| Author | Message | ||
     mem Citizen Username: Mem Post Number: 6147 Registered: 5-2001  |
Anyone stupid enough to discuss drugs over the phone deserves to get busted. They probably have sh*tty weed too. | ||
| Tom Reingold Supporter Username: Noglider Post Number: 14238 Registered: 1-2003  |
Well, you might convince me that we need to make some sort of compromise between safety and liberty. Well, maybe. But assuming that you can, why do you advocate a position that amounts to abolishing the fourth amendment? That's what you appear to be saying. I mean really, is it a totally trashy amendment? | ||
| Rastro Citizen Username: Rastro Post Number: 3091 Registered: 5-2004  |
Mem, but posting on a message board, where posts are archived "indefinitely" is smarter?  Tom, I believe our Attorney General would call it the "quaint" amendment. | ||
| Alleygater Citizen Username: Alleygater Post Number: 1993 Registered: 10-2004 |
Bajou, and how about the little girl that was abused in NY by her father in her own home. She was forced to live in her basement. The schools reported signs of physical abuse on her body over and over again. The child died, nothing happended. These things are horrible. I agree. They are not legal. However, what do you suggest we do? Should we put cameras in our homes. We gotta protect the children. I'm willing to lose my rights, for the safety of the kids. | ||
| Bob K Supporter Username: Bobk Post Number: 11487 Registered: 5-2001 |
Last Sunday there was a gang related murder in South Orange. The location where the murder took place appears to have a history of businesses staying open late, etc. and some low level crime. Would have well marked street cameras prevented the crime? Discuss. | ||
| Alleygater Citizen Username: Alleygater Post Number: 1994 Registered: 10-2004 |
Do you have an opinion BobK? | ||
| Bob K Supporter Username: Bobk Post Number: 11488 Registered: 5-2001 |
Yep, basically if the shooter knew he was going to be on camera I doubt if he would have conducted the murder at that location. Even if he did do the shooting, there would be more evidence for the police to work with. | ||
| Bajou Citizen Username: Bajou Post Number: 316 Registered: 2-2006 |
Dear Rastro - what makes you think there are no police officers on this board? Dear Alley - I suggest we hold the agencies who fail to protect those children accountable to the fullest extent. Dear Bob K.- The man got shot in front of an Italien Restaurant. And MEM I agree that that weed triggered some very fond memories of my youth (but hey I am still young right). In case anybody is listening. I intend to go out tonight and have a couple of drinks. I can't stand Bush and I love America. I consider Cheney and Rumsfeld threats to modern society and I think that terrorists suck. I think illegal immigrants that are willing to work should be able to stay in this country and we can only improve from diversity. So let's see who is gonna come and get me. Should I no longer post after this one then I either got arrested or the Ross brothers kicked me off. K-S - You are welcome anytime at the annihalation of the bottle parties | ||
| Case Citizen Username: Case Post Number: 1548 Registered: 2-2005 |
I'm sorry you didn't like my parade example. These sorts of things DO happen and have happened before. We need to make sure they don't happen here. I guess the only question I have is, "when and where"? Or are we using the McCarthy era "soviet paranoia" as our example? | ||
| thoughtful Citizen Username: Thoughtful Post Number: 191 Registered: 6-2001 |
One thing to keep in mind in this mad dash to make ourselves safer by having cameras is that we will be exponentially increasing the expectations of juries when it comes time to try and convict people of crimes. "No videotape? He must not have done it. Not Guilty." The courts are already seeing this phenomenon in relation to forensics. Call it the CSI effect: juries expect prosecutors to present all kinds of cool (and costly) forensic evidence. When they don't, the accused tend to walk. What this means is that these cameras won't do as good a job as making us safe or deterring crime as we'd like to think. That's when there might be an idea to see what else can be done with the data collected. Just a thought. And then there's the Rodney King beating caught on tape: how many convictions came from that one? | ||
| Bajou Citizen Username: Bajou Post Number: 318 Registered: 2-2006 |
Dear thoughtful: If a spot is not covered by a camera then the jury can be instructed accordingly. Rodney Kings assailants did not walk because it was taped but maybe because it was taped it couldn't be turned around to the point that Rodney was gonna pull a gun on us. A camera is nothing but a neutral witness. I'd be more willing to convict (as a juror) when I know the crime was caught on camera then if I know the only eyewitness was eighty, has a hearing problem, doesn't see well and was 50 feet away. | ||
| Southerner Citizen Username: Southerner Post Number: 1058 Registered: 2-2004 |
How bout this one. Cameras are here to stay so all the philosophical talk is kind of 10 years to late for you civil libertarians. You can't stop technology. Keep in mind, I am not stating an opinion on either side because it won't add anything. They are here so you might as well get use to it whether you welcome them or not. | ||
| thoughtful Citizen Username: Thoughtful Post Number: 192 Registered: 6-2001 |
Bajou, I hope you'd convict after seeing the tape and not just hearing about it.  | ||
| Rastro Citizen Username: Rastro Post Number: 3095 Registered: 5-2004 |
Bajou, you wrote: "Dear Rastro - what makes you think there are no police officers on this board? " What makes you think I think that? (my head is starting to hurt...) | ||
