US Government secretly spying on EVERYONE by using civilian security cameras.

[QUOTE="seahorse123"][QUOTE="Laihendi"] The government harms innocent people a lot. If you trust a stranger to not abuse power, you are being foolish.Laihendi

I guess the US is perfect as long as it isn't as bad as Cuba and North Korea.Laihendi

I never said the US is perfect, I said the US isn't even close to a police state like some posters are saying. People go on and on about losing their freedoms when they still have a lot of freedom to do what they like to include criticize the government on a gaming web site.

Besides, from what I have seen there are mainly two people against stuff like this: criminals and people who are extremely paranoid. Criminals because they are scared they may get caught doing something illegal and paranoid people who think they're so important the FBI actually cares that they jerk off every night to pictures of Kate Upton or whoever else they get off with.

I don't care; as long you're doing nothing wrong, there's no problem.

If it's a secret, then why did a British tabloid website break the story?Nuck81

Ehm wlecome to like 20 Years ago. this crap is nothing new.

#OBAMA2012

love fear-mongering like this. In public you have no right to privacy. this is just used to catch criminals not watch you paranoid fuks.

not that the government would wanna watch you anyway, your life is probably boring as sh!t.

Besides, from what I have seen there are mainly two people against stuff like this: criminals

ad1x2

Daily Mail is first fail. Second....they don't have the manpower to do that. You crazy kids and your ideas about intell,:lol:LJS9502_basic

So because its Daily Mail its automatically a fail? Clearly you didn't read the link.

Second fail is that the Government does have the manpower to do it. The US Government is so secretive and they've done things the "general public" doesn't even know about. What did the Government tell you about 9/11?

What if I told you that Twin Towers fell at around the same speed as a building would during a controlled demolition?

Personally I have no problem with people spying on me. *shrugs*

:P

To all the people that "have nothing to hide", this information came from wikileaks, a site that the government despises because government prefers to keep its practises..hidden.

To all the people who say "as long as my privacy at home is respected then i'm ok with it", guys, Patriot act? Oh and psst, you're on the internet.

To the people who like their lives being private and are subject to moronic ridicule and absurd questions about why you should have a private life, respond with, mind your own business, and if they say why, you tell them, i don't know you so f*** you, that's why. ;)

I love public surveillance cameras. We need more of them IMO. They'd make for great TV shows too - sorta like COPS, only with raw video feeds of people doing stupid things.

They could get Bob Saget to narrate them. "America's Funniest Public Surveillance Videos".

Netherscourge

It's already being shown and it's called: The Smoking Gun Presents: The World's Dumbest featuring drunks, bad drivers, criminals and other idiots from around the world.

If people expect privacy 24/7, they best not leave the house as cameras are where you shop, relax, and play. If you go to a ball park to watch a baseball game, you can expect your picture to be broadcast across the country for all to see. If you enter a store to do some shopping, you can expect cameras to be there watching you as well as others to help protect you, especially from creeps like the one who was caught taking pictures up underneath the skirt of another shopper with his phone at a store in Marietta last week.

I am disgusted by the number of pansies in this thread saying that they're "ok" with being watched and spied on 24/7. Don't you ever get the feeling that something is just too intrusive? That it violates the concept of liberty? That it makes our world a little too controlled? Of course people who commit crimes that truly hurt others are deserving of some punishment. That doesn't mean that every single person who goes 6mph over the limit for 30 seconds deserves a ticket. Good lord.

I am disgusted by the number of pansies in this thread saying that they're "ok" with being watched and spied on 24/7. Don't you ever get the feeling that something is just too intrusive? That it violates the concept of liberty? That it makes our world a little too controlled? Of course people who commit crimes that truly hurt others are deserving of some punishment. That doesn't mean that every single person who goes 6mph over the limit for 30 seconds deserves a ticket. Good lord.

hartsickdiscipl

[QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

I am disgusted by the number of pansies in this thread saying that they're "ok" with being watched and spied on 24/7. Don't you ever get the feeling that something is just too intrusive? That it violates the concept of liberty? That it makes our world a little too controlled? Of course people who commit crimes that truly hurt others are deserving of some punishment. That doesn't mean that every single person who goes 6mph over the limit for 30 seconds deserves a ticket. Good lord.

TopTierHustler

Lol.. I don't know about their funding. I do know that a lot of local municipalities depend heavily on traffic ticket revenue to keep their petty little operations going.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]Daily Mail is first fail. Second....they don't have the manpower to do that. You crazy kids and your ideas about intell,:lol:ThisIsTwoFace

So because its Daily Mail its automatically a fail? Clearly you didn't read the link.

Second fail is that the Government does have the manpower to do it. The US Government is so secretive and they've done things the "general public" doesn't even know about. What did the Government tell you about 9/11?

What if I told you that Twin Towers fell at around the same speed as a building would during a controlled demolition?

[QUOTE="ThisIsTwoFace"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]Daily Mail is first fail. Second....they don't have the manpower to do that. You crazy kids and your ideas about intell,:lol:J-man45

So because its Daily Mail its automatically a fail? Clearly you didn't read the link.

Second fail is that the Government does have the manpower to do it. The US Government is so secretive and they've done things the "general public" doesn't even know about. What did the Government tell you about 9/11?

What if I told you that Twin Towers fell at around the same speed as a building would during a controlled demolition?

Looks more like someone covering their eyes than facepalming. Appropriate given the subject matter and your head in the sand mentality.

