ychen@bmwe30.net (Yaofeng) wrote in message news:...
[snip]
> This brings up another point. Aside from my suspicion ACLU in this
> country won't allow pervasive use of CCTV like what I saw on the
> street of London,
Actually, it's long been established that CCTV can be used in public
places. It gets dicey when those cameras start looking into fairly
private places, but even that has gotten pretty much blanket approval
from the courts.
> the politicians, with the help of technical people,
> are more of control freaks. Rather than using many CCTV's which
> requires man power to monitor, monitoring traffic only at choke points
> can easily be automated is what I think.
Strangely enough, we've gotten a fair number of cameras installed around
here. And it wasn't the ACLU that was the primary problem. The problem
was the divorce lawyers. The government was concerned that those
recordings could be subpeonaed to figure out if John was actually
going to work, or to Susies house. They put restrictions on how
closely they can zoom, and they destroy the copies pretty quickly. |