Slashdot Mirror
Eye In the Sky For City Crime Fighting
Tiger4 writes "The mayor of the City of Lancaster in the Antelope Valley of southern California is considering a high-definition video flying platform to aid in crime fighting. The aircraft, would circle the city constantly, able to zoom in on activity spots instantly. 'You never know when you are being watched or followed. It would be stupid to commit a crime. You see it with such detail,' said Mayor R. Rex Parris, who took a ride last week in a camera-equipped airplane with pilot Dick Rutan. 'I have every hope that Lancaster will be the first city to deploy it. I've never been so excited about anything.' Dick Rutan is the same pilot who flew around the world non-stop in the Voyager, custom built by his brother Burt Rutan at Scaled Composites in Mojave." The aircraft is nothing special, a garden-variety Cessna or the like, but "the camera is an example of technology developed for and used by the military making a transition to civilian applications, Rutan said."
Outlaw roofs.
-- Put crudely, the world is an extremely large problem instance. (Russel/Norvig Artificial Intelligence)
going to offer a reward to the first person to shoot the damn thing down?
Seriously, though, the whole idea is wrong on so many levels it's not funny anymore. Privacy aside, couldn't they at least use a platform that's better suited to long-term surveillance, such as a small (drone-sized), unmanned airship?
welcome our new all seeing, all knowing skyball overlord and hope it resembles the comforting familiarity of "the walking eye"
Good people go to bed earlier.
It was a matter of time before this technology trickled down to Law Enforcement.
It's You and I against the World... When do we attack?
...never do anything stupid, so the Mayor pointing out "It would be stupid to commit a crime" is a really excellent example of how compelling the case is for using this sort of surveillance technology.
If politicians and police were honest about this they'd be doing a controlled experiment on these deployments, putting out these systems in ways that varied both in space and time that allowed them to determine whether these things had any effect on quality of life amongst the citizens, which is the metric that matters.
Instead, they are content to make stuff up, and the average person is so relentlessly anti-empirical that they have no idea what they are missing.
Blasphemy is a human right. Blasphemophobia kills.
The camera is an example of technology developed for and used by the military making a transition to civilian applications, Rutan said."
When you have the Military controling civilian security, the civilians become the enemy. This would normally just be a gross overstepping of the government, but to use it as a "transition" for EASing military is just crazy. Things are different in the Military. The rules, norms and expectations are completely different. You can't just take an MP out of the fleet, give him a badge and a gun, and expect him to take a squad car around the block with out incident.
-Rick
"Most people in the U.S. wouldn't know they live in a tyrannical state if it walked up and grabbed their junk." - MyFirs
For a moment I thought I knew where that was. Are there any place names America didn't steal?
"Welcome to our world. We are the wasted youth. And we are the future too." Yes, I know these are stupid lyrics.
1. Someone to know the crime is happening and thus record it, send cops over, and prevent it.
2. No blind spots(good luck on a roaming platform. Last I checked, buildings still are 3d and thus will cause blind spots.
3. The criminals not to take the most basic of all precautions to hide there identity(sky masks aren't exactly hard to make or buy.).
So, in conclusion, it looks like some dumb ass company built this device and decided to market it to whatever sucker they could find. World keeps on turning.
So basically, -1 troll/offtopic is really slashdots way of saying "I hate that you thought of something before me."
I wholeheartedly agree. On the condition that the loop includes a trip above the Mayor's house and that all video feeds are released to the public.
The Wise adapts himself to the world. The Fool adapts the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the Fool.
This surely is big brother watching you.
How do you know who is the "guard dog" watching ?
Who is in power is surely willing to keep it and it will use all means available.
Get ready to long shot videos or images of possibly "strange" situation being broadcastet to destroy a political opponent.
(Hey, look, your candidate was walking on a notoriously gay road !!!! he was talking to a possible drug dealer !!!!)
Of course any plausible reason for doing it will be seen as irrelevant.
Talking about the bad guy, he just needs a mask or a foggy day to have a coverup, not so difficult.
