Comrade Dan's government has covertly intorduced a new level of surveillance?

[jaydee]

Getting off topic and about to turn into a big blue.

[Bossxr8]

Originally Posted by leesa

The numbers of men killing women far outnumber the numbers of women killing men. Why do people keep pulling the "but men....." whenever someone tries to mention the atrocious rates of men killing women in this country and general disadvantage women face?

Domestic violence and women killed by men is a topic quite close to my heart, of course I remember their names. Are you really asking me why I don't give murdered men equal space in my memory?

Take it to reddit, we don't want this SJW crap on an automotive forum ffs.

[T3rminator]

Originally Posted by cs123

While I deplore any violence against a person, I cannot agree with comments that women cannot walk around safely. The stats do not support that.

This is why I highlight the word "feel". You can throw all the stats you want, but if someone "feels" unsafe then there is really no difference whether it is actually safe or not when you get down to it.

Its a bit like our harassment laws. It doesn't matter what your intent is or how you think the other person should have felt, if someone feels you have harassed them, then you have a problem. That's actually the legality of it.

[cs123]

Originally Posted by T3rminator

This is why I highlight the word "feel". You can throw all the stats you want, but if someone "feels" unsafe then there is really no difference whether it is actually safe or not when you get down to it.

Its a bit like our harassment laws. It doesn't matter what your intent is or how you think the other person should have felt, if someone feels you have harassed them, then you have a problem. That's actually the legality of it.

What about people with phobias? They feel unsafe in situations that are perfectly safe. If someone with a fear of flying said to me that the plane was going to crash, should I say "Oh My god!" or tell them that flying was safe?


And harassment isn't just about whether a person feels harassed. Across Australian workplaces harassment claims are made daily. Most of them are dismissed.

Enough of this topic, it's a bit stupid and has nothing to do with cameras

[Giant Cranium]

Originally Posted by leesa

It's actually not ridiculous at all. It can be hard to understand when it's not something that affects your daily life but majority of women are on guard and scoping their surroundings the moment they leave their front door.

Most avoid walking in dark spots in preference of lit up areas, will take a long way around to avoid walking through a park, keep a mental note on who's walking near them and if they're being followed, wrap their keys through their fingers when walking home from the train at night, lock their car doors as soon as they get in, etc etc I could go on.

Men typically get to walk down the street at night with no fear but women don't really have that luxury. Women often can't avoid walking down the street at night to get home from work and then if they're raped/murdered we all hear the blaming again, "being outside of a house at night is not safe and women need to keep themselves safer" as if most women don't already take excessive measures to try and avoid violent men.

You could probably fall asleep out on a park bench and wake up in the morning without having been raped, but if a woman did that she'd be told it was her fault for not keeping herself out of harm's way.

Please have a little more empathy for the women in your life who are trying to keep themselves safe.

I believe there's been a nation-wide push to increase CCTV coverage after Eunji Ban, Jill Meagher, Eurydice Dixon and countless other murders.

a few weeks ago i took my dog for a walk at about 5am, i was walking through the local dog park and it was very dark, now im a 195cm 130kg bloke and i could see this woman walking towards me but slowing down, i had the feeling that she was scared as often at night i see women cross the road (my wife does the same at night when she is walking) so they dont have to walk past me. in this instance i was lucky that my dog ran to her to say hello and she recognised betty then was fine with me walking closer. as a bloke who isnt going to do anything untoward it sucks to be labeled and scared of but i can see where they are coming from, they should like i do be able to walk freely at anytime of day with out worrying about the scum in the world. hopefully these sorts of cameras help

Originally Posted by jaydee

Getting off topic and about to turn into a big blue.

It's on topic, the cctv network is being expanded to improve visibility of crimes commited and deter offenders. A big part of that is assaults on women. It's also why lighting is being installed everywhere so there are fewer dark spots at night

Originally Posted by Bossxr8

Take it to reddit, we don't want this SJW crap on an automotive forum ffs.

It's The Bar [not needed]

When someone posts a topic you get to hear all sides of it and not just the ones that appeal to you. CCTV is being expanded and a big part of that is to help women.

[PG2]

Originally Posted by jaydee

Getting off topic and about to turn into a big blue.

Yep...

Take this as a warning everyone.

Despite what most think, I don't like closing threads but at the same time, we don't tolerate members having little digs at each other to get a reaction.

It's simple, discuss it like adults, and the thread stays open - start having pot shots at each other and the thread will be closed.

[zipping]

Originally Posted by Bossxr8

Take it to reddit, we don't want this SJW crap on an automotive forum ffs.

Especially a Ford Forum.

