A question for you Britons here.......

[Artina89]

I can't say it has ever bothered me. I don't go around commiting crimes, and people who do tend to cover their faces as mentioned before. Anyway, whenever a show like Crimewatch has CCTV footage, the resolution is so bad that I can never tell who they are anyway.

 

[Azure-Supernova]

Only cameras we have around here are in major points (if 'major' even applies to Cannock in any sense of the word) of the shopping centre. They don't bother me to be fair, whatever helps security stopping the layabout trying to shank me over who was in line for a Greggs sausage roll first.

 

[FlipC]

On the question of privacy - no. They're in public places or have been set up by private businesses in their own premises. Setting up a camera in an area that could be expected to be private without informing the users would be illegal.

Does it bother me? Yes, but for specific reasons to do with their deployment. The original plan was that they'd be accessories, tools to work alongside the police. Instead in some cases they became replacements. Rather than have a few police officers patrol an area instead set up cameras and have one operator monitoring 12 screens (or more). Then it got worse. Rather than being active in that a crime could be seen and called in; they became more reactive. Once a crime has been committed then pull up the CCTV footage to see if the perpetrators can be identified.

So if they're being monitored at all they're sharing time with other cameras and screens so provided a criminal takes basic precautions it could be said they have a lower likelihood of being caught than they would have been with random patrols.

 

[x EvilErmine x]

Living in Liverpool, arguably renowned as one of the 'crime' hotspots in the country then i say that the increased incidence of cameras has done jack shit to the levels of crime. There still at nearly the same levels they were before all the cameras were installed. They don't make as much of a difference as the pro-camera people would have you believe as the criminals just employ the age old tactic of 'covering your damn face up so nobody can see who you are' or they just vandalize the camera.

I think some one mentioned the average speed cameras we have on a lot of the motorways here in the UK too. If you don't know how they work then basically, a camera by the roadside identifies your car by the reg and then measures the time it takes for your car to pass by another roadside camera a fixed distance away. Form this result the speed is calculated over the distance between the cameras and a fine and points are issued automatically if your going too fast. Now this sounds fine in theory but is quite dangerous in practice.

Because what happens is that people see the camera and think 'shit gonna have to be careful here' so they have one eye glued to the speedo and aren't concentrating properly on the road ahead where someone else hasn't been paying so much attention to his speed but then glances down and notices he is going too fast so slams on to slow down, the driver behind does'nt notice in time for the aforementioned reason and promptly slams into the car that has slowed down cue ambulances, firemen and police closing the motorway while people get cut out of cars and the traffic wombles keeping it closed for hours more so they can pick up all the bits of smashed car.

 

[The Lugz]

As I understand, the UK is the country with the most surveillance cameras than any other. I'm from the US and so don't understand much about this. So I decided to ask.

My question for you members from the good old UK, does this bother you? Do you feel your privacy has been breached?

Thanks for any input.

Privacy: uneffected people can SEE YOU outside.. seriously what's the difference between that and a camera anyway?
really?
right.

safety? plegh.. probably makes it less safe because actual criminals will hide their faces so getting an id of them is paradoxically less likely as the helmet/face-mask idea spreads so you wont even get vague descriptions any-more
it's only the concealed spy-cameras that really deliver the goods, if you make criminals paranoid about cameras they'll just cover up.

mostly it's a waste of money and power.
but it makes brilliant you-tube videos so i don't mind.

 

[M-E-D The Poet]

...Britains? The term is Britons but I'll forgive you because it made me laugh.

To answer your question, CCTV hasn't really changed much (At least, in the area where I live) its made it a bit easier to catch people who are publicly drunk and stuff like that but most actual criminals have wised up and cover their faces and then the cameras are just pointless. One of the few times when it actually works is during riots (Which we have had recently) and people are too stupid to cover their faces properly when they're looting. Privacy isn't really an issue, its not like they're inside our houses.

he also said "most surveillance cameras than any other"


If you're going to nitpick, do it with class and do your job.

 

[Ymbirtt]

As I understand, the UK is the country with the most surveillance cameras than any other. I'm from the US and so don't understand much about this. So I decided to ask.