The end result seems negative in many ways to me, I would rather have more COPS on patrol than a flyng spy on the sky.
I'm not really sure that this is a "transition of technology from military to civilian application" as much as it is a militarization of a historically civilian function. Sure, if you look at the org charts, police are not military, nor have they changed much; but if you look at hardware and tactics there does seem to be a trend. The enthusiasm for using SWAT teams in all sorts of crazy places, at considerable peril to those ostensibly being protected and served, random little podunk county sheriffs picking up APCs, now aerial surveillance mechanisms...
Luckily, the police are not at all confused about their role...
This politician obviously doesn't get out much.
It would be stupid to commit a crime.
It would be stupid to spell Paris with two R's. And Rex Paris is a stupid name, don't you know what happened to the last king in Paris? Stupid's sticking power doesn't come from logic, au contraire, stupid defies logic.
It's a city with a giant Southern Baptist college and a bunch of farmhands.
Nothing happens there.
I wonder how hard it would be to shoot these things out of the sky.
Wouldn't it make more sense to use some sort of stationary balloon based platforms? Seems logical to start off that way at least.
Politicians do this shit to look relevant. So that at re-election time they can go: "see, see. We are all better off because of what *I* did."
Meanwhile cities can't even figure how to save money on the boring stuff. (printing double sided, prevent duplication of work, retuning wrongly ordered stuff to vendors, selling instead of trashing old assets...)
Obama's legacy: (N)othing (S)ecure (A)nywhere and (T)error (S)imulation (A)dministration
When a company does something stupid or draconian, I take my business elsewhere.
If the city I lived in started doing this, I'd move and take my tax revenue with me (paltry as it may be).
Interesting sidenote: This morning on the way to work I heard on the radio that California is in even bigger financial trouble now: Banks are no longer honoring the state tax refund IOU's, student grants are no longer being paid, people on all sorts of state-run social welfare programs are no longer receiving the assistance they are used to, etc.
Why don't we hear of more people fleeing the state in droves? I've never lived in CA, but if I did the decision to move would be a simple one. The state government is bankrupt, and now they want to monitor me from the sky in hi-def all the time.
Yep...Lets monitor all 145,074 of them at one time. Oh wait.
Kinda funny that this concept was first described for a prison.
Oh well. I sure hope that the residents enjoying paying their taxes for this, considering that a lot of the big banks in CA are not accepting CA IOU's anymore.
Sig it.
Is crime so bad in Lancaster that people are willing to be monitored constantly? Do they really find the expense of operating such a system worthwhile? Is it a better use of funds than giving raises to teachers, improving roads, reducing sales tax, offering a college scholarship program, or any of the countless other good things that could be done with the money?
Who makes sure this system is used responsibly, and not for the mayor to see what his wife does while he's at work, or to see how often his opponent heads to the local bar?
You never know when you are being watched or followed. It would be stupid to commit a crime.
When people in positions of authority start talking this way watch out because here comes big brother.
Fuck, I'm dissapointed in this half-hearted scheme. Why don't you just skip to the endgame and implant every one of your citizens with mood-altering gps tracking chips that transmit constant video and sound feeds of whatever they're seeing and hearing? I'll put money on the table that when the technology for that exists, there will be people in power who want to do it and general public who won't fight it.
I wish we could just hurry up and split species so that those who don't care can turn into HG Wells-like eloitards.
On another note, it doesn't matter that it's a plane, other cities like NY already use those and they're attached to blimps. So I'm sorry to tell this silly mayor that he won't be the first.
Liberty.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=TopkgGxGzQs
From the linked article: "During the demonstration flight, the system was used to observe a car accident, a city announcement said. The camera detected the collision due to the heat produced by the vehicles, and within seconds focused on the area and provided a clear picture of all vehicles and people in the area."
Wait, what? So, light a fire somewhere far away from where you're going to commit the crime, and the camera will detect the heat and look away? What are the exact specs of this system anyway?