| gj1 Citizen Username: Gj1 Post Number: 347 Registered: 11-2003 |
Bobk - a camera would have done nothing to deter the shooter in this weeks murder. | ||
| Bajou Citizen Username: Bajou Post Number: 322 Registered: 2-2006 |
Dear Rasto: you wrote to Mem: And do you think local law enforcement might be interested in your conversations about weed? Probably not, but would you have the same conversation if you knew the cops were listening? What if we know the cops are listing...what if we are the cops... Hi gj1: The only person who can make a statement like that is the shooter. NOT YOU. thougthful: Yes I would see the video tape. Evidence cannot be submitted to a trial if it can't be examined by the jurors. Southerner: For once you and I totally agree...You wrote: Keep in mind, I am not stating an opinion on either side because it won't add anything. | ||
| Rastro Citizen Username: Rastro Post Number: 3101 Registered: 5-2004 |
bajou, I was talking about phone conversations when I wrote that. But your point is well taken. I would be surprised, however, to learn that you or Mem was a cop. | ||
| steel Citizen Username: Steel Post Number: 1061 Registered: 2-2002 |
From our local Mr James Brown, (In the CHS thread): "My family is safer, the number of incidents is way down, [on Jacoby street] the police have made at least one important arrest of someone they wanted for along time, they got him, drunk late night at Seth Boyden school with a gravity knife. To anyone who helped make things better by calling the cops, and watching what goes on, I thank you. The success on my street shows that people can work together for a decent neighborhood. It isn't just better for me and mine , it's better for everybody. " -and all without the magic of surveillance cameras. -perhaps East Orange should be taking a lesson from Maplewood, not the other way around. | ||
| Southerner Citizen Username: Southerner Post Number: 1061 Registered: 2-2004 |
Bajou, Your post was going through my mind as I was typing mine. I'm glad you picked that low hanging fruit. If we all came to this board with that same attitude then many of you wouldn't get so frustrated. I read very few posts that actually add anything. And I know mine don't nor is my intent too. | ||
| Bajou Citizen Username: Bajou Post Number: 326 Registered: 2-2006 |
Dear Steel: I'd rather have a camera (an unemotional witness) than my neighbors spying on me. Plus if somebody really is willing to commit a crime and wants to get rid of a witness I'd rather have them bash the camera then some person that is on neighborhood watch. Southerner: I always pick low hanging fruit..that's the smart thing to do..LOL | ||
| Bajou Citizen Username: Bajou Post Number: 327 Registered: 2-2006 |
Rastro: What makes you think I am not a cop??? | ||
| Factvsfiction Citizen Username: Factvsfiction Post Number: 415 Registered: 4-2006 |
Hope the government is monitoring this thread.  | ||
| Bajou Citizen Username: Bajou Post Number: 330 Registered: 2-2006 |
I know ... I have always wanted to meet an FBI or CIA agent... | ||
| thoughtful Citizen Username: Thoughtful Post Number: 193 Registered: 6-2001 |
I think you're placing too much faith in cameras and what they can do. Cameras are not perfect witnesses. And whatever they capture would certainly be open to interpretation by whomever watches it (these people would be your neighbors (i.e., police who live in town). That is at least one reason why people have a problem with putting cameras everyhwere: we don't know who will be watching (all police are honest all of the time, right?) The other problem is that, as far as a trial is concerned, we're talking about video of often inferior quality taken from not always the best position. What you'd be looking at is not Hollywood Quality video. Most surveillance video isn't even America's Funniest Video quality. This means that the video needs explanation and interpretation--and people will interpret it the way they want. In other words, cameras are not fool proof and the idea that putting them everywhere will make us safer is fallacious. | ||
| Factvsfiction Citizen Username: Factvsfiction Post Number: 417 Registered: 4-2006 |
But think of the money that the towns could make off of the " Residents Gone Wild" series. | ||
| K_soze Citizen Username: K_soze Post Number: 199 Registered: 11-2005  |
"I'll buy that for a dollar" | ||
| marie Citizen Username: Marie Post Number: 1426 Registered: 6-2001 |
These cameras can be useful for situations like the one on Laurel St where drug dealers and gang members merely cross the street when they spot the police coming their way - they move from one police jurisdiction ( maplewood ) into another ( union ) making it virtually impossible for the police to make any kind of arrest. Surveillance cameras in conjunction with undercover police surveillance are what we need to get these guys out of our neighborhoods and off the streets. | ||
| gj1 Citizen Username: Gj1 Post Number: 348 Registered: 11-2003 |
If drug dealers are smart enough to move across the street when the cops are near, wouldn't they be smart enough to go around the corner, out of view of a surveillance camera? Baj: What makes you think I am not the shooter???  | ||
| steel Citizen Username: Steel Post Number: 1062 Registered: 2-2002 |
Bajou, Neighbors spying? Who said anything about "spying"? Here's a better idea. Neighbors who know each other and mind their own business except to chat and help each other out. A neighborhood that is close enough in its stewardship and sense of purposefull well being that it does not require the infiltration of spy cameras on telephone poles to falsely "keep it safe". As to cameras being "unemotional" -that is like saying guns are "unemotional'. | ||
