| Author | Message | ||
     MSO55 Citizen Username: Mso55 Post Number: 3 Registered: 5-2006 |
Are these new surveillance cameras around town really nessecary? Does Maplewood really have that serious of a crime problem? It seems to me like they're spending money and jeporadizing our rights for nothing. Maybe they'll bust some kids smoking weed who aren't hurting anyone anyway. Reading the police blotter in the News-Record, it seems like most of the crime is car and headlight theft which these cameras will do nothing for. | ||
| Factvsfiction Citizen Username: Factvsfiction Post Number: 360 Registered: 4-2006 |
Considering some of the posts I have seen here on MOL, it may arise from mental health concerns. You don't want strange people talking to themselves, muttering inanities, yelling, screaming, and disturbing others in your lovely downtown village and scaring people away, do you? Or soapboxs set up in front of King's? Just joking, of course. | ||
| Larry Seltzer Citizen Username: Elvis Post Number: 1 Registered: 4-2006 |
MSO55 - What right of yours is jeopardized by having a camera observing a public street or sidewalk? Do you think you have an expectation of privacy there? | ||
| Cerebrus Maximus Citizen Username: Xtralargebrain Post Number: 36 Registered: 4-2006  |
MSO55, Please provide rationale for why there should be no security camera. Thousands of crimes are solved every year because law enforcement authorities were able to review videotapes taken by the very cameras you curiously object to. What is the downside? Please provide a specific example of the bad thing that can happen to you personally. I am guessing you really cant provide an intelligent example. | ||
| gettinoffadaroof Citizen Username: Upondaroof Post Number: 683 Registered: 4-2003 |
Main Offender!!   | ||
| letters Citizen Username: Letters016 Post Number: 555 Registered: 5-2005  |
"Reading the police blotter in the News-Record, it seems like most of the crime is car and headlight theft which these cameras will do nothing for." I really hate to steal a line from someone else, but... Holy ignorance! | ||
| MSO55 Citizen Username: Mso55 Post Number: 5 Registered: 5-2006 |
I think I deserve to walk down the street without having to worry about being watched or recorded without my knowledge...and be serious, other pedestrians happening to see you by coincidence is not the same. Again- I fail to see what serious problems these cameras are going to solve. | ||
| Cerebrus Maximus Citizen Username: Xtralargebrain Post Number: 37 Registered: 4-2006 |
MSO.. Again you fail to provide an intelligent answer to my query "What is the downside" and my guidance "Please provide specific examples..." The cameras solve crimes. You still seem unable to tell us what the bad outcome would be. XLB would prefer that you no longer post until you awaken from your coma. | ||
| MSO55 Citizen Username: Mso55 Post Number: 7 Registered: 5-2006 |
XLB- I've got a great eye doctor. I can get you his number if you'd like. Or maybe you're just not paying attention. I have already explained the downside. I quote: "It seems to me like they're spending money and jeporadizing our rights for nothing. Maybe they'll bust some kids smoking weed who aren't hurting anyone anyway. Reading the police blotter in the News-Record, it seems like most of the crime is car and headlight theft which these cameras will do nothing for." Now please share with the me the serious crimes these cameras will solve that make it worth all this.} | ||
| ajc Citizen Username: Ajc Post Number: 5080 Registered: 9-2001  |
"Again- I fail to see what serious problems these cameras are going to solve." Besides hopefully keeping the likes of you off the streets, it can assist police to identify wanted criminals, drug deals going down, gang activity, kidnappers, car accidents and traffic congestions just to name a few... | ||
| Cerebrus Maximus Citizen Username: Xtralargebrain Post Number: 40 Registered: 4-2006 |
MSO55, You are not loking at this with a balanced perspective. The potential for these cameras to deter and solve crime and make Maplewood a safe and desirable plance to live FAR outweighs the concerns you have (which are at best very vague) about personal rights. Please tell me what you PERSONALLY fear or are you just saying that you dont want pot smokers to get busted. | ||
| MeAndTheBoys Citizen Username: Meandtheboys Post Number: 3688 Registered: 12-2004  |
"I think I deserve to walk down the street without having to worry about being watched or recorded without my knowledge." How is it "without your knowledge" when you've just clearly illustrated that you are very well aware that the cameras are there? | ||
| MeAndTheBoys Citizen Username: Meandtheboys Post Number: 3689 Registered: 12-2004 |
Maybe, if you wear your tin foil hat, they won't see you! | ||
| Bob K Supporter Username: Bobk Post Number: 11453 Registered: 5-2001 |
I think that there is somewhat of a disconnect between real crime and the perception of crime in Maplewood, especially on Springfield Avenue. If cameras make people feel safer and be more willing to venture out after dark they are probably a good idea. When Jamie first put up his camera I would look up at it, wave or maybe make a rude gesture.  Now that it is in operation I don't think about it anymore. Larry, welcome back. | ||
