Camera, Police and Freedom

in freedom •  3 months ago

The Police union in my little country the Netherlands, proposed the idea for everyone who installs a camera around our own house or office to register this with our police force, obligatory.


© Rodrigo (source)

When we hang a camera to see which cat is poking in our garden or filming unsavoury types trespassing, we have to register this with the police and give them access. In this way we facilitate the work of our servants. In the Netherlands, already today about 200,000 private cameras voluntarily help the police. In total, we have around one and a half million corporate and private cameras. People think our country and society will be safe, harmonious and perfect when there is more camera surveillance, however this can be called naïve to say the least.

The famous video clip of George Orwell: He lies in bed and tells the world is going to resemble what he described in his book "1984". I paraphrase: "If you build a world that is full of cameras, you build a civilisation that is based on hatred. In such a world there will be no emotions except fear, anger, triumph and self-abasement".


George Orwell Final Warning @ BBC (source)

In many of the discussions about this topic, the words 'this will not happen' appear. Crimes are dissolve much more effectively with camera footage. Who does not want to lock up criminals? That all seems true, until you realise more cameras lead to a paranoid world, in which the freedom of people is limited.

Think of all the shameful moments in your life. From peeing in open air, throwing cigarette buds onto the road (occasionally), singing while we cannot, to let ourselves go while being drunk.

We all want to help the police. However, do it voluntarily, with a secure camera, aimed at your private domain and delete the footage after a short period of time. Then we prevent 'a world of trampling or being trampled on,' to quote Orwell again.

NJOY FREEDOM

Music Library with more than 200 Entries

blockchain curator and reviewer for @illuminati-inc
you like music? check @qsounds

Authors get paid when people like you upvote their post.
If you enjoyed what you read here, create your account today and start earning FREE STEEM!
Sort Order:  

"People think our country and society will be safe, harmonious and perfect when there is more camera surveillance, however this can be called naïve to say the least.

I see your point but i have to disagree. People who take camera's might do that as a way to protect them selves. Its a way to fight back. Its not that they expect a perfect world. It might even be the opposite they expect something will happen therefore a camera. Thats not naive thats realistic.

When i was arrested innocent i was glad it was on camera so i could prove that i wasn't the guy on camera. (Same colour clothes, eyes.)

And when i was in the weed suspencerie and it got robbed, while i got a gun in my neck. I wish it were on camera so that there was more chance to get the ones who did it.

There are plenty of cases were they solved a crime through video footage. But the comment is getting too long as it it.

"Think of all the shameful moments in your life. From peeing in open air, throwing cigarette buds onto the road (occasionally), singing while we cannot, to let ourselves go while being drunk

I rather not :D but If they solve a murder case and im on camera peeing in public.. So be it.

Do i like al this big brother is watching you... Of course not.

R.I.P. Privacy

·

Also I understand where you coming from, and also I kinda agree with providing data to solve things we like to solve, including crime.

All positive has its negative sides as well. More surveillance is less privacy. When used only for the good, then nothing wrong. However, when used for the bad, then everything is wrong. The danger is that we take small steps allowing forces to invade our privacy more and more for good reasons, to eg prevent some crime; But after taking many of those small steps, we will come to a point of no return and we only need a couple of bad actors to abuse the power one has when being able to track individuals in society. Somewhere we need to draw some lines and I think we need to draw it between voluntary and obligatory. Today, providing camera footage to the police is on voluntary bases, the police union likes this to be obligatory. Did you read the book 'The Circle' by Dave Eggers? A different approach to big brother as George Orwell took, one of voluntary transparency by wearing a camera as a third eye; The book shows in what this can turn into, something nobody wants.

·
·

"The danger is that we take small steps allowing forces to invade our privacy more and more for good reasons, to eg prevent some crime; But after taking many of those small steps, we will come to a point of no return and we only need a couple of bad actors to abuse the power one has when being able to track individuals in society.

I agree big time. Before you know it we're trapped with a chip in our butts. I basically agree with whole your post only not that people expect to be safer with more cameras.

"Somewhere we need to draw some lines and I think we need to draw it between voluntary and obligatory

Makes total sense to me. And i really dislike other privacy issues. Like giving up my mine fingerprint years ago for my id card. I asked the women behind the counter do you ever have people who refuse? Nope I was the first one asking questions about it.

·
·
·

How people are not thinking of long term implications of their actions :(

Then you live in a glass box (like when you live with a narcissist) where you never have a moment of ease because anytime you could be breaking a minor law that you never heard of.
And there are many minor insignificant laws that are not enforced now, but who can guarantee me that if the camera grid has doubled or tripled that they will not start with enforcing those minor laws.
(They are now already enforcing the most idiot law b.t.w.)
You will get the same situation as in communistic Russia or east Germany
but then I don't know how many times worse.
The KGB and Stasi the SS and other would have been thrilled to have this amount of info and data.

In many of the discussions about this topic, the words 'this will not happen' appear.

I would say it is happening already and has been for years. It's not noticeable yet. Some might notice it when it's too late. But most people will defend it forever.....................Is my guess :)

·

The mass is simply going along with the small steps in giving up our privacy, not really thinking about the implications when we took a bit to many small steps; and then when the mass realises, it'll likely be too late.

What are your crime statistics like on the Netherlands?
What type of crimes top your list?
I think your point is valid in that there needs to be balance. I live in South Africa where the nature of crime and the frequency of crime is horrendous. we could do with a lot more surveillance through cameras.

·

We have about 430k registered theft cases, of which many of them are bycycles and theft from car. Of course, this is not the complete picture, but across the board crime is decreasing year on year and crime with harm to people is also decreasing year on year.

My point is that the government shall not force everybody to 1) register their camera’s as well as 2) force the freedom of access to the camera footage. 1984 is approaching. Dave Eggers wrote an i teresting book as well, the Circle. Both type of societies are based on 100% transparency; while Orwell transparency is towards the centralised government, and Eggers transparency is towards everybody; Both type of societies will result in each individual being imprisoned while not in prison.

“If you don't want a man unhappy politically, don't give him two sides to a question to worry him; give him one. Better yet, give him none. Let him forget there is such a thing as war. If the government is inefficient, top-heavy, and tax-mad, better it be all those than that people worry over it. Peace, Montag. Give the people contests they win by remembering the words to more popular songs or the names of state capitals or how much corn Iowa grew last year. Cram them full of noncombustible data, chock them so damned full of 'facts' they feel stuffed, but absolutely 'brilliant' with information. Then they'll feel they're thinking, they'll get a sense of motion without moving. And they'll be happy, because facts of that sort don't change.”
― Ray Bradbury, Fahrenheit 451

·

Do you feel safe now? Ha ha ha... As long as big brother is watching... everything will be OK. No, not paranoid at all... just losing my mind that's all.

b23d324f133b7065e451b1a1638e88e8.gif

·
·

Hahaha

·

I guess true words in terms of how governmentstry to keep fear away from the public. But, they also practise the ‘one side of coin’ wrt the posibility of terorist attacks to allow all sort of laws to pass to give the government more and more of our personal data. Sure, one side is that indeed all this data can be used to lrevent some attack happening; But the next step could also be the government using the same data to hunt us for all those things we do daily and may or maynot be against some law.

Hahaha camera is most security.

·

hmmm, when you are recorded 24x7 and this is in the hands of a single entity, you think you will live your life in freedom?