Slashdot Mirror
Houston Police Chief Wants Cameras in Homes
An anonymous reader writes "In one of the most blatant and frightening statements made on privacy, the Associated Press reports that Houston's police chief wants surveillance cameras in apartment buildings and even private homes. Chief Harold Hurtt wants building permits to require cameras in shopping malls and large apartment complexes. He also wants them in private homes if the homeowner has called the police repeatedly. So, if you're in Houston, don't call the cops too much, or they might install a camera the next time they show up. And what does Hurtt have to say about privacy concerns? 'I know a lot of people are concerned about Big Brother, but my response to that is, if you are not doing anything wrong, why should you worry about it?'"
I live in Houston, or more accurately "near" Houston and there's a reason. The current mayor is big on things like this. Cameras at intersections have been implemented to catch anyone who runs the lights (but hey if you're not doing anything wrong then why would you mind right?) and mandatory towing if you stall out on the freeway are brilliant ideas of his.
You can't even refuse the tow and in the case of a flat tire where you're on the shoulder you better get it changed before a wrecker pulls up or they'll shove you out of the way and hook your car up. It's hard to beat the wreckers because they have cameras covering just about every inch of the freeway system here and they dispatch one to you the moment you pull out of the main lanes.
It's not surprising that they're angling for more cameras. They've been talking for a few months about putting cameras in the downtown district for our "protection".
I think that this new proposal needs a pilot program before we adopt it. The Police chief should have to live with a camera in his house for a year or so before he can put one in anyone elses house. I'd like to see how he likes it.
Appended to the end of comments you post. 120 chars.
Maybe we all ought to file complaints against him. After all, his statements are so dangerous and totalitarian that I'd say it's subversive and borderline treason!
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
I'm not disagreeing with your sentiments, but Jews have no problem with Gentiles not keeping Kosher.
Support a few technologists in Washington.
What was stated, was that he wanted cameras watching the property. "And if a homeowner requires repeated police response, it is reasonable to require camera surveillance of the property, he said."
Cameras in malls and large apartment complexes are actually quite common. Having a camera watching the halls and lobbies should not affect normal people at all. A camera which is used for watching private property is not /too/ much different, as long as it is placed outside of the house (probably watching the road in front of it, the driveway and the walk up to the front door). To me, it sounds like that is all he's talking about. /inside/ the home is a totally different issue, and any who suggest it should be thrown from whichever office they currently hold.
Of course, having a camera
Calling a sword by a pretty name is no more than adding perfume to poison.
This guy makes for an interesting goolge search.
Disappointed about not having anyone to arrest they arrest everyone at K-Mart. They actually practiced at a Wendy's restraunt the week before. I believe with the mayor and police chief watching. They even arrested families that had a receipt showing that they were waiting for food, for tresspassing. In order to crack down on groups of youths collecting in high crime areas where they might cause trouble. They needed a scapegoat, and so after the backlash, it became the officer in charge at the scene decided to do it on his own. The test a Wendy's was determined to be an "unrelated" incident
And we can be sure that he would protect are constitution rights. Just like he would for his own officers. So why not put the cameras in. You can't talk to anyone if you criticize my department
But he just wants to make sure that everyone is not breaking the law. Unless they are an illegal immigrant. The police chief has issued a direct order to police that they cannot enforce any immigration laws because it creates to much political conflict with city officals getting relected. I just have trouble with the police being told they cannot enforce a law. At this point the Police chief has become lawmaker & enforcer. If they want the illegal immigrants to stay, they need to change the laws, not give the police chief the right to do whatever he wants.
"I'm going to raise taxes 10 percent"
US:"BOOOO!!!!"
"OK, you're right. I'm only going to raise it 5 percent."
US:"Whew! That's a relief!"
My high-school band director would do the same thing for our band trips every year. He would go to the school board (which had to approve the trip) and tell them he wanted to take us to London or Sydney, etc., and let them think about it. He'd come back a month later and propose Orlando, Quebec, etc. The school board would invariably rubber-stamp the second less-dramatic proposal.
To a lesser extent my boss does this, but in reverse, by under-promising and over-delivering, which makes our department look good. He calls it "managing expectations".
$7.95/mo, 200 GB disk, 2TBxfer, MySQL, PHP, RoR.