Police Given Access to Congestion-Charge Cameras
The BBC is reporting that anti-terror Police officers in London have been given live access to the "congestion charge cameras", allowing them to view and track vehicles in real time. This is a change from the original procedure that required them to apply for access on a case-by-case basis. "Under the new rules, anti-terror officers will be able to view pictures in "real time" from Transport for London's (Tfl) 1,500 cameras, which use Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) technology to link cars with owners' details. But they will only be able to use the data for national security purposes and not to fight ordinary crime, the Home Office stressed."
Mmm, frog stew.
Your flagrant disregard for paying of the £8-a-day toll has been noted. Your days are numbered, Sir.
Yeah, for now.
You mean that when people give power to other people that the powerful might use their power to get more power even if they promised not to?
isn't this just enabling police to watch things happen instead of doing things about it?
The game.
"The BBC is reporting that anti-terror Police officers in London have been given live access to the "congestion charge cameras", allowing them to view and track vehicles in real time. "
If the anti-terror Police officers in London are anything like the anti-terror officers in the States, I would suspect that public acknowledgment means it's been going on for a decade, minimum.
Anything you say will be held against you.
Until, of course, they change the rules again.
This is a perfect example of how the government creates a system that COULD be abused but has a legitimate purpose initially. The people allow it, so long as it is not used for evil. Then, once the government has it in place, the rules are changed. I'll have to remember this one next time somebody gives the argument that we don't have to worry about the some new PATRIOT-style act.
>But they will only be able to use the data for national security purposes and not to fight ordinary crime, the Home Office stressed.
I wonder how long that'll last... which is to say, I wonder for how long they've already been using the data to at least track ordinary crime, just waiting for the general public to give up caring enough that they can use the reams of data they've collected with impunity. Or whether we, over here in the USA, will even find out that this kind of technology exists and is being used.
Anything the government can use against its citizens, it probably already is, and if not, it's only because of technical limitations they're busily trying to fix.
Nostalgia's not what it used to be.
And then what? Assult? Property damage? Jaywalking? Littering? Unregistered gatherings...that simply turns out to be three people waiting for the lorry?
It always seems reasonable until it becomes too late to change it.
The offices can't even tell the difference between 2 photos. Jean was murdered by London officers after they mislead him with a Muslim terrorist that lived at the same building. An officer took a picture of Jean, sent to the police headquarters, and they said: "that's it, he's our man". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean_Charles_de_Menez es
Hey, dumbass - it's not Blair any more.
Do try to keep up. A little search-and-replace could keep your batshit insane rantings looking nice and fresh.
The London system is the direct source of the system that NYC mayor Bloomberg is trying to install in Manhattan. He says it's for "counter terrorism", though he'll probably morph that excuse into "traffic congestion". And then he'll use the (public spying) info for whatever he wants. Like helping his run for president, by watching which "known whorehouses" his political and economic opponents frequent when they're telling their wives they're "working late again".
These cameras point at public places. Their data is public info. Their use, and abuse, needs to be overseen by representatives of the public. Probably on a time delay to give real police business the advantage for which they're installed. Probably with a process to allow total redaction to protect legitimately sensitive info, even though it was recorded in public, like for example which places are covered (and therefore which places have a blind eye). But without public oversight, they're just Big Brother's public eyeball.
--
make install -not war
That "enduring threat" seems to consist of two recent attempts, both bungled by incompetent notscaryists, to let off car bombs in central London using previously unknown vehicles. Remind me how tracking everyone everywhere is going to do anything whatsoever to prevent that happening again?
If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
Yeah, that's right. Kill the Muslims, because all 1.6 million of them living in the UK must be terrorists!
Don't you even consider that if you tolerate all Muslims being murdered then maybe you'll be next? And that if all Muslims were terrorists then we'd have a full-scale civil war going on?
Just remember that most of those people who have 'invaded' are normal, peaceful, law abiding citizens. Stop reading The Sun and The Daily Mail, pull your head out of your arse and get a grip on reality. Please, for the sake of our society.