| Tom Reingold Supporter Username: Noglider Post Number: 14149 Registered: 1-2003  |
Welcome back, Larry. We missed you. No one reasonably expects privacy in a public space. But cameras, attached to recording devices, make it much easier than ever before to collect huge amounts of data about a great many people. If abused, the recordings could be used for many purposes. Do you want people knowing that you buy porno magazines, even though it's legal? Do you want law enforcement or the marketing data collecting companies to know which people you have relationships with? | ||
| Ima Perplecks Citizen Username: Victor Post Number: 18 Registered: 6-2005 |
a. It's not 1984. It's 2006. b. Better safe than sorry. c. Maybe there is more than what makes the papers. | ||
| Bob K Supporter Username: Bobk Post Number: 11455 Registered: 5-2001 |
Tom...which is why the tapes and access to them have to be controlled. They should only be allowed to be reviewed with the approval of a senior commander, maybe Captain or Chief, and be destroyed after six months or some other reasonable period. | ||
| algebra2 Supporter Username: Algebra2 Post Number: 4066 Registered: 5-2001  |
I like the idea of always having a camera on ME. I have always felt like I am living a real life sort of "Truman Show". When I am in an elevator and I know cameras are watching I put on a little show -- try to "lighten up the episode". Where are these new cameras? | ||
| steel Citizen Username: Steel Post Number: 1054 Registered: 2-2002 |
In answer to MS055's initial questions: "Are these new surveillance cameras around town really nessecary? Does Maplewood really have that serious of a crime problem?" The answer is no. Ima sez: "Maybe there is more than what makes the papers" -NOW who is paranoid? This is what things have come to in this oh-so-charming town and sadly elsewhere that people can't feel safe unless mommy and daddy is watching them through a camera and then paradoxically call those who prefer to live without them, "paranoid". It's completely upside down. This truly paranoid crowd simply can not understand the concept that there is a vast difference between being in the view of other person's on the street going about their business and being peered at anonymously by someone who's business it is to watch you. They just don't care. They don't even feel that value. It's all "Reality TV" now. They have no sense of value for an unintrusive society and so must dismiss others that do as "wearing a tin hat" of "being in a coma". I can only imagine that such derisive comments magically make them feel smarter and more alert as they blithely hand over more of their rights without even realizing it. The further irony is that I have walked in every part of this town without fear, (and easily due to the fantastically low crime rate), and yet apparently there are those who cannot do so unless they see a camera on a pole, and yet those persons call ME "paranoid" or ask me "what's MY problem?". Again, -completely upside down. It would really be a delicious irony if it where not so sad to see so many otherwise good people marching like obedient lemmings to this tune. This same crowd actually demands reports of "incidents" of the "dangers" of cameras because they have become acclimated like trained dogs to no longer understand such a value as living without them. Meanwhile Bob K raises excellent points which have yet to be established by our TC. Our esteemed TC has so far abandoned the simple responsibility of once now having agreed to this unnecessary paranoid intrusion of at least first having creating such guidelines for the use of cameras as other cities have. -So far the vote here has been; "buy some cameras and... whatever....we'll see...most people want 'em". Other towns have at least had the sense to establish resolutions for the following BEFORE they bought the cameras and put them up: WHO is going to be monitoring these cameras and who cannot? HOW long are the "tapes" to be kept, particularly if there is no crime on them? WHAT other agencies or news organizations can these tapes can be shared with? On what basis to we measure the "success" of these cameras and for how long an initial period? PS: George Orwell's story should have been titled "2084", -my grandkids will still be around then when Hayden's grandkids are running things. Smile, all the country will soon have all the charm and "security" of a giant 7/eleven. | ||
| greenetree Supporter Username: Greenetree Post Number: 7609 Registered: 5-2001  |
I'm mildly curious to know if there is an age factor in opinions on this. Some of us grew up reading 1984 in HS Lit class, horrifed that a day like this could ever come. Others of us know nothing but the internet and think nothing of websites streaming bedroom, bathroom, whatever, activities of total strangers. I belong to the school of "I wouldn't have a camera on my personal goings-on, but I don't expect privacy in public and try to remember not to adjust my underwear in elevators, even when I'm alone". | ||
| Ima Perplecks Citizen Username: Victor Post Number: 20 Registered: 6-2005 |