Playing poker with a joker and some Uno cards
The Panopticon: The Panopticon is a type of prison building designed by English philosopher and social theorist Jeremy Bentham in 1785. The concept of the design is to allow an observer to observe (-opticon) all (pan-) prisoners without the prisoners being able to tell whether they are being watched.
Constantly circling aircraft to carry video camera to fight crime? Isn't this the same California, which is spectacularly bankrupt already?
Do American voters really want to turn the USA a complete police state? Do they have any idea what are they doing? Why don't they read some books about existing or previous police states before they agree to create one for themselves voluntarily?
only outlaws will have umbrellas.
Slashdot: news for Apple. Stuff that Apple.
They either plan around it (unlikely) or commit impulsive acts when the opportunity arises. They also don't always commit their crimes out-doors, or in cloud-free weather. They also don't ever expect to get caught (if they did, that would be a deterrent - it isn't).. So while keeping a plane in the air (and presumably a control room staffed, to watch the spy cameras) and a mechanic on standby to refule it and maintain it, might sound like a good idea - and may even impress the voters the chances of it reducing crime are small.
Luckily for the mayor, it's impossible to correlate one act of crime prevention with any movement in the crime statistics, so whatever happens (short of someone stealing the plane), he, she or it will be able to call the initiative a success.
I do have a feeling though, that this plan was not exactly thought out. Any sale to a gullible official - who isn't spending their own cash yet comes out with statements like "I've never been so excited about anything" sounds like exuberance has got the better over common sense. I would expect that the money earmarked for this plan would be far better spent on orthodox police patrols: more officers, more man-hours and maybe even a few public awareness campaigns. Not as sexy, but far more effective.
politicians are like babies' nappies: they should both be changed regularly and for the same reasons
Not one seemed so keen on going to school or on avoiding the police. Actually, going to prison was part of the networking with other thugs and the reputation building. So yes, there could be an investment of millions on cameras that can even see through the £5 hooded clothes but I don't think it will be much of a deterrent.
"It would be stupid to commit a crime."
It should already be stupid to commit a crime. This guy seems to think that criminals don't believe laws are logical and beneficial. If they are committing a crime, they have already decided they don't care about that. A lot of crimes ARE stupid and are committed without regard to logic or consequence. This guy seems to think criminals will suddenly start thinking twice.
Look, you can't PREVENT crimes. Even if you have a camera, you'll only just be watching one already in progress. And if a criminal is worried about the camera, he will probably shoot it down. With an unlicensed weapon, no doubt. Way to go.
Twinstiq, game news
I guess the whole state isn't on the verge of bankruptcy. Or do they think they can reduce the size of their police force enough to make up the difference?
If it could reduce the number of cops running around with attitudes. In general our police forces have become way too big, and bored cops develope attitudes. Of course this likely won't happen and our taxes will go up to support this.
I want to know what it is about cities named Lancaster that leads them to think that monitoring everyone's activities is a good idea? A couple of weeks ago we had a story about Lancaster, Pa having the most cameras per capita monitoring for crime and now we have Lancaster, Ca putting an eye in the sky.
The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
"There was of course no way of knowing whether you were being watched at any given moment. How often, or on what system, the Thought Police plugged in on any individual wire was guesswork. It was even conceivable that they watched everybody all the time. But at any rate they could plug in your wire whenever they wanted to. You had to live -- did live, from habit that became instinct -- in the assumption that every sound you made was overheard, and, except in darkness, every movement scrutinized"
davecb5620@gmail.com
If the video feed was open to the public, it wouldn't be long before there would be clips of the mayor's butt crack showing up on youtube, as he bent over to work in his garden, or the city council folks walking their dogs and letting them take a dump on neighbor's lawns, or local fatcat businessmen passed out drunk in their back yards, all the local cop cars on patrol making illegal left turns at stoplights, etc.
The spy in the sky program would end pronto then.
http://www.technovelgy.com/ct/content.asp?Bnum=309
weinersmith
does it strike anyone else as odd that two of the more "big brother" cities in America recently are both named Lancaster (PA & CA)?
http://www.philly.com/inquirer/local/pa/20090706_Plenty_of_cameras_monitor_55_000_Lancaster_residents.html
Or maybe he just didn't anticipate IR cameras.
