George Orwell Was Right — Security Cameras Get an Upgrade

Jamie stopped to mention that Bloomberg is reporting on a recent addition of speakers to public security cameras in Middlesbrough, England. From the article: "`People are shocked when they hear the cameras talk, but when they see everyone else looking at them, they feel a twinge of conscience and comply,' said Mike Clark, a spokesman for Middlesbrough Council who recounted the incident. The city has placed speakers in its cameras, allowing operators to chastise miscreants who drop coffee cups, ride bicycles too fast or fight outside bars."

dupe. from September

[kae_verens]

http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/09/17/16 56258 [slashdot.org]

Re:People of England, you have sold your souls.

[serialdogma]

and it is the *left* that is pushing for more cameras....

The left in the UK is in steep decline in recent times. So I'm rather curious as to where you got that idea from.

correction

[foreverdisillusioned]

Actually, I just realized you *could* be arrested after only one "anti-social" sign of disrespect. Apparently, the courts issued a pre-emptive ASBO for the entire town of Skegness, allowing the police to imprison anyone (for up to six months) whom they deemed disruptive even if they haven't actually broken any laws. (Explicitly included was the power to disperse any "crowd" consisting of two or more people.)

I don't see what's stopping them from issuing a similar ASBO covering the entire camera network...

Re:V says...

[porkmusket]

Good movie, but credit where it's due, they're paraphrasing Thomas Jefferson. "When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty. "

Re:Riding too fast?

[Anonymous Coward]

the speed limit isn't for a particular type of vehicle in most cases, the speed limit is for the street in question. So, you can get a speeding ticket for going 21mph in a 20mph school zone.

Re:I, For One

[Admiral Ag]

The problem is that it's Britain we're talking about. "Nuisance" crimes committed by youths seem to be more prevalent there due to the oft cited "yob" or "chav" culture. In Britain, there is an underclass of people (most of whom are white) who have absolutely no respect for the law or for other citizens.

Given the ridiculous class divisions that still pervade that country, there are few prospects for them, and so they might as well be hooligans. In some ways they aren't the worst. The English middle class are absolutely insufferable.

I can't say that I like the idea of cameras, but Britain is such a pathetic and dysfunctional country (try organizing a fucking train ride next time you are there, or getting served in a store) that I don't have much pity. It has to be the least efficient country on the planet. Even though I'm entitled to, and it would probably make me more money, I will never go back there to live.

Re:How much law is too much?

[c6gunner]

1) You prevent them from committing crimes for several years.
2) You create incentive for others to follow the law.

Do you really not understand this concept? I don't know how I can make it any clearer; I thought it was a self-explanatory idea. It's constructive not because you're punishing that one individual, but because you're showing others what will happen to them if they try it. It's not about vengeance, but about reducing the number of occurrences through what amounts to intimidation. The same principle holds true for raising children, or training your new puppy. You set rules, create consequences for breaking those rules, and, most importantly, demonstrate them that those consequences will be applied without fail. Otherwise you end up with problem kids, and dog-poo on your carpets.