last time I checked, baring your breasts for a camera is not indecent exposure. There are thousands of film, many nonpr0n, where this goes on. It is not indecent to broadcast breasts over cable TV. If the woman didn't bare her breasts in view of anyone--which they'd have to prove--simply catching it on camera doesn't mean it's indecent. And if this woman happens to be underage, doesn't that make the police liable for pornagraphy (referring to the Girls Gone Wild underage scandal)? And since they're broadcasting it on TV in a non-news, non-fair use capacity, don't they owe the people acting fees? Aren't people required to sign release agreements for this sort of thing? This can get ugly fast.

Improper camera setup

[MobyDisk]

Here in Baltimore:
1) The cameras aren't moveable (AFAIK).
2) The cameras can only take snapshots, not video.
3) The cameras only take snapshots when they detect a red light, and a car crossing into the intersection.

I'm not trying to advocate traffic cameras, but at least someone spent some time designing these appropriately.

Mixed feelings

[chia_monkey]

That's a toughie. I'm all about my privacy. Yet it would be nice knowing I could be safe. Could this be a criminal deterrent? Maybe. But damn...if I get a bit drunk and decide to walk home instead of driving and then someone notices me on the camera and nabs me for public intoxication, that's no fun.

I kinda agree that "it's in the public domain so act accordingly". I definitely think we need to discuss this more. Am I off my rocker here?

Re:Turn Tables

[Sylver Dragon]

I had a thought along similar lines to this once. Basically start up a non-profit organization that employed people to follow around every elected representative 24/7 with a video camera. The only time the camera would not be recording the assigned representative would be when that rep. is in a private location, e.g. their home. And even then, the camera would be recording the front of the house, waiting for people to come and go. The footage is then put up on the internet for anyone and everyone to review. Afterall, these are the rep's who are asking us to put up with being monitored, let's start out by testing the monitoring on them. Moreover, I would try and see about getting these sorts of cameras inside their offices, and in any meetings where they discus stuff that might affect us citizens. The govenment these days seems to have forgotten that it is supposed to be them serving the people, not the other way around. Of course, most people have lost sight of that too, sigh.