So now what I do in my lawn is not considered privacy anymore? Great.
Even though I disagree with people who say "If you are in public, people should be able to film you at all times." I understand their point.
Now a camera pointing down will be able to see what I am doing in my back garden that has a very high fence around it. What if the camera films at an angle?
Well, at least people are innocent until proven guilty, but it is best to do your hardest to prove them guilty.
Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
Hello sunbathing Megan Foxx!
I doubt this is all that hard with a conventional military type rifle for this type of aircraft at low altitudes, the tech is old, it is called tracer bullets to help you adjust aim, and you put one say every fourth round in the magazine. Small arms have been used to take down low flying planes for a long time now. Granted, it would never be as effective as a dedicated AA cannon of some type, or a missile, but it has worked in military conflicts all over the planet since planes were first used offensively.
... in buildings, bridges, garage's and so forth, I can see criminals using underground tunnels/sewers/access points more often, and wealthy criminals creating such tunnel networks.
The technology for this does not exist yet, but it will very soon. Look at the solar impulse aircraft, for example, that is going to attempt to fly around the world on solar power. It stores up electricity during the day so that it can fly through the night. Combine this thing with UAV technology and you have your 24/7 camera surveillance.
Another solution that pop into my mind are balloons that are tethered to the ground.
weirdest thing I ever saw: scientology advertising on slashdot.
We named our city that because we have so many LAN parties here.
Security theater are actions that make you feel secure, but have no actual affect. In Great Britain they have installed over three million surveillance cameras. Arrests have increased, but the crime rate is still the same.
The problem we have is not an inability to arrest people. Our problem is that we do not know what to do with people after they are arrested. Arial surveillance. will give companies fat contract and get politicians re-elected, but it will not increase our safety.
As demonstrated by one Gordon Freeman as he fled City 21 during the unrest in the early 2000s, these surveillance drones are particularly susceptible to blunt force attacks. Alternatively, subway tunnels and fast waterborne craft also make it difficult for the drones to follow and/or record.
If people stopped acting all crazy, this sort of thing wouldn't be suggested in the first place. As usual, it's the group of kids in the corner of the playground who ruin it for the rest of us.
Ideally, this wouldn't exist. Less ideally, access to the film would require a court order, but... realistically, the film should be publicly accessible to anyone, anytime, and all records should be destroyed within a certain number of days.
such an event would either require ... decades of change and transformation in how the military works
Good thing they're getting started now. So even though we might not get to, at least we can look forward to our children huddling in bombed out cellar holes scurrying in fear of the US military.
This is OK, because it is just a higher quality version of whats happening already. If it gets any higher quality then that's a problem.
Infra red is a obvious requirement since all cameras have done in the past, is move crime around. So this instantly pushes even more crime to night, so they add infra-red. Now they can bust into anyones house with grow bulbs on suspicion of marijuana growing, etc, etc.
I don't have a problem with a camera recording, and definitely like the idea of them chasing down crimes in process with this technology. What I don't want to hear is a power drunk Mayor excited about all the new crimes he can arrest, that weren't causing any harm in the first place. Or about the prospect of wasting this much money improving something already proven to not reduce crime rates.
Exactly. I don't think people who are about to commit crimes thing about how stupid it might be. Most are not being terribly rational. Who's being stupid now?
Anyone else think of those flying camera things in Half Life 2??? The ones that fly around and alert the bad guys of your presence. I didn't RTFL, but I get the feeling this technology could be used for more than just recording criminals. I'm sure it could be used to track people and their actions. I realize I'm stepping into major tinfoil hat territory here, but I think it's worth noting that "this is where it starts".
Military definition of "warning shot" duly noted 8-|
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
because here in Atlanta when police protecting the mayor scanned the plates of a car visiting her son and found the car stolen the policeman doing got into trouble and the police were prevented from doing future scans.
* Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
When you keep putting fear day in and day out inside peoples' head via propaganda ( which ironically they watch on free will ) then there is no stopping in how survilance stuff they can put around them. People with fear of their own kind will go to great length to strip themselves out of privacy, freedom and liberty.
You shouldn't be shocked or surprised though. It's nothing new, just history repeating itself.
If this tool is used in specific conditions, it could have a huge benefit -- video evidence of crimes in progress and more accurate prosecution. I see no problem with the police focusing a camera on a specific location after someone has called 911 and a dispatch has been made. The camera can be pointed in a few seconds, whereas the officers would take minutes to get there.
Give the authorities as many facts as possible, so their activities are fact-based, and not "soft." DNA testing did this, making criminal justice more accurate as a result. I suspect that dashboard cameras have had the same effect. Also, the behavior of the police would have to improve if they knew they were possibly filmed from above on every call.
Of course, the problem is one of trust. How do we know that they are not recording all the time? This is what local political activism is all about. Limit the number of cameras. Pass local laws limiting the use to hot pursuit or locations of current dispatch. Remember -- lobbying the locals is relatively cheap and easy. (And if you'd rather not let the police have aerial cameras at all -- lobby for that. Participation is good.)
I was stationed at Edwards Air Force Base from 2001 - 2003. After the burgs of Rosamond, Mojave and the tragic-comedy of California City, Lancaster-Palmdale was the closest form of civilization to the base - just a 35-mile drive from the back gate!
While there I formed the theory that Lancaster was used as a checkpoint during the Okie migration of the Great Depression (see "The Grapes of Wrath" for further details). If you were halfway decent-looking, you were allowed to cross the San Gabriel mountains. If you were a freak of nature, you stayed in Lancaster.
Seriously - I never saw so many ugly people in one place in my life.
What?
Lancaster is a sprawling desert crap hole 'ex-urb' of LA in the middle of the Antelope Valley and has gotten progressively, socially worse over the years. I should know, I lived there for 10 years. Graduated High School there 20 years ago. What we need to do is invest this surveillance money in education, jobs, training, social services, etc. Keeping your citizens smart, happy, and working is the best way to deter crime, IMHO. Not some spy plane.
... is of little use unless you know precisely where to point it, eh? Is it also clairvoyant, or can it pick up a "criminal vibe" so that it knows where to zoom in?
If not, it will not help catch the smart crooks. All it might do is help catch the dumb ones, who are inevitably gonna get nabbed anyway because they're dumb and are in the wrong line of work for dumb people.
This will bring on nudity amongst criminals. When this technology first is activated, a lot of robberies and muggings that "could" have been caught on camera will be missed because after many boring hours and days, the pilot(s) will start focusing on the occasional naked lady sunbathing (it IS southern California!). Even better will be a nudist colony, or the occasional nude tryst (this thing can see at night, right!). I can see the pilots "sharing" their best shots!
Then, when the sh*t hits the fan and the public becomes aware of all this peeping, for political reasons, the camera technology will have to be **expensively** upgraded to automatically blank out nude people.
Then, robbers will catch on, and start plying their trade in the Nude! Come on, you know I'm right!
I am the eye in the sky
Looking at you
I can read your mind
I am the maker of rules
Dealing with fools
I can cheat you blind
And I don't need to see any more
To know that
I can read your mind.
If any place in southern California needs military surveillance technology to crack down on crime, its Lancaster. One of the trends that took place in the early 21st century was that large numbers of people from South Central moved out to Lancaster and Palmdale. They were drawn by the affordable housing and the hope for a new start. Unfortunately they took all of their ghetto children and relatives with them, and now Palmdale is nick named Pompton to reflect its characteristic similarities to everything bad about Compton. The tax revenues in those cities are very low and consequently the police departments are small and under funded. It's a good place to be if you're a gangster and a bad place to be if you're just about anyone else.