| Bajou Citizen Username: Bajou Post Number: 333 Registered: 2-2006 |
Steel: Yes guns are unemotional. Ask a police officer what a range in discription you can get when you interview 5 people who have witnessed a crime. Forget about the sequence of events. I the crime is a violent one then you are adding witness shock which can temporarily erase important facts. Plus how about three people in a shooting. One victim, one shooter, one witness..what if the witness is the shooters best friend.... Would be nice to have a camera to really know if it was self defense or straight out murder. | ||
| thoughtful Citizen Username: Thoughtful Post Number: 194 Registered: 6-2001 |
I think you're placing way too much faith in cameras if you believe that a camera will be able to tell you the perpetrator's intent. Video captured by a camera will be open to just as much interpretation as a "regular" witness would be. And a good lawyer--with a good expert witness--will be able to cast doubt on video just as she would with an eyewitness. | ||
| steel Citizen Username: Steel Post Number: 1063 Registered: 2-2002 |
Dear Bajou, (I feel we're so close now) Re: "Wouldn't it be nice" [if a camera caught a shooting] -What are you suggesting? -Are you wanting cameras absolutely everywhere on the off-chance that they may record with accuracy the one or two shootings that we have around these parts every year or so? -Because it seems to me commonsense that anything less is pointless if that is the surveillance path environment path that so many reality TV fans wish to particiapate in. Is that the "quality of life" that you seek? | ||
| Alleygater Citizen Username: Alleygater Post Number: 2014 Registered: 10-2004 |
Stupid question, if we only had a few strategically placed camera's how hard would it be to shoot out those few cameras. It would be costly to replace them and impossible to figure out who shot them out. Unless of course we want to put up cameras to monitor the cameras. | ||
| Bajou Citizen Username: Bajou Post Number: 338 Registered: 2-2006 |
Dear Steel (feeling is mutual) Listen the cameras are already pretty much everywhere so what's the difference if you are being filmed in Kings and in the liquor store or in Kings then walking on the sidewalk and then in the liquor store...I mean why are you guys not hollering bloody murder that you are being filmed everywhere else anyway oh and by the way accessable to the police through a simple subpeona. | ||
| Tom Reingold Supporter Username: Noglider Post Number: 14293 Registered: 1-2003 |
I'll give you one point but not the other. Yes, perhaps being taped on public space is very similar to being taped on private space. But no, being taped in public space is not the same as being subpoena'd. The latter takes trouble, and the former takes none. The latter is active, and the former is passive. Big difference! | ||
| Bajou Citizen Username: Bajou Post Number: 339 Registered: 2-2006 |
Point taken Tom but I really don't worry about it since I don't do anything that a cop can't see. I mean I don't really turn around and check if an officer is watching me or not. Not that they don't have better things to do. Frankly I wouldn't mind cameras just for simple things like who put the darn scratch in my car...which I got last time I went to Bill and Harry's. So I know some of you are in mortal fear of loosing your personal freedom but I am not. I consider it an additional and very useful tool for the police to use and therefor consider it an enhancement to my personal safety and additional protection for my property. Look at it this way..Let's say you get mugged at an ATM. The guy is wearing a mask and you have no idea what he looks like. Let's say the guy runs off and you see him ditching the mask. Would you not feel better if you know his face was caught somewhere along the way by a camera or would you rather protect your personal freedom and be uncomfortable every time you go back to that ATM? And lets forget about violent crime for a minute. Let say your car got damaged and nobody left insurance information...Or your kids I-pod got snatched or their bike got stolen and yes it does happen in Maplewood and South Orange. I just don't feel threatend by it..that's all. | ||
| thoughtful Citizen Username: Thoughtful Post Number: 195 Registered: 6-2001 |
Bajou, Do you think that the police should be allowed to beat suspects? If you're not doing anything wrong, why should you care? In fact, you might consider it an additional and very useful tool for police and therefore an enhancement to your personal safety. | ||
| Bajou Citizen Username: Bajou Post Number: 342 Registered: 2-2006 |
What a stupid post! I mean really....read my post. I said I don't care about being filmed by a surveillance camera. What does that have to do with police brutality. Frankly I think that bad cops would be more carful how they behave since everybody would know there are cameras that would show what went on. And yes, there are bad cops, why is that so surprising to people? There are bad doctors (I don't mean incomptetent, I mean bad people), bad nurses, bad priests for crying out loud, bad nuns, bad real estate agents, bad teachers and so on... why is it so shocking that there are bad cops. Lets have them caught on film just like any other bad guy/girl .... And now I evoke my freedom of opinion to not have a problem with it. It is still America right...? | ||
| K_soze Citizen Username: K_soze Post Number: 218 Registered: 11-2005 |
Another great post by Bajou!! | ||
| thoughtful Citizen Username: Thoughtful Post Number: 196 Registered: 6-2001 |
It's still America--at least until the government puts cameras everywhere. |
