Sebrof Posted October 23, 2008 Share Posted October 23, 2008 http://www.manxradio.com/readNEwsItem.aspx?id=27064 Bill Henderson wants the IOM to follow in the footsteps of the UK, the most spied upon country in the world. S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
immortalpuppet Posted October 23, 2008 Share Posted October 23, 2008 What will you be doing in public that you would not want people to see? Its spying on me? its a public place so how is it spying? Anyhoo, i am not a big fan anyway simply because i have seen CCTV evidence get thrown out of court where the whole episode was caught on camera. If CCTV had more credability in court then i would be all for more units. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skeddan Posted October 23, 2008 Share Posted October 23, 2008 I could understand there'd be reason to have CCTV coverage of the Promenade - or at least the trouble hotspots. That could make sense especially if there was also live monitoring during 'peak' trouble times and this was used as tactical tool for rapid response. If Henderson has specific proposals like that in mind it would be better to spell these out rather than just 'more CCTV' which I think one should rightly be very wary of. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WTF Posted October 23, 2008 Share Posted October 23, 2008 i agree with both of you. there is no difference in having a camera there as having an actual person. public is public so i don't see how it can be an invasion of 'privacy'?? if it stops wankers wanking in public, hay ho. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimbms Posted October 23, 2008 Share Posted October 23, 2008 Remember CCTV can work both ways, numbers of Police officers said to be "over enthusiastic" in making arrests has fallen in these areas, also a number of people have been able to prove their innocence when arrested due to CCTV being able to show their location at a given time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wake Up Call Posted October 23, 2008 Share Posted October 23, 2008 Go down the pub or for a swim at the NSC and you will be on camera. I reckon most of the pubs in Ramsey have cameras recording you being robbed as a bitter nears 3 quid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimcalagon Posted October 23, 2008 Share Posted October 23, 2008 Big Brother might well be watching me - but that is surely preferable to the opposite arrangement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chinahand Posted October 23, 2008 Share Posted October 23, 2008 I am in basic agreement that when you are in a public place your expectation of privacy does NOT mean that you can't be filmed on CCTV or whatever. Though I do think it means that your converstations shouldn't be monitored - sitting on a park bench chatting to a friend, lover or colleague I believe I should be able to have a private converstation. The only way a third party would be able to intrude on such a conversation would be via covert means and I think the state has no more right to covertly record what I am saying on a park bench than in my own home - ie it would need a warrant to do that. It is vital that any CCTV put in is of sufficient quality to be used for ID purposes and for court evidence, or else its useless. The CCTV vans seemed to be a good way ahead - one's regularly in Castletown Square at closing time. It may not stop a drunk dick head, but it means they should be got bang to rights afterwards. I agree passive CCTV can be pretty useless, and would agree to going high tech with controllable ones monitored from police HQ if it is thought necessary - it would allow resources to be targetted where they are needed with one person able to monitor a wide area - should we have a game of guess the area most in need of a police CCTV? Going off topic, but in a similar vein do people have an expectation of privacy when they go through airport security - those new cameras will show off all your wobbly bits, plus where your wallet, money belt, and that expensive ring or whatever you are wanting to legitimately keep close to you rather than risking it in your baggage - I have carried stuff which is perfectly legal, but which I didn't want anyone to know about through airports - doing that with these cameras is now close to impossible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sebrof Posted October 23, 2008 Author Share Posted October 23, 2008 I am in basic agreement that when you are in a public place your expectation of privacy does NOT mean that you can't be filmed on CCTV or whatever. Though I do think it means that your converstations shouldn't be monitored - sitting on a park bench chatting to a friend, lover or colleague I believe I should be able to have a private converstation. The only way a third party would be able to intrude on such a conversation would be via covert means and I think the state has no more right to covertly record what I am saying on a park bench than in my own home - ie it would need a warrant to do that. It is vital that any CCTV put in is of sufficient quality to be used for ID purposes and for court evidence, or else its useless. The CCTV vans seemed to be a good way ahead - one's regularly in Castletown Square at closing time. It may not stop a drunk dick head, but it means they should be got bang to rights afterwards. I agree passive CCTV can be pretty useless, and would agree to going high tech with controllable ones monitored from police HQ if it is thought necessary - it would allow resources to be targetted where they are needed with one person able to monitor a wide area - should we have a game of guess the area most in need of a police CCTV? Going off topic, but in a similar vein do people have an expectation of privacy when they go through airport security - those new cameras will show off all your wobbly bits, plus where your wallet, money belt, and that expensive ring or whatever you are wanting to legitimately keep close to you rather than risking it in your baggage - I have carried stuff which is perfectly legal, but which I didn't want anyone to know about through airports - doing that with these cameras is now close to impossible. I am amazed at how people seem happy to accept incremental erosion of liberty. CCTV today, speech monitoring tomorrow. As long as it is done by slow degrees, it appears that people will just accept it. Sad. S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keith Posted October 23, 2008 Share Posted October 23, 2008 I am amazed at how people seem happy to accept incremental erosion of liberty. CCTV today, speech monitoring tomorrow. As long as it is done by slow degrees, it appears that people will just accept it. Not sure how your liberty is eroded? You can still do what you want to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebees Posted October 23, 2008 Share Posted October 23, 2008 I dont know why but, I just dont like the idea of CCTV everywhere. Its handy enough on 'The Bill' but somehow I dont see them only using CCTV for spying on criminals over here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Tatlock Posted October 23, 2008 Share Posted October 23, 2008 I concur with Sebrof's earlier post In too many cases, Bill Henderson just says what he thinks people want to hear IMO. While he piddles about while Rome burns, he's not endearing me to giving him a job on my spud farm or herring boat next year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homarus Posted October 23, 2008 Share Posted October 23, 2008 Just spuds Albert , we can't catch herring anymore! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Tatlock Posted October 23, 2008 Share Posted October 23, 2008 Just spuds Albert , we can't catch herring anymore! Not after I'm elected and our invasion of Iceland is complete! I intend to use the Viking boats in Peel - AAARRRR! WHO'S WITH ME? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
%age Posted October 23, 2008 Share Posted October 23, 2008 My neighbour was doing some overtime at the office and was filmed on CCTV walking home through the Villa Arcade. The police thought he might have been a witness to an attack a short while later in the area (in fact he saw nothing unusual). Anyway, he had his picture splashed all over the Courier in glorious technicolor. I hope he was in fact doing overtime as he told his family and I also hope he hadn't booked in work to midnight when the picture showed him at 11:45pm. Erosion of liberties? You decide. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.