Slashdot Mirror
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.
"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.
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>
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.
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.
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."
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....
As far as folks in the UK are concerned, I guess you never heard of the IRA. That's the reason that to this day, you will not find any trash cans on most London streets.
Also, if you truly believe that police monitoring TRAFFIC cameras in the UK was one of the goals of the terrorists then I want to have words with your teachers.
The goals of terrorists are to get us to be terrified and to allow our Governments to continue the erosion of our privacy and Civil Liberties. Monitoring by Police, for whatever reason, is yet another means of said destruction of those liberties.
So while we should be vigilant we also should be thankful for the freedoms we have,
I am so grateful for them and love them so much, that I become quite angry when any one of them is eroded for achieving the sense of (false) security.
I have a several family members who would shove their Bronze Stars up your ass for saying that to me.
They have sadly let you down in both your education and critical thinking skills.
I'll be crying myself to sleep tonight because of that comment.
I prefer Flambe as apposed flamebait.
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.