My question for you members from the good old UK, does this bother you? Do you feel your privacy has been breached?

Thanks for any input.

No, not really. The surveillance cameras are in shops and on high streets, both areas which I technically don't own, so if the government wants to watch me using their streets, or if a shopkeeper wants to watch me shopping in their shop, or if my university wants to watch me use their library, then that's fine by me since I have no right to make rules about what they do with their property. If the cameras were in my house or something, then I'd be complaining about breach of privacy, but since the cameras are in places accessible to the general public, we can't argue that the things we do there are meant to be private.

 

[devotedsniper]

Unless your commiting crimes there should be no real issue really, they are there to help reduce crime and catch criminals when a crime is commited (and they do work), they are generally used to direct the police to criminals running rather than identifying them (as any crim with half a brain will know to wear a mask).

Either way it doesn't bother me.

 

[JWRosser]

yes it bothers me for one thing it doesn't actually do anything.

if two drunk idiots get into a fight in the high street no one ever goes "hey we better calm the heid, we're on CCTV!" no they just lose it as per and hospitalize one another like they always did while the cops sell half the stuff they record on to shows on Channel 5 and Sky...

CCTV has cut down on street crime not one iota (and you can go check that statement if you like) most of the time its just a giant waste of money.

This.
Regarding the 'giant waste of money' part, so are a lot of things the government do...


It doesn't bother me that they're there in regards to privacy, as they don't look into my house or anything. But don't be mislead - this isn't like 1984 - you don't walk down the street only to have cameras ominously following you. In fact, I've hardly noticed. Of course they're outside quite a few shops or banks but that can be expected.

 

[Gunner 51]

First they put CCTV cameras everywhere, then it's stop'n'search, then full-body scanners in airports and armed policemen everywhere. Before you know it, you have yourself a fascist state and the populace can't rebel because the state knows what you're up to before you put it into action.

Nice Slippery Slope Fallacy, there.

I don't care much. I live out in a small town so there are none around here, and I've never noticed any in the streets when I am elsewhere. Even so, they're only ever put in public places anyway, so it's no different than if someone was actually there.

Why should it matter whether I'm seen by some passer-by or a camera?

Edit;
Oh, and CCTV cams installed in shops or private property are owned and put there by the management of that shop or the properties owner, respectively.

I still think it is a slippery slope. But I'm the kind of guy who would like my private life to remain just that. If I want to go to the chemist for some prophylactics or even take a shower - I don't want to be videotaped doing it on the grounds that it's embarrassing and intrusive. (Even if I don't notice it, I still think it's morally wrong to videotape someone without their consent.)

But the cameras are everywhere. Not just ones that log your whereabouts, but we're talking speed cameras too. Those things have people diverting their attention from the road to their speedometers.

I don't see how inconveniencing and spying on the public all the time justifies catching a few drunken fools on a Friday night. The means don't justify the ends.

 

[Shadowsafter]

Btw the term is "Britons" you yankie dumbass.
Also the word is said "Al-oo-min-ee-um" you hick prick
I'll stop now.
Anyways the cameras ain't in our goddamn bedrooms dude, the fact that we have so many is down to us bieng in a downwards social spiral where dozens of benefits bottom feeders eponentially produce dozens of little chav children that fill the streets with crime. Just look at the recent riots.
So I like the cameras.

 

[Shadowsafter]

I am not from the UK, but I once made holiday there. One night we got drunk and were weaving over a street as out of the sudden a voice out of a speaker told us, that we are not allowed to weave here. As a someone from a country that is really ***** about cameras and privacy (Germany) I found that highly disturbing. My friend then kicked down a bin and we run away.

Hold on a bloody second I just read this and, WHAT?
I have never encountered any of this sort of thing in all my 16 years of living here.
The only place I'd expect to encounter such a thing is in YOUR country of Germany (Circa 1942)

I call thee a LIAR!

 

[Kiardras]

It used to really bother me, its an invasion of privacy, and the government should not have to watch your every move. I can barely leave my house without being on camera.

