Hello fellow Brothers. Californian here (yeah yeah, say what you want I don't care). I got pointed to this article from another forum and I had to come here to see if this was true.

seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/1110AP_Police_Cameras.html

Apparently the Chief proposed putting surveillance cameras in apartments, malls, etc. and even private homes because of a shortage of police officers? Please tell me this is a joke, or that this fucktard has no real influence. I especially cringed at this part:

"I know a lot of people are concerned about Big Brother, but my response to that is, if you are not doing anything wrong, why should you worry about it?" Chief Harold Hurtt told reporters Wednesday at a regular briefing.

So I guess being trifty is more important than Freedom and Liberty to this guy.

Just thought I would see if this was true, get your reactions/comments, and possibly give you all a heads up if you missed it. I don't want filth like this anywhere in the world, let alone in my beloved America.

ETA: forgot to make the link live.

sad to say it could happen. they are putting up red light cameras now. the chief says if you are not doing anything wrong then you have nothing to worry about.

abc13.com

Cameras could soon help cops monitor high crime areas
Chief proposes video surveillance to help fight crime
KTRK By Andy Cerota

(2/15/06 - KTRK/HOUSTON) - First it was red light cameras at certain intersections. Now Houston police are looking to install other cameras to help them fight crime. It's a solution other cities have come up with and it's always met with controversy.
With all this talk of hiring more police officers and not enough money to do it, Houston's police chief has offered a new proposal. This plan includes placing surveillance cameras at crime hot spots such as malls, apartment complexes and those areas where prostitutes and drug dealers hang out.

The video would be fed directly into the police department. Chief Harold Hurtt says it's really no different that the red light cameras which will eventually be installed at 50 intersections. In fact, there's already a plan to install five of those surveillance cameras in downtown Houston along Main Street to track and monitor any criminal activity.

Chief Hurtt said, "Wherever you go in a city this size you're going to be on video camera or tape at least 12 times a day. If you just think about it, you go to a convenience store, you get gas, you go to the bank, you drive down the street in front of people's houses where motion sets off the cameras, you're already on camera. I know a lot of people are concerned about big brother. My response to that is, if you're not doing anything wrong, why should you worry about it?"

Chief Hurtt believes it would be cheaper to have the cameras than to hire enough police officers and have them at every street corner. He's even suggesting that those homeowners who have too many calls for service to their homes be forced to install the cameras as well.
(Copyright © 2006, KTRK-TV)
http://abclocal.go.com/ktrk/story?section=local&id=3909198

I have a problem with this in that the cost for this extra apartment security is borne mostly by people who garner none of the benefits.  It is the responsibility of the apartment management company to provide additional security and the cost should be borne by those living in the apartments, and not by business and home owners living many miles away.

Let the tenants pay for it through a rent increase.

The problem is there is a difference between security cameras watching doorways, hallways, streets, etc and monitoring cameras inside the residence. I wouldn't want to know my wife and kids can be watched anytime of the day they want by anyone who can pass a physical exam. Not to mention anything personal, intimate, or embarassing that may happen in my home.