When I see people on here decrying surveillance technology, I wonder if they've ever lived in borderline neighborhoods. I live in Long Beach, and it isn't by any means a full fledged, crime ridden neighborhood like Watts, but it has its fair share of property crime and other crimes of opportunity. One of the nicer neighborhoods that I used to live in just put up cameras because the residents were sick of having their cars and homes broken into. The cameras are accessible by the police department. To nobody's surprise, crime has gone down in the neighborhood.
Its easy to live in the comfort of a place like South Orange County, or any other affluent suburb and moan on internet about the evils of big brother surveillance technology. Where the police already have everything under control and you can safely walk down the street at night, there probably isn't a need for a network of cameras blanketing the city. On the other hand, in places that are borderline, where there aren't enough police to be everywhere and there are good sized populations of convicted criminals on probation and parole, a simple technology like security cameras can make a difference.
Well, let's see, so far citizens are unanimously in favor of:
Automated Speed Cameras
Red Light Cameras
Neighborhood Cameras (ala UK)
Cameras in the classrooms of elementary schools
No they aren't. Not all of them.
Show me one study where people are in favor of automated speed or red light cameras. There are none, they are hated - they go up because they are revenue producers and are pushed by the companies that sell them (and collect some of the revenue).
There's a huge difference between those things, and street cameras or the camera mentioned in the article and that is - no automated actions are taken as a result of these cameras being in operation. I don't care what cameras are out in public, as long as there are humans somewhere in the chain deciding what to do based on what is seen. In reality most these cameras are not even monitored in realtime, they are only brought out of a dormant state as a tool to address a current situation (for the eye in the sky thing it might be a diver fleeing from a traffic stop).
The red light/speeding cameras just automatically issue fines with no consideration of context or compassion. If a camera mounted on the plane sent down a hellfire missile at someone it thought was doing a drug deal based on AI recognizing a dime bag, I'd have a problem with that too.
I welcome cameras everywhere because I understand they are just tools, and because given the shaky nature of people's recollections I would rather have the truth recorded than have to be deduced.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
'You never know when you are being watched or followed. It would be stupid to commit a crime. You see it with such detail,'
London (aka New Panopticon City) crime stats say you are a fool, Mr. Mayor.
The blackmail possibilities are endless. Not everything embarrassing is illegal, but they can still be used for fundraising!
Just think of all the budgets that could be balanced. Or, you know, pockets lined.
It was kind of inevitable, but I'd hoped it would arrive later.
Why not hire Arnie Pie and Kent Brockman of channel 6 news of 'Eye in the Sky' with Arnie Pie fame!
If cameras prevented crime, there would be no such thing as a corrupt politician.
It's not just companies selling snake oil that's creating these problems, or politicians who don't give a damn about privacy. The third problem is: selfish, short-sighted, self-centered conservatives. You know, the ones always demanding tax cuts and that rates go up by not so much as a dime, so cities, counties, and states are forced to look towards other sources of revenue to pay for basic services.
Like raising sin taxes on cigarettes, alcohol, and traffic violations.
So, all you conservatives that hate red light cameras AND vote against any and all taxes, take your rage out on the nearest mirror until you learn that low taxes have high costs.
Shouldn't the representatives of my country (US for me too) fscking ASK the constituents if they want these damned things in the first place, rather than listen to the pitch by the private companies operating these systems (red light for sure, I think maybe the speed cameras too) telling them how much revenue they will bring in???
And how do the people in your area vote on your state and local taxes? Do you only vote for tax cutting politicians and no on any ballot measures to raise sales/property taxes? If the answer is "yes" to either of these questions, you have found the answer for why politicians are so quick to install red light/speed cameras: it's a way to raise revenues without raising taxes.
If they spent that time and money making their cops do their jobs better, and commit less of their own crimes (bribery, brutality, neglect), they'd get a more crime reduction, more public safety, more public trust, and for a lot smaller budget.