But. As the recent vandalism and criminal acts in London and other cities showed, CCTV has its use. Its helped to prosecute hundreds of scumbags involved in the vandalism and looting, and now I'm having a moral struggle with my opinion on it. On one hand I still object to the idea of CCTV, but seeing how useful it has been and how much it has aided the police, I find it harder to take such an Anti stance as I used to.

 

[malus_vai]

In my opinion, if you're not doing anything wrong, you've got nothing to worry about. Personally I have nothing against them seeing as a friend of mine got attacked in town once (live just outside Bristol) thanks to CCTV the 3 guys who attacked him got caught and paid damages.

 

[Hamish Durie]

I waved to one once
it waved back
I was scared

 

[Gunner 51]

I find the surveillance state to be incredibly intrusive to be the first blow in chipping away the civil liberties we in Britain take for granted. But the Closed Circuit Television Cameras aren't just in the streets, they're in practically every building around - you can't scratch your arse without some voyeuristic type watching you.

First they put CCTV cameras everywhere, then it's stop'n'search, then full-body scanners in airports and armed policemen everywhere. Before you know it, you have yourself a fascist state and the populace can't rebel because the state knows what you're up to before you put it into action.

The CCTV cameras are the vanguard of a paranoid people and an incompetent state.

wait wait wait wait, the person who doesn't want to be seen on camera for no real reason is calling other people paranoid.

Pot kettle black mate.

Sorry, I shouldn't have put that down. That was a brainfart on my end.

Please accept my revised version...
"The CCTV cameras are the vanguard of a paranoid and incompetent state."

 

[MGlBlaze]

I still think it is a slippery slope. But I'm the kind of guy who would like my private life to remain just that. If I want to go to the chemist for some prophylactics or even take a shower - I don't want to be videotaped doing it on the grounds that it's embarrassing and intrusive. (Even if I don't notice it, I still think it's morally wrong to videotape someone without their consent.)

But the cameras are everywhere. Not just ones that log your whereabouts, but we're talking speed cameras too. Those things have people diverting their attention from the road to their speedometers.

I don't see how inconveniencing and spying on the public all the time justifies catching a few drunken fools on a Friday night. The means don't justify the ends.

No, it... really isn't. It's a significant leap to go from CCTV cameras in the streets to being video-taped while taking a shower.

Also if speed cameras make you take your attention away from the road and diverting it to the speedometer more than usual, that says much more about someone's (lack of) driving ability and safety rather than the presence of the cameras'.

 

[Gunner 51]

No, it... really isn't. It's a significant leap to go from CCTV cameras in the streets to being video-taped while taking a shower.

Also if speed cameras make you take your attention away from the road and diverting it to the speedometer more than usual, that says much more about someone's (lack of) driving ability and safety rather than the presence of the cameras'.

I guess my main point is you can act lawfully and do things you'd rather not be caught doing, but it's still an intrusion to be video taped doing so without one's consent. We all have something to hide.

But when it comes to speeding. I think it is possible to speed in a safe fashion, so long as the driver is alert and is in control of their car - they should be fine. I find a traffic police officer's discretion to be a fairer judge than a speed camera. An encounter with a firm but fair policeman sticks in a speeder's mind a lot more than a faceless and forgettable fine.

 

[Trivun]

As an Englishman I don't see any problem with cameras, and I don't feel like my privacy is being breached. The way I've always seen it is that if you have nothing to hide then why argue against CCTV cameras at all? I have nothing to hide, so I'm all for them. If they started trying to wire up my home or whatever with cameras then yes, I would have a problem, because that is breaching your privacy, but in public it's all good. If you don't like being caught on film then don't go outside, it's that simple.

 

[kickassfrog]

As I understand, the UK is the country with the most surveillance cameras than any other. I'm from the US and so don't understand much about this. So I decided to ask.

My question for you members from the good old UK, does this bother you? Do you feel your privacy has been breached?

Thanks for any input.

It doesn't actually bother me, but I think the people who call it invasion of privacy would be the first to cry foul if they got burgled and the burglar got away without being caught on CCTV.

In short, I don't mind, because I don't break the law.