I wish they'd put a camera over the speed bump they put on my street so they can watch the cars flying over it. | ||
| Buzzsaw Citizen Username: Buzzsaw Post Number: 4678 Registered: 5-2001  |
 | ||
| gettinoffadaroof Citizen Username: Upondaroof Post Number: 684 Registered: 4-2003 |
 | ||
| Dogbert Citizen Username: Dogbert Post Number: 99 Registered: 1-2006  |
>>I think I deserve to walk down the street without having to worry about being watched or recorded without my knowledge... Oh that right, yeah, it's right there in the 87th amendment just after the right to smoke in a restaurant. >>and be serious, other pedestrians happening to see you by coincidence is not the same. How about a police officer standing where the camera would be, observing you and potentially testifying against you in court? Do you think you have a right to walk down the street unobserved by police? | ||
| gj1 Citizen Username: Gj1 Post Number: 340 Registered: 11-2003 |
We don't need our government using surveillance cameras to monitor law-abiding people in public places without regard to any suspicion of wrongdoing. General video surveillance reverses the American presumption of innocence and assumes that everyone is about to commit a crime. | ||
| steel Citizen Username: Steel Post Number: 1055 Registered: 2-2002 |
Another specious argument, (Dogbert's above) regarding ignoring rights that are "not in the constitution". Try reading the 9th amendment: Amendment IX The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people. Hell, our newly proposed CIA chief can't even remember the 4th amendment, insisting on the radio that it does NOT include the words, "but upon probable cause". Hellooooooo, -anybody home? But don't worry, we can all trust all authority figures forever and ever right? Federal, county and state governments have never given us a reason to not trust their every motive and use of power have they? I'm sure that it will always remain different here in our little 4-square miles. It will never be connected to anything outside our "trusted" authorities control. One of the TC members recently said to me, "you'll just have to trust us". -That's swell but he forgets that he will not always be around.  All of the "what is the greatest threat" arguments also completely ignore that having cameras watching you all the time just sucks. -How's that for a succinct argument? What ever happened to "I just don't like the idea of strangers watching my ever move" as being a strong enough argument against such a thing?  | ||
| Tom Reingold Supporter Username: Noglider Post Number: 14162 Registered: 1-2003 |
steel, please name the TC member who said we have to trust them. We need to know. Your point about that gets back to the saying that we are a nation of laws not of men (or people now). We need laws that work for current and future people, not just for the currently people, who -- we believe -- are trustworthy. | ||
| Bajou Citizen Username: Bajou Post Number: 255 Registered: 2-2006 |
MS055- maybe you should read the paper more often. There have been several incidences of violence in and around Maplewood village. The park has been an issue over the last few years and we had more then one child in a hospital due to quite serious injuries. These stemmed mainly from bullying and robbery but hey I'd want to know who the kid is or where he ran of to. If your car got scratched wouldn't it be nice if it is just a matter of "let's go to the video camera". What are you doing on a public street that cannot be observed by a camera...? Pick your nose..? gj1: you wrote: "We don't need our government using surveillance cameras to monitor law-abiding people in public places without regard to any suspicion of wrongdoing. General video surveillance reverses the American presumption of innocence and assumes that everyone is about to commit a crime." That notion went out the door when they stopped letting you tie your horse outside of the pub, walk in there with a cig hanging out of your mouth and hire a lady of the night after a long days work. Freedom is an extinct creature in the USA. | ||
| MSO55 Citizen Username: Mso55 Post Number: 8 Registered: 5-2006 |
"How about a police officer standing where the camera would be, observing you and potentially testifying against you in court?" That would be one better alternative. But again what are these extermemly serious crimes? And I'm pretty sure a kid has not been attacked in the park in about two years. And the village??? Theres an unlimited supply of cops and soccer moms. You DEFINITELY don't need cameras there. | ||
| greenetree Supporter Username: Greenetree Post Number: 7627 Registered: 5-2001 |
Think of how much income could be generated from those soccer moms making illegal left turns into the parking spaces captured on camera! | ||
| Bajou Citizen Username: Bajou Post Number: 261 Registered: 2-2006 |
