[selbaer]

here the differences between US and GB

enjoy the US

http://www.myfoxdc.com/myfox/pages/Home/Detail;jsessionid=C5EB861DC520F425C08BB9C1199CDDE5?contentId=6664418&version=2&locale=EN-US&layoutCode=VSTY&pageId=1.1.1&sflg=1

and here enjoy London, reported by a friend

[Pete B]

To tell you the truth, I'm not sure why people have a problem with big brother. I'd like to have cameras everywhere if it means that 7/7 or 9/11 bombers and terrorists, or random knife attackers, or teenage happy slappers are going to get caught. But then, I've nothing to hide.
Pete

[PilotGuy]

[BubbleBoy]

[Imaposer]

[Wingspan34]

Just a couple little comments -

Cameras in public places do not invade your privacy. After all, it's called going
out in public, not going out in private.

If I remember correctly some time in the 1970s the US Supreme Court
effectively ruled that the only place a person can consider truly private, is their
bedroom. But more or less what you do in your own home is generally
considered private business - unless you do it in front of an open window
within view of the public.

I too have no fear of cameras in public places. Everyone I see has eyes, don't
they? What's the difference between them seeing me and a CCTV camera.

And if someone claims I did something (that, let's presume, I didn't do) I'd
much rather have a video record that shows it wasn't me, then a human "eye
witness" who is "positive" it was me. Or maybe another camera showing
me somewhere else.

[Mrsposer]

So does that mean if I'm in a dressing room that I should be on video?? Where will it end??

[Wingspan34]

[Mrsposer]

I wasn't really meaning just in dressing rooms. I meant that if you give 'em an inch they'll just take a mile. They will end up in dressing rooms and restrooms and bedrooms if people allow it. It's just like all this security stuff after 9/11. We went to Disney a few years ago and this "security guard" wanted me to take off my fanny pack so she could go through it. They didn't bother to make us go through metal detectors though. What kinda retard is going to put something in a bag if the bag is all that's being checked? It's just like guns...you start taking my right to have a gun away and before long the only people that are gonna have guns are criminals.

[Scott]

I too have no fear of cameras in public places. Everyone I see has eyes, don't
they? What's the difference between them seeing me and a CCTV camera.


just remember that when the camera automatically sends you a fine or revokes your license for picking your nose"$500.00 for inattentive driving"...or
"500 bucks for spitting in the gutter"

government uses cameras to generate revenue and uses the fear of the sheeple to justify these abominations to our individual privacy and freedom.

here's your automated fine from camera xyz123 showing a drop of gasoline dripping during you last trip to the gas station,that will 650 dollars to the government for "blatant wasting of a precious resource and pollution"

[saltoricco]

[saltoricco]

I've been asked to not photograph in shopping malls. Although used by the public, those are usually privately owned spaces so that was a legally founded request, and I tuck my camera away. If you're standing on public property (street) you can shoot almost everything, but even there are exceptions (i.e. copyright protected items, NSA, military protected areas).

Union Station has both public and private areas so it depends on where you are if they can legally prevent you from taking pictures. Often security guards don't know the laws and try to disallow everything.

Holger

[Imaposer]

I'm betting that pilot guy wouldn't complain if they were putting them in school girl locker rooms.

Seriously though, I guess it is just the "I have nothing to hide mentality" that scares me most. Yes cameras in public places may do some good in some cases but the issue extends well beyond that. Its just a scary thought that people are so willing to give over to the government and sacrifice all of their personal freedoms in the name of safety.

Benjamin Franklin said, "Those who would give up Essential Liberty
to purchase a little Temporary Safety,
deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

Samuel Adams Said, "In a state of tranquillity, wealth, and luxury, our descendants would forget the arts of war and the noble activity and zeal which made their ancestors invincible. Every art of corruption would be employed to loosen the bond of union which renders our resistance formidable. When the spirit of liberty, which now animates our hearts and gives success to our arms, is extinct, our numbers will accelerate our ruin and render us easier victims to tyranny. If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquillity of servitude than the animating contest of freedom—go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen!"

Of course both of these quotes are taken out of context of the time and had slightly different ramifications then but they still apply today.

Governments want you to believe they can give you wealth and safety. All you have to do is give up your liberty, and especially "the spirit of liberty," to quote Sam Adams.

But you don't really want "liberty" anyway, because that means personal responsibility. That means risk and uncertainty. Better to be a pampered slave.



Ah, but I really shouldn't be here now! It's really against my personal rules to discuss political beliefs or religion on the org so I guess I'll stop before I piss someone off or get my blood pressure up.

So, who's goind flyin' this weekend?

[Wingspan34]

[Mrsposer]

[Mrsposer]

[Imaposer]

[PilotGuy]

[Mrsposer]

[saltoricco]