Smile! Urine Candid Camera!

Anon E. Muss writes "Just because you can put a camera somewhere doesn't mean you should. Apparently, the Department of Homeland Security doesn't grasp this concept. They've installed video cameras in urinals at Houston's Hobby Airport. At least they weren't sneaky about it — they posted a notice saying 'Automatic infrared flush sensors also provide video monitoring for security purposes.' (Insert bad joke about bashful bladder syndrome here)."

Comments

Not as bad as it sounds

[Brian Gordon]

If there had to be a camera somewhere in a men's restroom, the safest place would probably be right on the urinal facing straight out, where it apparently is. And if you're blanketing a building with security cameras, how much sense does it make to leave out prominently labelled rooms where any illicit activity can occur under the radar?

Don't get me wrong, video surveillance is absurd, but cameras in bathrooms isn't any worse than cameras on every street corner.

Re:Not as bad as it sounds

[Brian Gordon]

I mean right above the urinal of course.

The camera itself isn't shown in the picture; it's on the wall probably chest-height. That's where the IR sensors usually are. (I don't know how much slashdot females know about mens urinals o.o)

Re:Not as bad as it sounds

[Anonymous Coward]

Now it's modded funny. Behold the power of time!!!1

Re:Not as bad as it sounds

[Romancer]

"...the airport is the one place where I am willing to give up some privacy and convenience to gain more security."

Why?

Do you think it's easier to hurt you in an airport?
Or did you mean on the plane? Where there should be a solid impenetrable door to the cockpit and an absolute no negotiate policy.
That would actually protect you on the plane.

But you said the airport. Are you more afraid that they would hurt you there rather than on a bus? Or perhaps the train or subway?
Why not the mall? Why not a school? That'd make a point from a terrorist point of view.

If you are willing to give up your privacy in an airport simply because someone used that as a point of terrorism in the past, you're pretty narrow minded.
Just because something has happened in the past does not make it right to fear it more than other things that are just as likely and obviously much less guarded in the future. If you thik the terrorists are a one note band then you'll be just as surprised on the next news flash as you were on the last one. Learn that the only way to make things secure is to actually make them secure, not play security theatre.

Do you think that they will be able to monitor every camera, in every bathroom, all the time and that no one will figure out to go into a stall since the camera is visible?

Really?

Then you shouldn't worry about those terrorists, you should worry about what they are "trying to destroy"... Your freedoms, your feelings of safety and security, since there will be more stupid stunts to gain attention in the future and it's inevitable. Since they can buy a gun and walk into a mall or onto a bus or into a church and do whatever they want without time for a response, you're doomed if you let go of youor freedoms. They're the only thing that can sway those kinds of people away from those acts. To get them to stop doing what they "think they must do to get attention to their plights" and instead help fix the world of the consistant removal of those things that make us different. That make us not want to commit those acts because we have the freedoms to live and prosper as we see fit. To be in america. The things you are willing to give up to feel a little safer are the things that have been keeping you safe in your own country from domestic terrorists. Look to the middle east and count the bodies of those who did not have the freedom to think otherwise and then tell me you would give it up to feel safer and be a little more like them.

Re:Not as bad as it sounds

[KatAngel]

*raises hand*

Of course, slashdot law requires that at least five people now show up to prove me wrong, since there are "no women on the internet." It's ok. However wrong you may be, I am prepared to acknowledge that you are only following cliches, jumping on bandwagons, and repeating someone else's jokes for perhaps the hundredth time in your life in an attempt to sound funny, witty, or intelligent. I know you're only 'doing your duty,' par se. Fulfilling your obligation to slashdot society.

Don't worry. There are people who can help you.

Re:Not as bad as it sounds

[maxume]

So the camera in the bathroom is going to keep you from getting blown up while you wait in line for security screening? "O.k. folks, bunch up over there so we can keep you safe."

The majority of the visible security activity done at airports is designed to make you feel safe, not to make you safe. Secure cockpit doors and angry passengers are the things preventing another airplane crash bombing, not the nonsense that they engage in at airports.

Re:Not as bad as it sounds

[PleaseFearMe]

Excellent idea. Problem is, the post in question was made by an AC.

Bullshit

[QuantumG]

Well, just to get this out of the way.. this is bullshit. And dear god when did Slashdot become Digg?

