Hey, there! Log in / Register
BPD looks to tie private cameras into its surveillance network
Support Universal Hub
Help keep Universal Hub going. If you like what we're up to and want to help out, please consider a (completely non-deductible) contribution.
Comments
What would Ben say?
Benjamin Franklin one said something to the effect "Those that give up essential liberty,to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty or safety."
This is giving up "essential liberty"?
Serious question.
Franklin was talking about taxes, not privacy.
https://www.npr.org/2015/03/02/390245038/ben-franklins-famous-liberty-sa...
If it is done the right way....
I think it is a good thing.
Have a civilian group (or everyone in the public) access to the same system. If there is a crime and the police want to "freeze" the footage, get a warrant.
I always thought a large private company (thinking insurance) might have the resources to pay for cameras themselves in public places. What if they charged the government for public footage? At least with proper oversight, the public would be able to control the surveillance, not some corporation.
Mr. Security Theater
Guess who makes a lot of money off this creepy crap.
Who would make money?
Seriously, cost isn't really an issue for something like this and security theater has nothing to do with it, the purpose isn't to pretend to make people feel safe, people aren't even going to know about it, that is the whole problem with surveillence in the first place.
Security Box Office
Comcast, Amazon/Ring, Google/Nest. They make money off this crap.
Oh they could make money...
but why is that in a response to my point? And what does security theater have to do with it?
Test it on the State Police Details first
Apparently no shortage of “irregularities” there - other than that not interested in any expansion of surveillance of citizens -
I like this, honest legal question though
Could this help with traffic enforcement?
I'll use my street in Brighton as an example, I've been hit by a car there that rolled through a stop sign, could video captured of this be used against the motorist? I know BPD can't patrol each and every crosswalk in the city but is there any legal precedent that would allow for review of video at intersections to issue tickets? Could it be citizens submit apparent violations and the police review?
I was thinking about this after almost getting run over yesterday crossing Canal St., another motorist rolling through a stop sign. I mean I just can't see it working, the logistics and due process concerns would be too great but I dunno, there has to be some way to hold motorists accountable.
And don't get me started about tracking all those unlicensed bikes.
Depends how serious the accident is.
But yes, in crashes that involve serious injury, the police will review private security footage and can issue citations based on this footage.
If they don't do it or say it isn't serious enough to investigate, you can do it yourself, send the footage to your insurance company. I guess you could also file your own court complaint but you might not benefit if the other person is found responsible because that doesn't get you anything either. Unless you just want to see them cited?
There are also registry hearings which serve the same function but I am not 100% sure on either.
Ya no thank you
This isn't China or the UK.
I immediately stopped reading
I immediately stopped reading the story after it cited Mark Wahlberg's "composite" character from Patriots Day as an example of anything.
You need to re-read that section
The Dig wasn't using that as an example - it was the cop who proposed the idea who brought it up.
Seriously?
A cop cited this?
What really happened was that an alert citizen - albeit one with legs blown off - was the one who identified the bombers and made it so that they could focus in on them.
Look, just read the thing
He cited it as an example of what not to do.
But don't take it from me - read the article. It's really not that long.
What ever happened to getting
What ever happened to getting a Warrant?
You don't need a warrant if someone offers you the camera.
If the police ask you to view your camera footage and you say no, that is the end of it.
Anything that will help solve
Anything that will help solve crimes faster and deliver justice is welcome.
Buddy
Watch 'Robocop' and get back me on this take.
Robocop? Try Judge Dread!
Robocop? Try Judge Dread!
anything, huh...
you sure about that?
I think it makes sense for
I think it makes sense for the BPD to have a database of private cameras, their locations, who is responsible for them, how long they keep footage for, and who to contact if they would like to ask for footage. I do NOT think BPD should under any circumstances have direct access to them.
Can’t get the cops to wear body cams
But it’s okay to film us - what’s next National IDs - “Show me your papers!”
I don't get why the cops would want this
Sounds like a way to cut staff to me.
The cops don't want it....
cuts on the overtime as well in theory.
Sometimes it is encouraged to
Sometimes it is encouraged to register your cameras with the police in case there is a crime near you then they are aware you may have video evidence. Cops are not trying to spy on us Adam. Take of your tin foil hat and relax Adam Snowden...
Did you actually read the article?
Oh, wait, I bet you're against the idea of body cameras, too.
Yes, every day brings new evidence that Boston cops do their job well, especially as compared to cops in other places.
But that doesn't mean people might not get at least concerned enough to question the idea of the police gathering vast amounts of video from across the city.
I am for body cameras.
I am for body cameras. Thanks.
RTFA
Read the article. This isn't what they want. They want to use private cameras for surveillance.
Its a big word, surveillance. You might want to look that up.
Did you read the article?
the Dig mentions that the problem is that it could lead to surveillance, not the police. Local police don't really benefit from the surveillance you are taking about, and they don't mention it in the article.
From the article...
BPD has voiced a mild desire to use private security cameras to expand real-time monitoring.
It's not just BPD who will effectively have access
It's the NSA, FBI, DHS, INS, DEA, CBP, corrupt politicians, and everyone else with power.
Who is representing the people, in achieving a balance between the BPD and others understandably wanting more powerful tools, and people not wanting to end up in a totalitarian nightmare?
We'll get an Orwellian camera surveillance network as a complement to warrantless access of everyone in power to anyone's social media accounts:
https://www.reddit.com/r/technology/comments/867jo1/the_cloud_act_would_...
Ever wonder
Why Boston police are so against "BODY CAMERA'S" being worn by officers ? Why is the first police force in the Nation, the Last to wear body cameras ? I'll tell you why, because they would have to change there whole way of working, talking ruffing people up swearing , yelling, pulling guns out on blacks on a regular basis. And no more telling people while there gun is to there head " I'll blow your F#cking brains out" while screaming and yelling to TRY an intimidate Citizens. No body camera but they wanna use private cameras. If they had body cameras they would no longer need to pull out there cell phones to record while there being recorded.