Ummagumma66
Active Member
it was good that they caught this guy, but I'm not a huge fan of be watched all the time, no matter what the reason for it, although I know its here to stay and cameras will only become more plentiful in the near future....
|
|
|
New Cameras Catch Murderer
- Thread starter unimaginative2
- Start date
EnviroTO
Senior Member
Most cameras are not monitored but are taped and within days deleted/overwritten. They exist for solving crimes, not for dispatching.
CDL.TO
Moderator
Students Accidentally Catch Cyclist Assault On Tape
Tuesday May 8, 2007
CityTV Link
A group of students on a field trip in Toronto investigating the pros and cons of public surveillance cameras ended up catching a slice of big city street hostility on their own cameras Tuesday.
The Grade 12 students caught a road rage incident between a driver and a cyclist on tape, and could play a key rule in the meting out of justice after turning their evidence over to police.
The kids' mini-cam was pointed at the scene near Queen and Bay when the driver on four wheels got into a dispute with a cyclist on two. As the students watched in disbelief, they saw the motorist get out of his still idling car, approach the cyclist and punch him boldly in the face. He pushed the stunned bike owner onto the sidewalk where the assault appeared to continue for several more moments.
Apparently the driver was enraged that the cyclist, who lost a tooth in the attack, had stopped at a yellow light and blocked him from going through.
"I'm going to pray for that guy, you know, because why he did it, I don't know. Maybe he's sick. Maybe he needs help," bike rider Andre Sokol said after he was assaulted.
Allison Mann, the media teacher at Ursula Franklin Academy, was with her charges when the incident took place. "We're on a field trip with about 40 students and looking at public and private space in Toronto. It's ironic this happened this morning because each group had a video camera."
"Surveillance is a hot-button issue in the media, so one of the things we're looking at is the usefulness of cameras. So it's interesting that they caught this on tape," she adds.
Mann, who gets rave reviews from her pupils on "Rate My Teacher.com", claims she's proud her students kept rolling and capturing clear images of the incident. A copy of that tape is now in the possession of Toronto Police. It will eventually be used as evidence in court.
"Initially when the cop came over, he didn't look like he would have believed him," said Gabriele, one of the students on the trip. "With video footage, you can't deny it any more. It's right in front of your face."
Tuesday May 8, 2007
CityTV Link
A group of students on a field trip in Toronto investigating the pros and cons of public surveillance cameras ended up catching a slice of big city street hostility on their own cameras Tuesday.
The Grade 12 students caught a road rage incident between a driver and a cyclist on tape, and could play a key rule in the meting out of justice after turning their evidence over to police.
The kids' mini-cam was pointed at the scene near Queen and Bay when the driver on four wheels got into a dispute with a cyclist on two. As the students watched in disbelief, they saw the motorist get out of his still idling car, approach the cyclist and punch him boldly in the face. He pushed the stunned bike owner onto the sidewalk where the assault appeared to continue for several more moments.
Apparently the driver was enraged that the cyclist, who lost a tooth in the attack, had stopped at a yellow light and blocked him from going through.
"I'm going to pray for that guy, you know, because why he did it, I don't know. Maybe he's sick. Maybe he needs help," bike rider Andre Sokol said after he was assaulted.
Allison Mann, the media teacher at Ursula Franklin Academy, was with her charges when the incident took place. "We're on a field trip with about 40 students and looking at public and private space in Toronto. It's ironic this happened this morning because each group had a video camera."
"Surveillance is a hot-button issue in the media, so one of the things we're looking at is the usefulness of cameras. So it's interesting that they caught this on tape," she adds.
Mann, who gets rave reviews from her pupils on "Rate My Teacher.com", claims she's proud her students kept rolling and capturing clear images of the incident. A copy of that tape is now in the possession of Toronto Police. It will eventually be used as evidence in court.
"Initially when the cop came over, he didn't look like he would have believed him," said Gabriele, one of the students on the trip. "With video footage, you can't deny it any more. It's right in front of your face."
BuildTO
Active Member
Despite the excessive underlining in the article, I'm still waiting for an explanation of the logic behind your stance. I'm open to change my attitude if you can convince me you have a logical, rational argument, but I haven't heard it yet. The article argues that cameras do not deter crime. But neither would a greater number of police officers. (Twice the number of officers in this city would not have put one in the Xerox Centre stairwell.)
What I find important is that more criminals are being caught, and this is where the cameras cannot be beaten. The cameras in the new program are not being monitored live, but rather used after an incident. If that system comes to be abused, I think we need to address that when the time comes.
The George Orwell hyperbole I find irrelevant. The cameras are not within our homes, so I don't understand the charter issue.
Urban Shocker
Doyenne
If the police suggested a foot-in-the-door pilot project to do precisely that, there would probably be enough "I've got nothing to hide" types to allow them to get away with it.
Observer Walt
Senior Member
^ US, isn't that what has already happened in three or four "test" locations? The worth of cameras, in selected locations and within reasonable limits, has already been demonstrated.
As previously mentioned, there is admittedly a potential for this to be expanded to oppressive dimensions. I would see no reason for cameras in most residential districts, quiet neighbourhood parks, etc. (shades of "1984" really do come to mind). But we are nowhere near that level of surveillance, and I don't think it's likely. We have a strong tradition of civil libertarianism in this country, which would result in opposition to any over-the-top proposals.
As previously mentioned, there is admittedly a potential for this to be expanded to oppressive dimensions. I would see no reason for cameras in most residential districts, quiet neighbourhood parks, etc. (shades of "1984" really do come to mind). But we are nowhere near that level of surveillance, and I don't think it's likely. We have a strong tradition of civil libertarianism in this country, which would result in opposition to any over-the-top proposals.