Anyway, I think the comments are more interesting, especially this one:

From Inner Loop Realtor:

Y'know about 3 years ago I was mugged in the Hobby Airport parking garage. I told them at the time that they needed cameras in the garage. This is typical of bureaucratic idiocy. Meanwhile, watch your back.

1. I thought Houston was in Texas.. why weren't you packing? Defend yourself asshole.
2. Ya know that security cameras are completely useless for identifying people, right? I mean, if *you* couldn't identify the guy, then how is a security camera gunna help? You don't actually believe that "we zoomed in and cleaned it up a bit" shit that you see on 24, right?
3. Has anyone ever done a study (a real study) of the effectiveness of security cameras at preventing crime? Any sort of crime.
4. It's this kind of knee jerk "we need more surveillance" reaction that the DHS contractors are banking on. You are the problem.

Re:Bullshit

[guyminuslife]

"I thought Houston was in Texas.. why weren't you packing? Defend yourself asshole."

AIRPORT.

He wasn't packing because he hadn't unpacked yet. You have to check those, you know.

Or maybe---since he had just flown in---he wasn't from around here. ;-)

fake. Anyone can make up stickers.

[YesIAmAScript]

I'm actually bit jealous of whomever came up with that gag. He sure got a lot of mileage out of it.

It's clearly just a riff on the "naked X-ray" controversy going around.

Re:Urine a lot of trouble TSA!!

[Brian Gordon]

The cameras are mounted on the wall above the urinal; they're not staring at you out of the disinfectant cake. The only people with anything to be embarrassed about are the douchebags who lean forward and put their hand on the back wall and roll their head back and make weird facial expressions, and I don't feel sorry for them at all.

Illegal

[Renraku]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't this illegal?

I remember some stores had the pants sued off of them (no pun intended) when people found out the dressing rooms were being monitored by cameras, to prevent theft.

Lots of high end places have bathroom attendants. Their job is two-fold. I'm not quite sure of the first one, but I know the second one is to make sure people know that it isn't a place where they can go and shit in the sink or assemble guns from the parts they have hidden in their underwear.

Re:Illegal

[Anonymous Coward]

I thought so too. Not sure if this is a hoax or not yet...but on the other hand, when did DHS *not* consider itself above the law?

Re:Urine a lot of trouble TSA!!

[physicsphairy]

It is a joke. Note how half the lettering is bleeding out? Printed on an inkjet. Also, the suggested idea of combining flush sensors and cameras is absurd in every way. *is thinking about putting up some similar placards at his own airport*

Isn't it probably just a prank?

[Cyberllama]

Am I the only one who thinks this is just some prank pulled by some kid with an inkjet printer and some label paper? It would take 2 minutes to make that sticker and just slap it on a few urinals for giggles.

Like, I realize some ridiculous crap has happened in the past few years, but are we all so jaded we just automatically assume that this sort of thing is real?

Re:Isn't it probably just a prank?

[mattwarden]

If it is a joke, I bet someone goes to jail.

Re:Isn't it probably just a prank?

[guyminuslife]

You do realize that in the War on Terror it isn't necessary to charge people with crimes, don't you?

unionized toilet flushing employees

[JimBobJoe]

I had this idea once for a short youtube feature.

It would show the normal black squares found on automatic toilets and urinals. But it would move into the wall to show employees sitting behind those squares, and discuss the advantages and disadvantages of being a unionized toilet flusher.

Think of it done in the style of the BBC's remarkable Look Around You series.

I have found people surprisingly creeped out by this idea.

Also: why are they just in urinals?

[Jane Q. Public]

Seems to me that is prima facie discrimination.

The guy that printed these...

[mcrbids]

The guy that printed/posted these is sitting somewhere laughing his fool arse off. Srsly - it's obviously a fake, and it made /. front page!

Ever wonder about the dark red glass on the I/R sensor? It's ridiculous to think there's a camera in there...

chuckle chuckle...

Re:Why not in stalls in BOTH sexes?

[Rakishi]

Have you read ANY of the stories on proposed security measures in the last five years? Only reason they don't run lie detectors on everyone is because it'd take too much time.

Re:Simple solution

[DustyShadow]

You seem to be unaware of the fact that the department of homeland security is run by the federal government, not Texas.

Re:Simple solution

[speedtux]

So, tell us, what enlightened nation do you live in? If it's in the EU, you are at least as much spied upon, analyzed, data mined, etc. as Americans.