Plenty of eyes on Oahu

[Dos Equis]

Why am I not surprised the ACLU is on the wrong side of another issue?   

Plenty of eyes on Oahu
By Marisa Yamane
From popular tourist spots, to Chinatown and Waikiki, surveillance cameras have become common across Oahu.

Meaning, you may be caught on video when you least expect it.

Some argue it takes away from our privacy rights, but police say in many cases, the cameras have proven to be valuable crime-fighting tools.

You're about to watch a crime occur. It's just before 8AM at the Pali Lookout.

Two cars have just arrived. Nearby, an SUV. The driver covering up his license plate.

"Once he covered, I called into HPD," said Akal Security dispatcher Dee Rapoza.

The SUV parks between the two cars. Within seconds, the man smashes and grabs. then goes to the next car.

"Here he is, see him, he uses some kind of gadget, see you see, he takes the stuff jumps, in the passenger seat," said Rapoza.

And they're gone.

A minute later, the victims return to their cars.

"They can't believe it, you know what I mean," said Rapoza.

Police later tracked down the SUV and made an arrest, thanks to the help of Akal Security, which monitors the Pali Lookout from this small room in Pearl Kai.

"Police can't be everywhere at one time so we employ technology to help reduce the cost and still provide the safety," said Lee Donohue, Akal Security Pacific Regional Director.

Donohue says when this camera was installed in 2005, crime at the Pali Lookout went down by 44%.

"This is the wave of the future," said Donohue.

Surveillance cameras are everywhere these days -- from tourist spots, to malls and businesses, to streets and freeways, and even homes.

And they're all over Waikiki and Chinatown.

"Sometimes maybe a drug deal going down Downtown, a transaction, it's seen on camera and the officers respond," said Sgt. Kim Buffett of Crimestoppers.

And when criminals are caught in the act on video, prosecutors love it.

"Picture is worth a thousand words. Once it gets into court, most people say I give up," said Donohue.

While there are many advantages to surveillance cameras, not everyone is looking at the big picture though the same lens.

Privacy advocates like the American Civil Liberties Union oppose government surveillance cameras.

"They promote a false sense of security and divert scarce taxpayer dollars away from proven measures such as hiring more police officers, increasing community policing, increasing foot patrols, and supporting improved lighting in our neighborhoods," said Vanessa Chong, Executive Director of the ACLU of Hawaii.

Hawaii has a video privacy law, but that mainly protects people in places that are thought to be private, such as bathrooms, locker rooms, and bedrooms.

"In Hawaii, so far the ACLU has not received any reports of government surveillance cameras being used illegally," said Chong.

While police use cameras to catch criminals -- ironically sometimes criminals use cameras to avoid police.

"I've worked on patrol where they've actually had cameras where they could tell when we're coming," said Buffett.

But police say the positive outweighs the negative.

When asked if it's too much like big brother, he replied, "No I don't think so. I think we're looking at what is fair for the greater good for the community."

While privacy advocates say surveillance cameras take away some of our freedom, police say the cameras are vital to help take away the freedoms of those caught breaking the law. 

http://www.khon2.com/news/local/15538492.html

[Decker]

I don't always agree with the ACLU either.

But it is interesting that you side with more government intrusion into your life.

"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

--Ben Franklin

[Mr. Cortisol]

i'm torn on this issue.

i like the fact that security cameras will catch criminals.

i don't like the fact that president hilary can have a bad day and bully through legislation that lets her abuse those cameras.  that's the problem - one stroke of a pen and that whole camera infrastructure is a population tracking device.  Don't say it can't happen - history says otherwise.

[Dos Equis]

I don't always agree with the ACLU either.

But it is interesting that you side with more government intrusion into your life.

"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

--Ben Franklin

Where exactly is the liberty/privacy interest in public places?  Did you read the story?  They are putting cameras in public, high crime areas.  Videotaping public places is not government intrusion into my life.

Have you ever had your car broken into?  I have.  Property crime is a huge problem on this island.  I welcome cameras in these areas.  They have reduced crime by nearly 50 percent in some areas. 

[Decker]

Where exactly is the liberty/privacy interest in public places?  Did you read the story?  They are putting cameras in public, high crime areas.  Videotaping public places is not government intrusion into my life.

Have you ever had your car broken into?  I have.  Property crime is a huge problem on this island.  I welcome cameras in these areas.  They have reduced crime by nearly 50 percent in some areas. 

I read the article.

The judicial scrutiny of a law/gov. act infringing on personal liberty in a commons area would be low indeed. 

I'm certainly glad that you are not personally inconvenienced by this type of governmental intrusion.  That's a relief.

But the ACLU is right.  Put more cops on the beat and shitcan the cameras. 

