Talking cameras installed in dilapidated playgrounds in Mount Vernon, NY.
A local ABC news affiliate in Mount Vernon, NY has reported (video above) on a small community that now has to deal with talking surveillance cameras, that give trespassers the following warning: "Stop! This is a restricted area, and your photograph was just taken! We will use it prosecute you! Leave the area now!"
Each unit cost $6000. It is important to remember the cost of the devices, as you will most likely see your city/town justifying purchasing these devices, and other big brother, Orwellian, tracking, police state-type devices, while at the same time telling you that they don't have enough money for, and have to cut, public programs that actually help people.
At 1:16 in the video, they interview a gentleman from the neighborhood, inside of the playground that the camera is pointed towards, which looks terrible, who rightfully points out "There's nothing in here, so why you got cameras in here?".
City Councilman Yuhanna Edwards defends the surveillance camera with the typical response that a tyrant gives to people that stick up for their rights, "You hear people say 'Why all these cameras'? But if you're not doing anything wrong, don't worry about the cameras."
The predictive programming for the people to accept these creepy devices has been on going. Last year, a local news ABC affiliate in Michigan reported on new street lights (video above), called "Intellistreets", that have computer processors inside of them that allow the street lights to "talk" to each other, record conversations, bark orders, and even, according to the news report, "count people for police".
The inventor of this device Ron Harwood, has a company called Illuminating Concepts, and received "funding help from the Department of Energy" for his Intellistreets design. The report mentions that because the camera is "capable of recording converastions" that it is "making critics CRY invasion of privacy". (Sidenote: The phrase "cry invasion of privacy" tells the listener that people who care about their privacy are like little babies, crying.)
Harwood responds to privacy concerns by assuring the people not to worry because Intellistreets doesn't have "spook technology". Interestingly, the news report ends with the information that Ron Harwood is working with homeland security!
In the UK, talking surveillance cameras have been shouting orders at people for at least a few years. In 2007, the BBC reported, "Talking CCTV cameras that tell off people dropping litter or committing anti-social behaviour are to be extended to 20 areas across England."
The following picture is shown on the report as an example of how the talking camera works:
The analysts at the No Agenda Show have been documenting the spread of the big brother surveillance state, including the introduction of giant voice systems that shout commands at people. I encourage readers to follow their work.
- Orwellian Talk In Boston Bombing, Making Martial Law Sound Nice - April 26, 2013 (link)
The erosion of the growing presence of security cameras and surveillance cameras and cell phone cameras any sense of privacy in public places. It is invaluable in identifying criminals, police officers can be everywhere, I don't see any alternative. It more clearly, they'll deter crime. A good mix of personal cameras, hidden cameras is the perfect strategy to combat crime.ReplyDelete
Thanks for your comment, though it is not fully legible, English may not be your first language, but it seems as if you are defending the massive government surveillance grid that is being implemented. The argument against this kind of surveillance can be approached in a number of ways. First, what is the cause of crime? Does destructive crime occur because there are NOT cameras on every street corner, and humans just want to destroy society, when nobody is looking? This can't be true, because the middle of the twentieth century in America didn't have as much as crime as it does now, and there weren't surveillance cameras, and as much police/government. I would argue that the increase in the police state, is a factor in the increase of crime. Regardless of the reasoning for the increase in crime, governments are not trying to solve the cause of crime, they are using our tax money to give surveillance contracts to their friends, to help steal more money people through fines, and put more people into cages.Delete
Also, if you think government surveillance is the way to a safe society, then why doesn't the government put cameras inside of every home, just to make sure there is no child abuse, and other crimes, occurring?
Installing security devices and surveillance equipment can be beneficial for your home as these devices provide one of the best defenses against possible theft, but sometimes these devices fail to fulfill the security requirements. Along with these devices, there should be someone who can track all the unwanted and suspicious activities. A security guard can provide greater security against unwanted theft and robbery. I am also using Sharp Edge security services along with a CCTV camera. It gives me a greater peace of mind.ReplyDelete
You are clearly, like the other two who replied, some kind of bot, selling security services, but I should note that I am NOT against private ownership of cameras, and security equipment.Delete
These devices are creepy. It gives you a feeling of uneasiness knowing that there are eyes watching your every move. But if it is really effective in deterring and solving crimes, then I guess the public should accept the idea of a big brother-like feeling.ReplyDelete
Says the person selling security products. With your logic, if the government put a camera inside of everyone's home, that would also be "really effective in deterring crime", and the public just "should accept the idea". Do you believe the the purpose of government is to keep us safe, or to protect our freedom? You can't have it both ways.Delete