Wherever people lie on the political spectrum.....Henry Ford did more for the underprivileged and working class man than any other human on the planet (before and after him).

His vision and ability to mass produce cars cheaply provided freedom of movement to the masses that unlocked untold wealth and lifted most of the western world into the middle class. His ideas were easily transferable to other items further enriching everyone.

No doubt Henry was flawed as we all are, but his ideas led to freedom for the common people something that all here should be aware of and celebrate.

If you read the history of Fomoco you should also be aware that Henry monitored his workforce and attempted to influence their behaviours in his own ideals.

This was a dark chapter in the Ford history, not all that far removed from the discussion at the outset of this thread. Rightly people were outraged and that was 100 years ago.

Surveillance imo is always presented as a good idea but always tends to be abused by those in control of it. OTOH our phones are pretty much telling big tech everything anyway.

[Ben73]

Let them know your thoughts through their YouTube channel if you must.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ZSSQN4ny8o

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YchFZvWafe8

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_TphOEJgrEo

[T3rminator]

Originally Posted by cs123

What about people with phobias? They feel unsafe in situations that are perfectly safe. If someone with a fear of flying said to me that the plane was going to crash, should I say "Oh My god!" or tell them that flying was safe?

That's the point. It actually doesn't matter what you say, it is likely to make no difference to how they "feel". You could tell them "dear, its all right" and you could show them the Qantas impeccable safety record, but it won't change a thing. You can however try change the situation e.g. distract with entertainment, cover their senses during take off, give em a sleeping tablet

To bring it back to cameras, CCTV, amongst other things, could be a mechanism to make some people "feel" safer. Where in reality, it might make no difference at all, because its already safe. Sorry, its hard to explain, I had a psychologist once explain it to me, and once I you get it you can see it happening on a day to day basis.

Originally Posted by cs123

Enough of this topic

Ok

Originally Posted by cs123

Enough of this topic, it's a bit stupid and has nothing to do with cameras

It has everything to do with cameras. In Brisbane it's even called the CitySafe Closed Circuit Television network. I don't really understand the comments suggesting it's not on-topic because to me it's very on-topic. What is it that you want to actually discuss about these cameras other than how they're to make cities safer?

[JasonACT]

After the fact maybe, last time I saw some video of an idiot doing bad things, they weren't paying attention to the CCTV. So it's easier to catch "them" but you're actually no safer really.

There's an endless supply of morons. Limited space in prisons though.

And I own a Falcon.

[Giant Cranium]

i asked my wife if she would feel safer if every street had a camera and she said yes, thats all i need to know. as a large male i used to feel safe walking through harlem in nyc. its upsetting that women can't feel the same in an australian city

[Citroënbender]

I have sympathy for the people whose misfortune is documented post factum by CCTV. How must it feel for their families, to see the king-hit, the out-of-control driver, the muzzle flash? Let alone when it is whored out to the media with passing deference, to fill the space between advertisements.

[cs123]

Originally Posted by leesa

It has everything to do with cameras. In Brisbane it's even called the CitySafe Closed Circuit Television network. I don't really understand the comments suggesting it's not on-topic because to me it's very on-topic. What is it that you want to actually discuss about these cameras other than how they're to make cities safer?

To answer your question, CCTV probably doesn't really make it any safer.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2008-05-...ameras/2427656

A top British police officer has thrown serious doubts about closed circuit television or CCTV cameras as an effective tool in crime prevention.

Detective Chief Inspector Mike Neville, who leads Scotland Yard's Visual Images, Identifications and Detections Office says despite billions of dollars being spent on CCTV networks, they have failed to reduce crime.

Speaking at the Security Document World Conference in London, Detective Chief Inspector Mike Neville said only 3 per cent of London's street robberies had been solved using CCTV images.

He says no thought has gone into how the police should use the images from more than 4 million cameras in Britain.

He described the system as an "utter fiasco".

Criminologists here in Australia agree, saying millions of dollars are being wasted.

Deputy Chief Constable Graeme Gerrard from the Chief Police Officers Association (CPOA) told the BBC it is difficult to track down criminals caught on CCTV.

"If you recover fingerprints or DNA, you can match it against national databases," he said.

"There is no national database of images of people. So whilst we might have the images, the difficulty we then have is trying to identify who it is and sometimes that isn't easy and clearly we can do better."

There are some Australian studies that suggest that they might help, but the condition is that they are "Actively Monitored", meaning someone trying to detect a potential threat in real time. And they say they are more effective in combating property crime and vehicular theft than violent crime.

[Polyal]

Well to put some automotive perspective on it, anyone seen that vid on FB with the 3 people stealing that HSV?

While it is staggering it appears to be broad day light, if there was no security footage then there is little proof until the car is in bits.