You think the "if it saves one child" crowd really makes a distinction between national security and "ordinary" crime? Pretty soon the Bobbies are looking at all vehicles. They are under pressure to "solve" crimes. Their definition of "solve" is to get someone convicted. Sure this provision will increase conviction rates. But dont be so sure all convicts would be the real perpetrators.
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
firstly, this will be used to enforce the 'No Repetitive Beats' law.
and no, i'm not taking the piss.
...vividly encapsulates that post-Watergate/pre-punk/coked-up moment when you could trust no one, least of all yourself.
Why can't they use these traffic cameras to fight crime when they can use standard town center CCTV?
How about they also stop pretending that London webcams malfunction whenever there's a large protest, so that we can keep an eye out for criminal acts committed by the police. After all, if they have nothing to hide then they have nothing to worry about.</sarcasm>
...actually, something vague and expansive like "national security purposes" is probably the *worst* thing to grant extra enforcement powers for.
Then, our Government(s) do things like the article with the blessing of the majority of folks thinking that they're "fighting" terrorism, when in fact, by reacting they way they are, they are playing right into the hands of the terrorists.
The terrorists want to cause terror and make us react in exactly the way we (the majority) have been - giving up our civil rights, running around panicking, and anytime there's even a threat of an attack, our level goes up to "Orange" or some such nonsense.
I don't know about you, but Osama and gang have been very effectual and are doing a great job winning the "War on Terror" (TM). (We're living in a state of terror - aren't we?)
I really can't blame the Governments too much because if they just say, "Shit happens and we can't panic. We'll work on this and bring these guys to justice. And in the meantime, let's see what we can do to stop this kind of activity in the World." It'll never happen because the general public wouldn't accept it.
I prefer Flambe as apposed flamebait.
Big Brother is watching you, in public! Surely, being in public violates your privacy!
I think it's a bit alarmist to go on about Big Brother, privacy, etc when we're talking about cameras that are in the street, as if you'll be showering there or rubbing butter on your lover.
Of course, a system like this could be abused if you started watching people jay-walk, but then again jay-walking is a crime and if a cop was standing there watching you, you'd also probably get in trouble (actually, probably not, I've never met a cop (personally) who cared about jay-walking in most cases).
To assume that any kind of authority watching you in the street is automatically big brother reminds me of people who live in the woods, want to separate from the US, and act like a bunch of crazies.
Anyone can see you in the street, log you for any purpose, and any cop can stop you and fuck with you. How is this any different than what's been happening for years? Other than it's over a camera now. You can't automatically jump behind "omfg privacy!" when it's in public. There are millions of people to watch, so it's a little naive and alarmist to assume it'll all be used to control your everyday life.
P.S. Sorry if this is hard to read, I keep having to hide the window from nosy co-workers.
http://news.com.com/Police+blotter+911+dispatcher+ misuses+database,+kills+ex-girlfriend/2100-1030_3- 6074559.html
D'OH
Whatever it is they're doing, whatever reason it is they give for it, if there's anything about it such that they say 'no, no, we'd never use it that way' - they're planning to do just that, just as soon as they can get away with it.
Real Daleks don't climb stairs - they level the building.
The UK uses ANPR for this too. Here you have to get home office type approval for a camera to perform a specific function. Data must be deleted ASAP if no offence can be proved. An ANPR speed camera must remove any non-offending data as soon as possible. A surveillance camera connected to the PNC must delete data within 48 hours unless the plate is black listed. The congestion charging cameras can only transmit a hashed VRM and can only store data if an offence happened. ( so it is possible to track backwards a vehicle with a known numberplate). A camera that is used outside it`s approved function cannot provide admissible evidence. I know of only two times when the police used ANPR data outside of it`s defined spec. Once when a WPC was shot in Bradford and recently when there was an attempted bombing. The police need to act quickly if they need to use a type approved device outside it`s designed function. The new law makes it faster for the police to gain access when they need to. Stressing this out is required because there are a lot more cameras here. The UK has laws that protect against data being kept for longer than is needed. I can understand the home office reaction that police might need access to ANPR cameras that might have security concerns...BUT it`s good to keep an eye on them in case of abuse.
