-- forwarded message -- Path: wmich-news!gumby!newspump.wustl.edu!fas-news.harvard.edu!oitnews.harvard.edu!rutgers!usenet.logical.net!news-out.internetmci.com!infeed1.internetmci.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!uwm.edu!computer-privacy-request From: David Alexander <davea@caplin.demon.co.uk> Newsgroups: comp.society.privacy Subject: Re: CCTV Cameras in Britain Date: 14 Jul 1997 16:05:55 GMT Organization: Computer Privacy Digest Lines: 71 Sender: comp-privacy@uwm.edu Approved: comp-privacy@uwm.edu Message-ID: <comp-privacy11.3.12@cs.uwm.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: 129.89.2.6 X-Original-Submission-Date: 10 Jul 1997 11:33:18 +0100 X-Submissions-To: comp-privacy@uwm.edu X-Administrivia-To: comp-privacy-request@uwm.edu X-Computer-Privacy-Digest: Volume 11, Issue 003, Message 12 of 16 X-Auth: PGPMoose V1.1 PGP comp.society.privacy iQBFAwUBM8oxCjNf3+97dK2NAQF46gF/RZ6tN/V6TQwOCyyAzJeCTngaqMu4IW9h Wm81iJFNAWYI59zJGoRVjd+b9u3TefKX =im9q Originator: levine@blatz.cs.uwm.edu Xref: wmich-news comp.society.privacy:424 I read with interest the comments about CCTV cameras that were in the last 2 mailings. I note that Steve does not live in the UK, and I would like to present a residents' view of these cameras. Privacy International says that in Britain, there are an estimated 300,000 CCTV surveillance cameras in public areas, housing estates, car parks, public facilities, phone booths, vending machines, buses, trains, taxis, alongside motorways and inside Automatic Teller (ATM) Machines. Originally installed to deter burglary, assault and car [...] Do we try to protect Democratic freedoms by legislating safeguards against the abuse of private data? Must we accept that the mightiest individuals and institutions cannot be held accountable, and there is no use in trying? Or do we simply acquiesce, and accept that privacy is an outdated concept when cheap technology makes everyone vulnerable, wolves and lambs alike? The choices are not easy, but in the words of David Brin, "asking questions can be a good first step". Yes, there are many cameras, and more going up all the time. The vast majority of the population is glad that these cameras are being introduced. Ordinary crime has been reduced greatly in those areas (proven fact) where the cameras are in use. We also have a big problem with Terrorism by the Provisional IRA over here, and the same cameras have been instrumental in the foiling of numerous terrorist operations and capture of those responsible for others (we have had 3 bombs detonated in England larger than the one at Oklahoma in the last 3 years). A very popular and effective program on UK TV is called 'Crimewatch' where video footage, from these cameras, of crimes and suspects is shown not for sensationalism and ratings but in order to ask for help identifying the perpetrators. It is very effective and crimes featured have a very high clear-up rate. One of the instruments needed to thwart such surveillence is the adoption of 'masks' which are socially acceptable for public use. Ideally they should all look alike, sort of something out of The Prisoner. Once a certain threshold of adoption has been passed the only option for law enforcement will be to remove the offending devices or declare maks illegal for public use (a real stretch for civil liberties). Yeah, right, get real. The only reason you might want to avoid being identified is if you have something to hide. Wearing a mask is only going to draw attention to you, and if you think everyone is suddenly going to start wearing masks...like I said in paragarph one, most people over here welcome the cameras. Please don't misinterpret my motives. I would be the first to celebrate if no threat to privacy existed. Unfortunately there are immoral, irresponsible and downright antisocial (not to mention the psychologically unsound) people who will not abide by the law, or to what we regard as social norms and persist in infringing our rights. As long as those people exist, and no better way of deterring and tracking them down after the (often tragic) offence has been committed, then we need such laws and technology. I would feel very ashamed if my attempts to protect my rights caused the death of innocent people because security against those who are irresponsible had to be drastically cut back. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ David Alexander AIX Support Professional V3 & V4, SP Certified Technical Manager Caplin Cybernetics Corporation E-mail: davea@caplin.com Windmill Business Village Tel: 01932 778172 Brooklands Close, Sunbury-on-Thames Fax: 01932 779606 Middlesex TW16 7DY, England ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ -- end of forwarded message --