[QUOTE="J-man45"]

[QUOTE="ThisIsTwoFace"]

So because its Daily Mail its automatically a fail? Clearly you didn't read the link.

Second fail is that the Government does have the manpower to do it. The US Government is so secretive and they've done things the "general public" doesn't even know about. What did the Government tell you about 9/11?

What if I told you that Twin Towers fell at around the same speed as a building would during a controlled demolition?

hartsickdiscipl

Looks more like someone covering their eyes than facepalming. Appropriate given the subject matter and your head in the sand mentality.

It's a bear.

And whatever, since your statement reminds me of that thread you made a while back about 9/11 conspiracies (or maybe you were just a huge contributor, whatever), I realize I don't have patience to argue with you about that.

[QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

[QUOTE="J-man45"]

J-man45

Looks more like someone covering their eyes than facepalming. Appropriate given the subject matter and your head in the sand mentality.

It's a bear.

And whatever, since your statement reminds me of that thread you made a while back about 9/11 conspiracies (or maybe you were just a huge contributor, whatever), I realize I don't have patience to argue with you about that.

You're right. It's not at all abnormal for 3 steel-framed buildings to fall within their own footprint on the same day within their footprint from random plane impacts on just 2 of the buildings. Totally plausible:lol: Even more mundane- Seeing the BBC report that building 7 had fallen a good 20 minutes before it did.

[QUOTE="J-man45"]

[QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

Looks more like someone covering their eyes than facepalming. Appropriate given the subject matter and your head in the sand mentality.

hartsickdiscipl

It's a bear.

And whatever, since your statement reminds me of that thread you made a while back about 9/11 conspiracies (or maybe you were just a huge contributor, whatever), I realize I don't have patience to argue with you about that.

You're right. It's not at all abnormal for 3 steel-framed buildings to fall within their own footprint on the same day within their footprint from random plane impacts on just 2 of the buildings. Totally plausible:lol: Even more mundane- Seeing the BBC report that building 7 had fallen a good 20 minutes before it did.

umm there was nothing architecturally abnormal about the way the towers fell.

may i inquire as to where this information was obtained?

How am I gonna pick my nose now? Jesus.SolidSnake35

I thought Brits were already used to this.

I am disgusted by the number of pansies in this thread saying that they're "ok" with being watched and spied on 24/7. Don't you ever get the feeling that something is just too intrusive? That it violates the concept of liberty? That it makes our world a little too controlled? Of course people who commit crimes that truly hurt others are deserving of some punishment. That doesn't mean that every single person who goes 6mph over the limit for 30 seconds deserves a ticket. Good lord.

hartsickdiscipl

Privacy is important. I don't want Cameras following my every move. Its already bad in the UK, Croydon is just one BOROUGH in London and it has more cameras than the whole of New York.

ThisIsTwoFace

[QUOTE="J-man45"]

[QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

Looks more like someone covering their eyes than facepalming. Appropriate given the subject matter and your head in the sand mentality.

hartsickdiscipl

It's a bear.

And whatever, since your statement reminds me of that thread you made a while back about 9/11 conspiracies (or maybe you were just a huge contributor, whatever), I realize I don't have patience to argue with you about that.

You're right. It's not at all abnormal for 3 steel-framed buildings to fall within their own footprint on the same day within their footprint from random plane impacts on just 2 of the buildings. Totally plausible:lol: Even more mundane- Seeing the BBC report that building 7 had fallen a good 20 minutes before it did.

I don't doubt this is true, when you install apps on your smartphone, the small print says that you agree to give the right to be recorded through your camera or something like that.

Pretty sure you also give the right to be recorded through audio without notice too.

[QUOTE="ThisIsTwoFace"]

Privacy is important. I don't want Cameras following my every move. Its already bad in the UK, Croydon is just one BOROUGH in London and it has more cameras than the whole of New York.

comp_atkins

I am a notorious figure in the courts of Gotham.

And I think people are missing the point about why we need privacy rights: The more power and overwatch the government has over you, the more potential there is for an abuse of power within government and the ability to silent anybody who disagrees with the government.-RocBoys9489-

This is correct. It isn't necessarily the "now" that we should be worried about, its the future that the problem begins. Government never starts things big, they always start programs small and grow them over time. This incramentalism essentially allows for nearly anything to happen because people react to things based on emotion. If the governments came out and said "we are going to be installing millions of cameras around the country to spy on people" there would be outrage, however when cameras are slowly installed for "cost cutting" and "safety" and "basic traffic vilations", people don't really care. The government just eases the idea into peoples minds.

When I approach a stray dog i don't just lunge at it and try to grab it, i slowly walk towards it saying nice things and i eventually get close enough to hold it and it lets me. The government uses the same approach on us.

So once this idea of watching people from the streets becomes engrained in our society the government can use that advantage to track down people they deem bad.

Take, for instance, Bernard von NotHaus. He minted gold and silver coins and is facing prison because of it. Now the prosecutor is calling him a "domestic terrorist". Yes, they called him a terrorist because he made some gold coins and his own currency. A terrorist. Huh, thats interesting. You know what else people claim about terrorists? That they shouldn't receive a "right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury..."

Government starts by simply planting the seeds of an idea and slowly let it grow. It has been proven over and over * 1000 again that this is the way they work. Many people either deny it for the sake of denying it, don't see it, or refuse to want to see it.