They should start with 100% cop surveillance. Every cop gets 100% of their time on-duty (minus their protected bathroom breaks, when their partner logs their removing their badge for the duration) recorded in 360-degree video. Then, instead of typing paperwork, they can just voice-annotate their video records, on fast-forward to the important parts. All the good cops will have easier jobs, especially when sending the videos as evidence instead of testifying in most cases (and seeing their word supported by video). The bad cops will have a harder time. And the police department will still get to play with expensive hi-tech toys, if not quite the science-fiction ones that cost more and do less, while violating our privacy rights.
--
make install -not war
Why don't they invest this money in hiring new cops?
1. Employment
2. good Economy
3. Everybody happy.
-- It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it. -- Aristotle
At what point is it better to have some crime? How fucking safe do people need to be? Close cover before striking, and never leave the house without a full face helmet. Big brother all around.
We already have this in Manchester, England:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/35164707@N07/3516169162/
As do many British cities.
Oh look, there's a rape machine I'll go outside if it looks the other way; You wouldn't believe the things they do...
Low taxes are not a problem for real conservatives because they're also advocating decreased spending and fiscal responsibility as well. The problem is when you advocate spending programs with no way to pay for them - like say a big ass war or two. Those "conservatives" should be shot. I feel perfectly fine advocating tax cuts as at the same time I don't want half the stuff we're getting taxed for in the first place.
I have the right to commit crimes in privacy! It's bad enough that people lock their houses when they leave, but this is going to make my work all the harder. Shit, now i'm going have to switch cars and double back through tunnels. Won't somebody PLEASE think of the criminals!
Thank goodness this system wasn't in place after I robbed that 7-11. They might have tracked me to my own home. What kind of country do we live in where "cops" can make me accountable for my actions? Not any kind of country I want to live in.
And these speed cameras are infringing on my God given right to go as fast as my car's engine will take me. Now I have worry about being watched as I do 50 in the suburbs. If some kid runs out in front of me, he'll learn his lesson, and he won't do it again. Damn nanny state expect us to watch out for everyone. Who's watching out for us???
I shouted fire in a crowded movie theater and they had the nerve to arrest ME for using my right to free speech. No one was in any danger, as there wasn't a fire. I was just yanking their chains. What a bunch of humorless wussies we've become.
Just the other day some cop told me I shouldn't drive while using my cell phone. I said, "I can handle doing two things at once" and he whined about 'putting other drivers and pedestrians at risk'.
There I am going to visit my pal Jim. And THEY'RE watching me. Why do they care that I'm visiting Jim?You know why they're doing all this? Because they're onto me. They know how important I am. I know the truth, man. Of the millions of people in my area, they're watching ME. They have nothing better to do! I'm the center of the damn universe and they know it. I'm just trying to commit my crimes in peace. Is that so wrong?
Utilizing the synergization of benchmark e-solutions to pre-workaround action items!
A lot of police departments want these new toys, and there are a lot of companies making these things. Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) are already used for border patrol. One of these border patrol UAVs (a Predator B) crashed in 2006. Safety concerns + excessive surveillance concerns = fun for the whole family.
I've been looking into this stuff because my hometown is trying to get permission for this too. The one my hometown is testing out is a helicopter equipped with a regular camera and an infrared camera. They can't fly it over populated areas yet.
Regulatory thing: The FAA's current view of UAVs is that they can't be used over populated areas. Period. BUT, you guys in Houston and Miami should probably look up and wave every now and then, because the Houston and Miami area police departments got clearance from the FAA to fly their UAVs over these urban areas. The FAA isn't planning on revising their policy on UAV use in civilian airspace until at least 2010, but Houston and Miami are basically test areas to help them figure out what sort of regulations would be needed. You guys feel safer yet?
I guess that these officials in Lancaster never heard of a little area of Riverside, CA called Casa Blanca. They tried to shoot down a police helicopter there. They'd start a Death Pool on a little unmanned drone flying around a neighborhood. I can't imagine that Lancaster villains are very much less vicious, and if anyone actually flies a Cessna on this task, I hope they have a lot of evasion experience.
seems like a good idea as long as they don't start trying to crack down on non-violent non-hurtful "crimes" such as marijuana smoking.