” Well… I have no problem with it… I haven’t anything to hide” said the girl whose hair was white with peroxide, had those ridiculous massive dark sunglasses which covers all one’s face and make- up so thick I could have sworn it was made in a cement mixer. She smiled into the camera, she was on TV being interviewed! She was referring to CCTV.
CCTV is installed in many areas in Canberra. The reason why I talk of this subject is because I recently saw a report on how a local council in the UK have been using their CCTV to fine people for small misdemeanours (think dog’s droppings, rubbish, etc).
The CCTV powers were granted to local councils for the purpose of “terrorism and policing “. Surprise, surprise. As is popular with most western democracies of our age, the meaning of the words “terrorism and policing” are interpreted broadly, very broadly (but the definition of “torture” is narrowly interpreted, just ask Mr Cheney & Co).
The problem with CCTV (apart from the whole privacy issue) is that it operates retrospectively. It doesn’t prevent the crime, it MAY assist in the apprehension of the “criminal” post-crime. “But”, people argued on TV, “it is a deterrent for criminals”. I would argue that it is as much of a deterrent as capital punishment is to murder (American states with the death penalty often have much higher rates of murder than those who don’t ). Plus, any self-respecting criminal / terrorist (and I use that term unwillingly) would factor in CCTV into the criminal equation. All you need is a hoodie and a hat, or a balaclava or two and you are no longer recognisable.
So the apparent paradox is this: CCTV’s original purpose was to deter and assist with the apprehension of serious crime… but, anyone who is serious enough can remain undetectable, so what good is it for? Catching your law abiding Mr Smith’s dog doing its business in the bush.
I have nothing to hide, but I am unquestionably against my movements being recorded by anyone. As one person pointed out to me… “they could deter paedophiles and incest if they put cameras in everyone’s houses”… If you had nothing to hide, you would agree, wouldn’t you? I think not. Put all that wasted millions into programs that assist in the real cause of crime, social inequality and exclusion….
“Say Cheese”
Posted by Flappy in Social Commentary on June 26th, 2008
” Well… I have no problem with it… I haven’t anything to hide” said the girl whose hair was white with peroxide, had those ridiculous massive dark sunglasses which covers all one’s face and make- up so thick I could have sworn it was made in a cement mixer. She smiled into the camera, she was on TV being interviewed! She was referring to CCTV.
CCTV is installed in many areas in Canberra. The reason why I talk of this subject is because I recently saw a report on how a local council in the UK have been using their CCTV to fine people for small misdemeanours (think dog’s droppings, rubbish, etc).
The CCTV powers were granted to local councils for the purpose of “terrorism and policing “. Surprise, surprise. As is popular with most western democracies of our age, the meaning of the words “terrorism and policing” are interpreted broadly, very broadly (but the definition of “torture” is narrowly interpreted, just ask Mr Cheney & Co).
The problem with CCTV (apart from the whole privacy issue) is that it operates retrospectively. It doesn’t prevent the crime, it MAY assist in the apprehension of the “criminal” post-crime. “But”, people argued on TV, “it is a deterrent for criminals”. I would argue that it is as much of a deterrent as capital punishment is to murder (American states with the death penalty often have much higher rates of murder than those who don’t ). Plus, any self-respecting criminal / terrorist (and I use that term unwillingly) would factor in CCTV into the criminal equation. All you need is a hoodie and a hat, or a balaclava or two and you are no longer recognisable.
So the apparent paradox is this: CCTV’s original purpose was to deter and assist with the apprehension of serious crime… but, anyone who is serious enough can remain undetectable, so what good is it for? Catching your law abiding Mr Smith’s dog doing its business in the bush.
I have nothing to hide, but I am unquestionably against my movements being recorded by anyone. As one person pointed out to me… “they could deter paedophiles and incest if they put cameras in everyone’s houses”… If you had nothing to hide, you would agree, wouldn’t you? I think not. Put all that wasted millions into programs that assist in the real cause of crime, social inequality and exclusion….
CCTV, terrorism
No Comments