Slashdot Mirror
California Mayors Demand Surveillance Cams On Crime-Ridden Highways (arstechnica.com)
An anonymous reader shares an Ars Technica report: The 28 shootings along a 10-mile stretch of San Francisco-area highway over the past six months have led mayors of the adjacent cities to declare that these "murderous activities" have reached "crisis proportions." Four people have been killed and dozens injured. These five mayors want California Gov. Jerry Brown to fund surveillance cameras along all the on and off ramps of Interstate 80 and Highway 4 along the cities of El Cerrito, Hercules, Richmond, San Pablo, and Pinole.
Withholding federal funding for "sanctuary cities"?
Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
I see no problem with surveillance cameras on public roads. There is no expectation of privacy there, and there's a legitimate reason for the cameras to be there. Lots of highways have cameras, if nothing else to monitor road conditions. This isn't news for nerds, stuff that matters. It's a non-issue.
The cameras won't have enough sensitivity to produce usable images. The perps are likely on foot . These places are "bad neighborhoods". Your welfare dollars at work.
Putting cameras on I-80 may deter shootings on the highway but I'm guessing the bullets will start pop-pop-popping up somewhere else.
Surveillance Cams On Crime-Ridden Highways
That means they're going to do something about civil forfeiture, right?
The perps are likely on foot .
That should make them easier to spot when they climb the sound walls to get a shot at the freeway.
How about doing some real detective work and finding the real reason why people are doing the shootings? Putting up cameras will just making finding the people responsible easier after the fact. Sure the article says the shootings may be gang related but I find it may be hard to believe that the gangs are just going out to the highway and taking random pot shots. One would hope that after 28 shootings the police would be a lot more proactive but alas that seems to be too much to ask today.
You think these gangs are shooting each over pot?
Look it put. All statistic point out that illegals have a lower crime rate than naturally born American. So what would really effectively lowering funding for sanctuary cities do ? If anything if illegals are replaced by naturally born American in those cities, then crime rate would rise. The sad truth is that if you want to lower crime rate, then you better look at program which will help reintegration of ex-con and programs which helps the local find better paid job above minimum wage.
C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
visit randi.org
There were cameras installed in New Hampshire and the people became incensed when they learned about the actions of bureaucrats. We got new legislation passed which banned cameras. That is government ones. They've even been taken down now.
If you don't want to live under an authoritarian hell hell hole dictatorship we have to stop putting up with this BS. If you think we can live without abusive police and violence against the people come to New Hampshire. Liberty-minded people are making a home here and we've got thousands of migrants to the cause already. I moved in March and there are lots of people coming. All over southern New Hampshire there are activist centers and meet ups multiple times a week. Even nightly.
We're pushing for legalization of weed, elimination of things like drivers licenses, vehicular registration, license plates (of which none of these things will make us any safer and are more or less just another tax and means of control, we already don't require car insurance in NH and the world hasn't ended), reduction of or elimination of police (there are better systems we're already developing to deal with threats and other matters, see cell 411), tax payer funded public schools (not that we are against assisting those in need, but we don't need the government doing that), pro-gun (hardly conservative), pro-gay (against the concept of state marriage, but otherwise supporting equal rights for gays to marry, etc), etc.
Agreed -- surveillance cameras the governments buy nearly always has horrible resolution they get the cheapest cameras (so they can pocket some of the money) because here are no quality standards.
She says that it's apparently gang initiation stuff (or perhaps that's what the media is telling her) but it doesn't sound particularly nice. A lot of "shoot the random person from the overpass, to prove you're gangster"
Who knows what the truth is but they need to nail the people doing it.
My educated guess is that these gangs already have access to all the pot they want.
It's gangs. Surveillance is not the answer. Pot legalization will take *some* of the revenue from the gangs, but not all. Also, if alcohol prohibition is our guide, the gangs won't just leave or turn legit. They'll actually get worse as they compete for their slice of a smaller vice pie, and we can't legalize all vice such as human traffic and sexual abuse of minors.
You see gang activity all over California. In my neck of the woods, there's a tag war of Nortenos vs. Surenos. I have taken to calling these tags "Trump campaign signs".
Your country probaly dosen't have a vast gulag prison system, over 2 million people behind bars, or police that dress in heavy body armor, carry big and powerful guns, and burst in homes (no knock) and kill children because they raided the wrong house two doors down from the person growing pot or they were acting on an anonymous "tip". I don't trust the US gov't enough for me to believe they should have these kinds of toys.
probaly started with some ransom psycho and now they got copycat psychoes to deal with. Gangs usualy sell drugs, or shoot rivals/people that crossed them, or those believed to be a fake (wearing gang paraphanelia when not in the gang) or a snitch, not sit on the side of the freeway randomly shooting people.
Could he be in Europe? Or maybe the United States, Canada or even Latin America? Asia, Africa or maybe in Antartica? Think and think this through
You think these gangs are shooting each over pot?
No, but a joint should help calm people down. I have never seen a stoner "rage" about anything.
But these shootings are not about "road rage" anyway. They are targeted gang shootings. Innocent people are caught in the crossfire, but they are not the intended targets.
