Eye In the Sky For City Crime Fighting

Tiger4 writes "The mayor of the City of Lancaster in the Antelope Valley of southern California is considering a high-definition video flying platform to aid in crime fighting. The aircraft, would circle the city constantly, able to zoom in on activity spots instantly. 'You never know when you are being watched or followed. It would be stupid to commit a crime. You see it with such detail,' said Mayor R. Rex Parris, who took a ride last week in a camera-equipped airplane with pilot Dick Rutan. 'I have every hope that Lancaster will be the first city to deploy it. I've never been so excited about anything.' Dick Rutan is the same pilot who flew around the world non-stop in the Voyager, custom built by his brother Burt Rutan at Scaled Composites in Mojave." The aircraft is nothing special, a garden-variety Cessna or the like, but "the camera is an example of technology developed for and used by the military making a transition to civilian applications, Rutan said."

Re:Whoa, they invented the maintenance-free plane?

[cmdrkynes]

There is no way they can really afford to keep a small jet airplane in the air just circling for hours... That is thousands of dollars a day worth of fuel.

Re:Whoa, they invented the maintenance-free plane?

[furby076]

Privacy outside of a building is not constitutionally mandated. Walking on the street? Anyone can take pictures of you - media, gov't, private citizens and you have zero privacy claims. There is no expectation of privacy when you leave the protection of a building.

There were some issues, in the past, with aerial photos of people in their backyard which had walls (and obviously no ceilings). I don't recall what the ruling was but I think it was ruled that if there is no roof there is no expectation of privacy....so you may want to make sure your drug deals are done within 5 enclosed walls :)

Re:bad idea + bad idea

[Anonymous Coward]

When I was on guard duty in the Marine Corps, I was given the following instructions:

If you see someone attempting a crime, or entering a secure area, you will give ONE and ONLY one order to halt.

If the individual does not halt, you will fire one warning shot, directly at center of mass.

If the warning shot does not cause the person to halt, you will fire at him until he halts.

For unarmed posts, they told you to call a "react" if you saw anything out of the ordinary. What's a react, you say? When you call a react, the guard shack hands everyone currently on duty an M-16 and a loaded magazine, they all pile into a humvee and haul ass to your location, then they all jump out, aim, and give the order to halt.

Disobey the order, and they ALL fire a warning shot.

I'm not exaggerating, either. There's a reason nobody screws around on a Marine Corps base.

Stupid to commit a crime?

[bazorg]

It takes someone stupid to commit a crime? maybe someone with motivations that are hard to understand... Just yesterday on BBC3 we had interviews with 14-18 year old thugs who were really keen on their "street cred", their "reputation", the robbing and stabbing of other kids who ventured into their post code, and the appeal these activities have when looking for a girlfriend.

Not one seemed so keen on going to school or on avoiding the police. Actually, going to prison was part of the networking with other thugs and the reputation building. So yes, there could be an investment of millions on cameras that can even see through the £5 hooded clothes but I don't think it will be much of a deterrent.

Re:bad idea + bad idea

[Mr. Slippery]

When you have the Military controling civilian security, the civilians become the enemy...You can't just take an MP out of the fleet, give him a badge and a gun, and expect him to take a squad car around the block with out incident.

We've been militarizing ordinary police work for the past few decades, since the Reagan era [reason.com]. It's part of the general trend of the militarization of society pushed by authoritarian neoconservatives.

Re:Whoa, they invented the maintenance-free plane?

[Attila Dimedici]

He is referring to reports of incidents where the police have attempted to confiscate cameras that were used to take pictures of them making an arrest. There was a case a year or so ago where the police arrested someone for videoing them making an arrest. There was actually a law in that state making it illegal to video a police officer. Fortunately, the state courts ruled the law unconstitutional.

Re:Next step

[Painted]

Having operated FLIR gear, there is no way the umbrella would be "completely transparent" to IR. Perhaps there will be a new technology in the future, such as sub-millimeter radar that could give the resolution you're implying, but current IR gear cannot. You would simply see that there was a heat source under the umbrella making it warmer than the background. The drug deal taking place under it would be undetectable.

Re:Next step

[MaskedSlacker]

Calling Parris shady is like calling Hitler mean.