Or we could make a compendium tape of all the rapes and murders and thefts caught on camera.  What about masked perpetrators?  Does the camera apprehend them?

Another marginally effective tool in the fight against crime.

I prefer not to be under surveillance everywhere I go, especially in public places.  I don't like to be plugged-in, online, 'can you hear me now', always on the radar and under the eye of big brother.

[Dos Equis]

I read the article.

The judicial scrutiny of a law/gov. act infringing on personal liberty in a commons area would be low indeed. 

I'm certainly glad that you are not personally inconvenienced by this type of governmental intrusion.  That's a relief.

But the ACLU is right.  Put more cops on the beat and shitcan the cameras. 

Or we could make a compendium tape of all the rapes and murders and thefts caught on camera.  What about masked perpetrators?  Does the camera apprehend them?

Another marginally effective tool in the fight against crime.

I prefer not to be under surveillance everywhere I go, especially in public places.  I don't like to be plugged-in, online, 'can you hear me now', always on the radar and under the eye of big brother.

The ACLU is wrong.  It's more efficient to put cameras in these high crime areas than hire cops to patrol places like lookout points.  They showed a clip of how this works:  a perp smashed the windows of two cars, the security service notified the cops, the perp was arrested within one hour.  Also showed the owner of one of the cars (probably a tourist) in absolute distress when they saw the shattered glass from their car on the ground. 

No one is losing any privacy interest.  No one has any expectation that they will have privacy when they're in a public place, particularly a lookout point.

And this isn't marginally effective.  They reduced property crime by nearly 50 percent in some areas where these cameras are located. 

[Decker]

The ACLU is wrong.  It's more efficient to put cameras in these high crime areas than hire cops to patrol places like lookout points.  They showed a clip of how this works:  a perp smashed the windows of two cars, the security service notified the cops, the perp was arrested within one hour.  Also showed the owner of one of the cars (probably a tourist) in absolute distress when they saw the shattered glass from their car on the ground. 

The ACLU is not wrong.   Cameras do nothing to reduce violent crime or the like.  Plus there's already documented cases of abuse of public surveillance cameras by the cops.

No one is losing any privacy interest.  No one has any expectation that they will have privacy when they're in a public place, particularly a lookout point.

No one's claiming that a reasonable expectation of privacy exists in a public place.  That's a fairly stupid argument.  It's the attendant effects:  like constant surveillance raising the 'Big Brother' issue which may have 1st amendment implications as far as having a chilling effect on free speech in that area.  The mindset that we are being not only watched but taped all the time in areas that "we the people" own is a dangerous mindset.

It's a slippery slope argument that I make.  Look everyone!  Having government watch us in all public venues is a-ok.  It's not.  Let's foster that paranoid feeling again.  Boy, that sounds like a song.

And this isn't marginally effective.  They reduced property crime by nearly 50 percent in some areas where these cameras are located. 

A 44% reduction.  Great.  Smashed windshields reduced in number from 4 to 2 in the park during the surveillance. 

I'd love to see the statistical abstract for this claim of 50% reduction in crime because there is no study that shows public surveillance does anything to reduce crime overall.

[Dos Equis]

The ACLU is not wrong.   Cameras do nothing to reduce violent crime or the like.  Plus there's already documented cases of abuse of public surveillance cameras by the cops.
No one's claiming that a reasonable expectation of privacy exists in a public place.  That's a fairly stupid argument.  It's the attendant effects:  like constant surveillance raising the 'Big Brother' issue which may have 1st amendment implications as far as having a chilling effect on free speech in that area.  The mindset that we are being not only watched but taped all the time in areas that "we the people" own is a dangerous mindset.

It's a slippery slope argument that I make.  Look everyone!  Having government watch us in all public venues is a-ok.  It's not.  Let's foster that paranoid feeling again.  Boy, that sounds like a song.

 A 44% reduction.  Great.  Smashed windshields reduced in number from 4 to 2 in the park during the surveillance. 

I'd love to see the statistical abstract for this claim of 50% reduction in crime because there is no study that shows public surveillance does anything to reduce crime overall.

Violent crime isn't a problem on this island.  Property crime is a serious problem.  I'm sure the people who have been violated by these criminals are much happier than you that the property crime rate has been slashed nearly in half.   

A person can no longer break into a car in a public place without being caught on tape.  What is exactly is the First Amendment issue here?  What speech is "chilled"? 

[Tre]

Even if there is NO reduction in the actual number of crimes committed, it stands to reason that the arrest and conviction rate would be higher in areas where the cameras are placed. 

[Decker]

Violent crime isn't a problem on this island.  Property crime is a serious problem.  I'm sure the people who have been violated by these criminals are much happier than you that the property crime rate has been slashed nearly in half. 

That's what I thought.  A bunch of yuppies crying about having their car keyed.  I kid.