MSO55: Several kids have been beaten up and had their i-pods stolen. A young boy was so severely injured that he was several months out of school. There was an incident in the village were kids crashed a birthday party and a couple of the teenage guest were hurt with a knife. A young woman was raped in one of the apartments right in the village during daylight hours. Several at-gunpoint robberies of transit customers getting off in Mountain Station, South Orange and Maplewood. We had one of the most brazen armored car robberies just recently in Short Hills and the robbers where arrested right here on the Maplewood South Orange Border. Oh and Yesterday a man was shot on South Orange Avenue around 8PM by grove park. Any more requests...wake up and smell the coffee. Anything else..? | ||
| Factvsfiction Citizen Username: Factvsfiction Post Number: 364 Registered: 4-2006 |
I suggest instead considering it as an eclectic fashion show sans runway music. Now do you feel better? | ||
| Case Citizen Username: Case Post Number: 1519 Registered: 2-2005 |
Why is 24 hour police presence "better" than a camera? Forget the relative expense... I'm just curious why one option affects your rights, and another does not. Frankly, I'd LOVE to have beat cops all over the place... but I'd HATE to pay for it. I have to admit I'm curious about something else - what level of public drug use should merit police response? It seems we've established that smoking pot is OK... where's the line? | ||
| MSO55 Citizen Username: Mso55 Post Number: 9 Registered: 5-2006 |
If someone being raped in their apartment constitutes the need for cameras then why not have them outside every few houses in case someone commits a crime in another house? I-pods are stolen in Columbia High School all the time. Columbia has cameras yet the theives are almost never caught. These cameras don't have anything to do with South Orange so the in the incident in Grove Park is irrelevant. The train station already has a camera so nothing would change there. I had not heard of the party in the village that had knife fight take place. Where in the village was it? And finally..."We had one of the most brazen armored car robberies just recently in Short Hills and the robbers where arrested right here on the Maplewood South Orange Border." Am i missing something? How would these cameras have helped? It says they WERE arrested. | ||
| Todd Manana Citizen Username: T_manana Post Number: 13 Registered: 9-2005 |
Bajou, sounds like you're the paranoid, afraid-of-everything type who wants complete control. Maybe you'd be more at peace in the midwest? 10 bucks says you're a Republican. You're displaying the classic personality traits. Cerbrus Maxipadus, you must have some additional input on all of this, no? | ||
| MSO55 Citizen Username: Mso55 Post Number: 10 Registered: 5-2006 |
Well it's not up to me but but i say we draw the line when they are some how harming themselves, others, or the property they're on and as far as I know a few kids smoking a little pot as you walk by doesn't do any of those things anymore than many legal substances. | ||
| Factvsfiction Citizen Username: Factvsfiction Post Number: 371 Registered: 4-2006 |
Todd- To extrapolate concern about rape and having cameras as a matter of crime reduction as the ultimate sign of republicanism is totally clueless. Or a doctrinaire and moronic concept of what the definition of civil liberties is. | ||
| birdbrain Citizen Username: Birdbrain Post Number: 94 Registered: 2-2003  |
I am uncomfortable with cameras monitoring the village also. How is it different from a police officer standing there watching me? Well, for one thing, if there is a crime going on the police officer can do something about it. Exactly what are these cameras supposed to do? Help us catch crooks, right? Unless someone is watching the camera at all times though, a crime can still occur, then the only good the camera does is to try to identify the bad guy. Do we really think they won't figure out what areas are and aren't being watched? So, if we have someone watching the monitors ready to dispatch officers to a distubance, why don't we just post that person out in the areas that need watching? It is also far different having the government collecting data to sift through at their discretion. Will we have access to these tapes too? If it's just "someone watching a public space" then why can't the average citizen review these public tapes that are being created with our tax dollars? If I knew they were on archive somewhere to review, I'd feel much more comfortable with the law. Our country is so great because it's based on the idea that _we don't have to prove anything_ with regard to our rights. They are inalienable. It's the _government's_ job to make a strong case as to why they need to spend my money to watch me. What's the downside? Money and people used to watch cameras that may or may not deter anything. A false sense of security. How much will the system cost to maintain and monitor, including man-hours? I suspect that it comes close to or even surpasses the cost of placing a beat-cop in the areas that most need it. The burden of proof is on the govenrment, not us. "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." -Benjamim Franklin -David Wren-Hardin | ||
| Todd Manana Citizen Username: T_manana Post Number: 14 Registered: 9-2005 |
Thanks for the laugh Fact. Your attempts at appearing intelligent have been fodder for lots of laughter in my office. | ||
| MSO55 Citizen Username: Mso55 Post Number: 11 Registered: 5-2006 |
Thank you birdbrain. That was perfect. |
