Can I have that in plain English
“surveillance is there to protect them, and not spy on them.”
How does that work?
“There is a gap between what exists and what should exist,” according to the UK's commissioner responsible for ensuring that surveillance cameras are protecting members of the public, rather than spying on them. Tony Porter, who sees that public authorities follow the government's rules on operating surveillance cameras, on …
I have no problem with CCTV in public, if its there to keep the public safe.. Footage should be used as confidentially as would anything you tell your doctor..
I have CCTV at home, it is mine, it is there for security... So far i've not had anyone come to my house and get upset that there are cameras covering my gardens....
Next time you walk through any town, try to imagine that in place of every CCTV camera there is a watchtower atop which stands a man in a black uniform and peaked cap, using binoculars to look down at the citizens, writing in a notebook and occasionally talking to his overlords via a field telephone.
Would that make you feel safe? Or nervous?
There is absolutely no difference in intent or purpose.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019