Urban Shocker
Doyenne
We're in an over-the-top world. The public wants intrusions. Reality TV intrusions make stars out of them. They get their 15 minutes that way. People will probably pay for it. The authorities will be more than happy to provide it.
H
Hydrogen
Guest
Is this a verifiable fact? Against what standards?
If you are going to speak of logic you should be able to see how your statement can't be supported.
ShonTron
Moderator
Member Bio
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2007
- Messages
- 12,577
- Reaction score
- 9,629
- Location
- Ward 13 - Toronto Centre
The best part? The assault-and-run motorist is a suspended cop! He turned himself in later yesterday afternoon.
The Mississauga Muse
Active Member
Hey there, BobBob
You wrote:
I don't think the issue with most privacy advocates is that they think they are being watched. It is that once the Big Brother infrastructure is in place, all you have is the trust that Big Brother isn't watching you.
What happens if we should lose that trust at some point?
I used to believe that all those cameras didn't matter --that I wasn't doing anything wrong. Then I learned. And then the only conclusion it's possible to reach is what you just wrote:
"the Big Brother infrastructure is in place"
I've SEEN "Big Brother". I even got HIM on video.
BIG PELCO BROTHER on GOOGLE
BIG PELCO BROTHER on YOUTUBE
You hit it dead-on.
"the Big Brother infrastructure is in place"
Ho yeah.
Signed,
The (Increasingly paranoid) Mississauga Muse
You wrote:
I don't think the issue with most privacy advocates is that they think they are being watched. It is that once the Big Brother infrastructure is in place, all you have is the trust that Big Brother isn't watching you.
What happens if we should lose that trust at some point?
I used to believe that all those cameras didn't matter --that I wasn't doing anything wrong. Then I learned. And then the only conclusion it's possible to reach is what you just wrote:
"the Big Brother infrastructure is in place"
I've SEEN "Big Brother". I even got HIM on video.
BIG PELCO BROTHER on GOOGLE
BIG PELCO BROTHER on YOUTUBE
You hit it dead-on.
"the Big Brother infrastructure is in place"
Ho yeah.
Signed,
The (Increasingly paranoid) Mississauga Muse
CDL.TO
Moderator
Wow. That really isn't surprising. At all. Police services seem to be in dire need of some major investment in anger management counsellors.
unimaginative2
Senior Member
I wonder what the chances are that he'd have been charged if the kids hadn't caught it on film.
The Mississauga Muse
Active Member
The new program that I assume you're talking about is that Toronto Police video surveillance program, right? I give the police credit. They went out of their way to inform the community beforehand and calm the fears.
Correct me if I'm wrong but I think the cameras even have the Police logo on them, right?
And yes, I read the article and those cams aren't being monitored --used only if there's a crime.
But the Number One important point about those cameras is they're Police Cams. Police with codes of conduct. And civilian oversight. And standards. And a tradition of serving the community.
On Monday, I was at Mississauga City Hall for Emergency Preparedness Day and got to see the surveillance camera system of Mississauga.
Creeped me right down to my boots. And those things are actively monitored. Complete with track balls.
And who does the monitoring? Why people who suddenly turn evasive when you ask them that question.
And who decides on where cams are stationed? Didn't want to tell you that either.
And what are the protocols for .... I didn't even get to ask the complete question before a supervisor reminded a guard that this is about "Emergency Preparedness Day" and to keep questions to that.
Also, please recall that in this thread there's talk about those highschool students doing a project on video surveillance and how they managed to get footage of a suspended police officer assaulting a bicyclist.
That's the other thing I have a problem with.
Security Guards who monitor those cams? Too many are people who could never make it as police officers. Police refer to them as "wannabes". Security Guards also come in a failed-police flavour. You know, those who got turfed out of the real service as screw-ups or yahoos?
Oh man if you only knew...
Pep'rJack wrote:
It's that people just don't know. Like stupid, oblivious me, they trust in government and say, "I don't have anything to hide".
It's not the cams that are scary. It's what's lookin' through the lens.
What happens though when the situation turns south? You suspect surveillance abuse and corruption. What then?
I think abuse is like any kind of Nasty. If you've reached a point where you've pondered its existence, "Hmmmm... I wonder if anyone's noticed that I've embezzled..." or "Hmmm, I wonder if this government is abusing its video surveillance"... or "Hmmm... gee, I wonder if there's any human right violations..."
There's a decent chance, yes.
As someone already pointed out so well.
The infrastructure is there --already in place --to monitor for crime or for terrorists. The same infrastructure can also monitor for future "shit-disturbers" --"shit-disturbers" defined by government.
Have you really looked around to see all the PELCOs about? I don't mean the ones that look like surveillance cameras. But the ones that look like tasteful lights hanging from the ceilings. Or outside, like part of a lamp post?
Or recessed to look like a possible emergency light.
Here's the other scary part and take this one from me. A person who believes (as I once did) that he has nothing to hide and therefore nothing to fear?
The scary thing is that no amount of convincing can rouse such a person out of that comfy-snooze. It's only when something ... happens.
And you experience for yourself precisely what's behind those government cameras. That's when you're set on a path fearing for others.
I have had one source of amusement in all of this video surveillance research I've been doing. The "watchers" do not like to be watched themselves.
An aside. Last weekend, I looked directly up into a Pelco --saw the actual camera just through the dome port.
And danged if I didn't see the blue-tinted lens and it moved --likely for close up. Someone working the trackball. Yep, quite the sight.
Have that --on video!
Signed,
The Mississauga Muse