The car may still end up in bits, but atleast some kind of justice can be followed with evidence.

[roKWiz]

Given whats been happening, Scotty could do with some more CCTV's inside Parliament house Canberra.

[zipping]

I'm sure the citizens of Hong Kong were all for their CCTV system too, until they weren't.

Just recently

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-55555299

The problem with big government infrastructure is that its all great when set up but never underestimate the ability of governments to turn on certain classes of people.

[FairmontGS]

Originally Posted by roKWiz

Given whats been happening, Scotty could do with some more CCTV's inside Parliament house Canberra.

One in Dan's office as well when the quarantine guard contracts were being signed would have been handy

[Burnout]

Originally Posted by cs123

To answer your question, CCTV probably doesn't really make it any safer.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2008-05-...ameras/2427656



There are some Australian studies that suggest that they might help, but the condition is that they are "Actively Monitored", meaning someone trying to detect a potential threat in real time. And they say they are more effective in combating property crime and vehicular theft than violent crime.

Yes agreed, truth is, they possibly assist in the recognition of an offender & the legal necessary proof of charge and little else.
If you think about high profile murders/assaults in the recent past, say, Jill Maher, they only assisted in time line investigations. They failed to detect a crime occurring, failed to identify an offender & just assisted police inquiry.
Other than that they are just a placebo.

[Trevor 57]

Originally Posted by zipping

I'm sure the citizens of Hong Kong were all for their CCTV system too, until they weren't.

Just recently

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-55555299

The problem with big government infrastructure is that its all great when set up but never underestimate the ability of governments to turn on certain classes of people.

wait until I find my tin foil hat

Originally Posted by cs123

To answer your question, CCTV probably doesn't really make it any safer.

There are some Australian studies that suggest that they might help, but the condition is that they are "Actively Monitored", meaning someone trying to detect a potential threat in real time. And they say they are more effective in combating property crime and vehicular theft than violent crime.

My question was what did you want to discuss about the cameras, if their contribution to city safety (or not) for women in particular is off-topic, then what?

I'd still argue that the cameras contribute to safety via deterrence. How many people are likely to try grab someone infront of those cameras now? Probably fewer than if the cameras weren't there at all. Sounds like a contribution to safety to me.

[cs123]

Originally Posted by leesa

My question was what did you want to discuss about the cameras, if their contribution to city safety (or not) for women in particular is off-topic, then what?

I'd still argue that the cameras contribute to safety via deterrence. How many people are likely to try grab someone infront of those cameras now? Probably fewer than if the cameras weren't there at all. Sounds like a contribution to safety to me.

Probably the same number going by the report I linked to that said they made no difference.

If you feel safer, that's great. I am happy for you

[T3rminator]

I'm actually curious why CCTV security cameras bother people so much.

What sort of sinister intentions do you think the gov has behind the use of these cameras?

[hawke]

Technology currently exists for facial recognition to pick faces out of a crowd, measure numbers of people in areas, pickup on people who have not moved for some time and leave luggage behind.

Last time I caught a plane in China, didn’t need to show my ID, their camera had checked my face at the gate. Indeed, as I walked around the Airport - Xian - and stood in front of a screen, the screen picked me out of the crowd, and showed what flight I was on, and gave me directions to the gate.

[FairmontGS]

Originally Posted by T3rminator

What sort of sinister intentions do you think the gov has behind the use of cameras?

Ummm....

How military aircraft could have spied on locked-down Victorians

Police would have been sent to illegal gatherings spotted by unmanned military spy planes in a plan rejected by the Defence Force, just days before Daniel Andrews raised concerns with colleagues about troops hitting the streets.

https://www.heraldsun.com.au/subscri...21suffix=143-a

[CoupeKing]

The Handmaid's Tale.

[Syndrome]

Originally Posted by T3rminator

I'm actually curious why CCTV security cameras bother people so much.

What sort of sinister intentions do you think the gov has behind the use of these cameras?

Cameras have been present in Melbourne for many decades. What concerned me is that this new level of surveillance was introduced without informing the public.

[T3rminator]

Originally Posted by FairmontGS

Ummm....

How military aircraft could have spied on locked-down Victorians

https://www.heraldsun.com.au/subscri...21suffix=143-a

I would question if your problem was actually with the law/regulation or the use of camera? I still don't get it. Is that like saying "I know its illegal to run a red light, but I oppose cameras set up to catch red light bandits because...."

Originally Posted by Syndrome

Cameras have been present in Melbourne for many decades. What concerned me is that this new level of surveillance was introduced without informing the public.

I think that is a very fair point. The public should be informed if they are being recorded in public. At the very least there should be signs around the area.