On Wed, Feb 13, 2002 at 05:10:12PM +0000, Jim Dixon wrote:
| On Wed, 13 Feb 2002, Eric Murray wrote:
|
| > > > He said city officials had studied the British surveillance system,
| > > > which has more than 2 million cameras throughout the country, and
| > > > were "intrigued by that model."
| > > > <snip>
| > >
| > > Intrigued by the fact that cameras have almost NEVER helped to solved
| > > crimes in Britain, in spite of their ubituity?
| >
| > Intrigued by the fact that their citizens let them do it.
| > It's not about solving crimes against citizens.
|
| FWIW few people in the UK object to security cameras (although there is
| considerable dislike of traffic cameras). If anything people seem to feel
| reassured by the presence of cameras. I believe that the statistics
| suggest that introducing cameras into an area will move crime elsewhere.
| That is, crime falls locally but goes up in nearby camera-free areas.
That few people object is why the US used to have a bill of rights.
You don't need a bill of rights to protect popular people or ideas.
Adam
--
"It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once."
-Hume