Oh, we don't care about regular crime. Let it happen as much as you want. Heaven forbid that we might use possibly effective tools already in place to actually protect you and your property. Only terrorists are worth actually trying to give our best efforts towards.
You know, all things considered, I suspect the average Britain is in far more danger from ordinary crime, than from terrorism at this moment. And if a Terrorist isn't actually a Terrorist until he commits an act of Terrorism, then he's just an ordinary criminal up to that point, and will be left to purse his merry pursuits. What a crock!
I like the David Brin solution. Have cameras everywhere public, and allow everyone to access them at any time. No more secrets this way, and a lot less suspicion.
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
It's pretty clear that you've never been the victim of police harassment. Or of government harassment. Folks in those positions use every tool possible to harass people they don't like, if they can get away with it.
Heck, one woman here in the States reported that the traffic cop who pulled her over ran a check on her recent purchases (thanks to the credit card datamines) and told her what type of underwear she had recently bought.
Let me also guess that you've never been the victim of sexual harassment.
There's a very good reason why it's a good thing to limit power of those on the government payroll. It's because this power corrupts. And absolute power corrupts absolutely.
I suppose you can live like a cog in a wheel, and always living under the threat of never trying to piss your masters off. But there's a price to paid for living free. And that price involves limiting the power of those who would enslave you.
When I am Supreme Ruler, my first act will be to make "Being Rupert Murdoch" a crime punishable by death.
My second act will be to round up every single BNP voter and Daily Star reader and imprison them for the good of humanity.
My third act will be to fire all ex-hippies from the Social Services.
Luckily, here in NYC, we just tossed out congestion pricing, which was the distractor for a full surveillance system, paid for by the congestion charge. Luckily, the legislators outside the golden ring of New York City saw this for what it is, a huge commuter tax. I want the Germans to run my traffic systems, not the British. WTF is up with this idea of total surveillance, and why would any allegedy free country put this crap up ? Allegedly....
And to think peopel fall for this nonsence every time.
Like the old seatbelt law 'we cant use this to stop you even if we see you with out a belt on the road' but it 10 years they had seatbelt enforcement roadblocks, 'for our protection'.
Wake the hell up people and put your foot down.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
How about we give all the cops anal probes? I don't like being watched when and where there is no reason to be watched. It is senseless.
I think using these public surveillance systems are only acceptable if all the video is archived and the public has access to them
The public does have access to them. In the UK, we have the Data Protection Act, which basically boils down to giving you the right to request any information an organisation may have about you, including CCTV tapes. You may have to pay a handling fee of £10 maximum, but for that you might well end up with literally a lorryload of tapes and paperwork. If they don't pony up, then it's big fines time.
It only takes so much depriving human beings of their
Sense of privacy and individuality,
And increasing a government's
National opression and monitoring of its' citizens in every sense,
When citizens will become so depressed and feel so
deflated of their individuality,
And
Sense of personal freedom
That they will revolt.
Read your history books.
It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
So, going down the pike to philly for a political rally in your car would have been private at one time, cuz no one would record it (unless you specifically are tailed) and the other people who happen to drive by wouldn't pay you a second thought cuz you're just another car on the road. Now...things are going to get to the point where a surveillance network can follow the whereabouts of ALL cars everywhere in most big cities. With cameras watching pedestrians on top of that, pretty much any dissident (by which I mean peaceful protesters) can be found and tracked and blackmailed/harassed much more efficiently. The anonymous "angry mob" that previous governments have had to please to survive can now be catalogued and effectively dealt with, striking fear into those who might think about joining them.
So there.