I would like to see proof of the 44% reduction...like I said, windshield damage has been reduced from 4 to 2 cases! 

A person can no longer break into a car in a public place without being caught on tape.  What is exactly is the First Amendment issue here?  What speech is "chilled"? 

Yes.  The old saw of hiding one's face has just disappeared.  We are at the mercy of the camera.

The first amendment issue here is that people in the public park may not assemble or engage in free speech activities if it is under constant scrutiny by the government.  That's the chilling effect not to mention that it's already been shown that cops misuse the cameras and the information gleaned from such surveillances in other US states.

[Dos Equis]

That's what I thought.  A bunch of yuppies crying about having their car keyed.  I kid.

I would like to see proof of the 44% reduction...like I said, windshield damage has been reduced from 4 to 2 cases! 
 Yes.  The old saw of hiding one's face has just disappeared.  We are at the mercy of the camera.

The first amendment issue here is that people in the public park may not assemble or engage in free speech activities if it is under constant scrutiny by the government.  That's the chilling effect not to mention that it's already been shown that cops misuse the cameras and the information gleaned from such surveillances in other US states.

   Man this is about people having their personal property damaged and stolen.

That first amendment argument sounds like a croc to me dude.  People don't gather at lookout point parking lots.  Even if they did, a camera isn't going to stop them.  Not buying that one. 
 

[War-Horse]

Im all for cameras in public places. Airports, restaurants, parking lots.....   Its kind of like leaving your porch lights on for security, the burglar doesnt want to be seen, so he runs to the next house.

As long as there is a sign stating cameras in use, it will lower crime.

[Deicide]

Why am I not surprised the ACLU is on the wrong side of another issue?   

Plenty of eyes on Oahu
By Marisa Yamane
From popular tourist spots, to Chinatown and Waikiki, surveillance cameras have become common across Oahu.

Meaning, you may be caught on video when you least expect it.

Some argue it takes away from our privacy rights, but police say in many cases, the cameras have proven to be valuable crime-fighting tools.

You're about to watch a crime occur. It's just before 8AM at the Pali Lookout.

Two cars have just arrived. Nearby, an SUV. The driver covering up his license plate.

"Once he covered, I called into HPD," said Akal Security dispatcher Dee Rapoza.

The SUV parks between the two cars. Within seconds, the man smashes and grabs. then goes to the next car.

"Here he is, see him, he uses some kind of gadget, see you see, he takes the stuff jumps, in the passenger seat," said Rapoza.

And they're gone.

A minute later, the victims return to their cars.

"They can't believe it, you know what I mean," said Rapoza.

Police later tracked down the SUV and made an arrest, thanks to the help of Akal Security, which monitors the Pali Lookout from this small room in Pearl Kai.

"Police can't be everywhere at one time so we employ technology to help reduce the cost and still provide the safety," said Lee Donohue, Akal Security Pacific Regional Director.

Donohue says when this camera was installed in 2005, crime at the Pali Lookout went down by 44%.

"This is the wave of the future," said Donohue.

Surveillance cameras are everywhere these days -- from tourist spots, to malls and businesses, to streets and freeways, and even homes.

And they're all over Waikiki and Chinatown.

"Sometimes maybe a drug deal going down Downtown, a transaction, it's seen on camera and the officers respond," said Sgt. Kim Buffett of Crimestoppers.

And when criminals are caught in the act on video, prosecutors love it.

"Picture is worth a thousand words. Once it gets into court, most people say I give up," said Donohue.

While there are many advantages to surveillance cameras, not everyone is looking at the big picture though the same lens.

Privacy advocates like the American Civil Liberties Union oppose government surveillance cameras.

"They promote a false sense of security and divert scarce taxpayer dollars away from proven measures such as hiring more police officers, increasing community policing, increasing foot patrols, and supporting improved lighting in our neighborhoods," said Vanessa Chong, Executive Director of the ACLU of Hawaii.

Hawaii has a video privacy law, but that mainly protects people in places that are thought to be private, such as bathrooms, locker rooms, and bedrooms.

"In Hawaii, so far the ACLU has not received any reports of government surveillance cameras being used illegally," said Chong.

While police use cameras to catch criminals -- ironically sometimes criminals use cameras to avoid police.

"I've worked on patrol where they've actually had cameras where they could tell when we're coming," said Buffett.

But police say the positive outweighs the negative.

When asked if it's too much like big brother, he replied, "No I don't think so. I think we're looking at what is fair for the greater good for the community."

While privacy advocates say surveillance cameras take away some of our freedom, police say the cameras are vital to help take away the freedoms of those caught breaking the law. 

http://www.khon2.com/news/local/15538492.html

Where does Jesus fit into this?

[Dos Equis]

Where does Jesus fit into this?