There are a lot of myths about gangs, and one of them is that they are needlessly violent toward the general public. That is nonsense. They are business enterprises, and nearly all their violence is directed at competitors.
This has been a more recent problem, and it IS gang related. Some relevant information about the problem... there are 2 feuding gangs, one from Richmond, and another from Vallejo that are having some kind of feud between each other (don't know which specific gangs). The corridor of the freeway and towns mentioned are for the most part, all the towns in the stretch between these two locations. El Cerrito is just West of Richmond, and if you travel east, there is Richmond, San Pablo, El Sobrante, Pinole, Hercules, Rodeo, Crocket, and then the bridge with Vallejo on the other side. The majority of these shootings are happening mostly at night, not during normal driving hours and almost all of them have been in this specific corridor (with a couple outliers happening near Berkeley).
These are NOT people on foot taking pot-shots at passing cars or anything of the like. These are mostly targeted, and are between multiple cars on the road, not on foot, so the perpetrators shoot and then just drive away and get off the freeway down the road. In some of these cases, one gang will in Richmond will spot a rival gang member on their turf, and chase/follow them, until the rival members gets on the freeway toward vallejo and the ensuing shooting occurs on the freeway. I think most of the shootings that I'm aware of, have happened on the East bound side, which indicates travel from Richmond toward Vallejo.
I've also heard rumors that one of the reasons the shootings have moved to the freeways, and the 2 gangs are attacking there is because the freeway does not have any "Shot-Spotter" system installed, which some of these cities in that corridor of the freeway do. I don't know if this is accurate, but it does make some sense. So in other words, if one gang intends to attack another gang IN Richmond, the shot-spotter system would detect it and they have a more likely chance of getting caught. If they follow the person onto the freeway, then open fire on them, then the Shot-Spotter systems are useless. So this could already be a case of one "safety system" pushing the violence out of the area where it has naturally occurred in the past, to a new area that does not have the same "safety system". So there is the real possibility that putting some system in place on the freeway will just push it somewhere else, maybe a worse place (for those not involved).
Trump Tower?
Game: Player 'Donald J Trump' now has AI skill level 'experimental'.
I would say that these cameras do far less to prevent a crime before it occurs than they do to catch and convict the perp after the damage is done assuming that the video footage is clear enough that a jury of 12 morons can make it out.
It's the same with far too many laws and illustrates the problem with politicians trying to do anything about crime. All they care about is being able to say that they did something as opposed to nothing therefore they should be reelected. There are already plenty of simple methods that would work and they usually involve increased police patrols.
We have been having these shooting on our expressways in Chicago for the past 5 months. This is a trend. Gangs follow cars onto the highway, and shoot, and the getaway is easy vs. doing it on the side streets in the neighborhood.
Sumdumass rightfully calls out what from this day forward will be known as "the straw-penis" argument!
Despite California having some of the most Draconian gun control law in the US, their murder rate is still higher than Western states with far fewer gun laws: OR, WA, UT, MT, WY. ND, SD, CO and TX and they are closely tied with AZ. So it is becoming clear with this move that they are want to disarm the citizens and promote the Bog-Brother State, so It isn't about guns, it is about the state versus liberty after all.
That is probably why they want cameras at the on-ramps.
This is for more money for traffic control in the name of crime prevention? That figures.
Surveillance is not going to stop road rage.
No, but marijuana legalization should help. We'll see what happens after November 8th.
Wishful thinking that a majority can legalize grass.
Washington state voted that way 4 years ago, and it hasn't shown up yet.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Few weeks ago they argued over store locations, no results; so are now taking a few months to renew an approach - it's endless foot dragging.
You are intentionally misconstruing the argument or intentionally misstating the difference between the criminal those statistic tracks and illegally being in the US, whichever you should never have been modded insightful. They are illegal and criminal for immigration laws. But looking at violent and petty crime, theft, murder, rape, drug trafficking, prostitution and all that jazz which really count when speaking of a tract of land with too many shooting they have lower rate than the average American. You may not LIKE that fact , and it is certainly an inconvenient fact for many people especially those liking trumps, but it stays a statistical verifiable fact.
C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
visit randi.org
Hidden cams surely work out better than conspicuous cams. Making crime a worse and worse path for an individual is a great way to reduce crime in the long term. And we need those cams in the finest neighborhoods as well as in the ghetto areas. Those cams have two benefits. First they can lead to the arrest of the guilty . Next they can protect people from incorrect arrests. A good cam system can provide your location at a certain time and many times the accused is no where near the crime site. And then there are the lives and property saved by making crime next to impossible.
Washington state voted that way 4 years ago, and it hasn't shown up yet.
I guess you're not from around here? There are three recreational marijuana stores within just a few miles of my office. In Washington State. They've been open and doing business for months.
Wishful thinking that a majority can legalize grass.
Shit, you need to go tell those merry fuckers in Colorado. They've been happily smoking legal recreational weed for a couple years now. Crime is down and Denver is booming.
Man, you really need that seminar!