One-fifth of world's surveillance focused on Brits!

One-fifth of world's surveillance focused on Brits!

rinf.com

Are Brits sleepwalking into the nightmarish Big Brother world envisioned by Orwell?

The British, who invented the spy novel, are now the most spied-upon citizens on earth.

Four million cameras watch them in the lanes, streets, public squares and highways across the land, more than in any other Western democracy. In an average day, a Brit will be surveyed by around 300 cameras.

One-fifth of the world’s surveillance cameras are focused on the Brits.

(visit the link for the full news article)

Don't want this to be another 'lets bash the brits and call them a police state' thread but the numbers are the numbers according to this article and research. Let's learn from whats going on there and elsewhere (including the US) to prevent (hopefully) from this escalating in the US and abroad.

rinf.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

And the SECRET UNDERGROUND UK CCTV BUNKER here...
rinf.com...

In a bunker beneath the bustling streets of central London, guards monitor a grid of closed-circuit television.

The centre, at a secret location, is run by a private company in association with the police and local council.

Polls show broad public acceptance, even if the cameras more often capture a couple in loving embrace than a terrorist about to wreak havoc.

Britain has more than 4 million closed-circuit security cameras, more than any other Western democracy.

Police say the average Briton is on as many as 300 cameras every day, usually unaware.

The density of surveillance is significantly higher than in any other Western democracy, says Jen Corlew, spokeswoman for Liberty, a London-based human rights group.

[edit on 6-6-2007 by greatlakes]

I'll just repeat what I said in the last "Uk is a Police State" thread. Seems we have one on ATS every week.

"I've lost count of the amount of times I've had to explain this, but I'll do it again....>sigh<

90+% of camera's are PRIVATELY owned by business. No one "monitor's them", they just record images in case a crime should be committed.

Of those that are owned by local government, they only occupy town centre's and have one or two chaps just sitting there watching a bank of screens. If someone is getting the crap kicked out of them in an alley, or if there are shoplifters doing the rounds, they can be reported to Police.

It's not like we have thousands of Government workers sitting there monitoring us all day... Jeebus...

It's not different than the CCTV you get in the states. You know, in the mall or in the gas station. Your caught on camera everywhere, even if you don't realise it. I would be heavily surprised if many businesses DIDN'T have CCTV to protect them. Were do you think the pictures of your "Most Wanted" come from? Or those pictures on "Police, Camera, Action" when they pull over people for traffic offences...

It's all the same CCTV we have here.

You do know that, don't you?

We might get caught on camera 300 times a day, but I'd bet a good wedge of cash your not far behind."

Originally posted by stumason
Of those that are owned by local government, they only occupy town centre's and have one or two chaps just sitting there watching a bank of screens. If someone is getting the crap kicked out of them in an alley, or if there are shoplifters doing the rounds, they can be reported to Police.

Wrong.

They do not just exist in town centre's. There are loads on the outside of, Banbury, Bicester and Oxford - no where near the Town Centre.

Not saying it is a bad thing, but it's false information.

Originally posted by Odium
Wrong.

They do not just exist in town centre's. There are loads on the outside of, Banbury, Bicester and Oxford - no where near the Town Centre.

Not saying it is a bad thing, but it's false information.

Ok, if you going to be finicky, they have them along every stretch of Motorway and major A-roads too...

Happy?

I was merely illustrating that all this nonsense that we are "watched" is just that. You have town centre camera's and traffic camera's operated by the Authorities. Any other camera is privately owned.

We are not "under surveillance". In fact, I would bet good money that the average American is caught on CCTV quite alot too, as I explained above.


[edit on 6/6/07 by stumason]

Yes but the numbers of UK cameras outnumbers the amount of cameras even in the US, even though the population numbers of the US outnumber the UK.

The CCTV cameras as counted in the USA ALSO include private locations just like in the UK. CCTV in the local convenience stores, at the bank etc., but STILL the numbers of reported cameras far outnumber even large populated countries like the US.

US Population: 301,139,947 (July 2007 est.)
www.cia.gov...

UK Population: 60,776,238 (July 2007 est.)
www.cia.gov...

So by ratio comparison, the US should have higher CCTV numbers than the UK, 5 times as many. Being that the two countries are technologically on par with each other. Countries with larger populations, such as India, are not on par technologically (yet) and therefore don't figure into the comparisons.

No matter how you look at it, the UK has the most cameras per person than any country in the world. Period.

Care to give me a figure of the amount of camera's in the US?

Or am I supposed to just take your word for it?

Much of that article is utter rubbish.

One-fifth of the world’s surveillance cameras are focused on the Brits.

The closed-circuit television cameras (CCTV) are mounted on high, fixed to buildings, or sometimes on poles. The pictures relayed day and night by the cameras are monitored by the police, or civilian firms acting for the police.

That implies that ALL CCTV is monitored by Police.

Utter garbage. 90% of CCTV is in private business and is usually not even monitored unless a crime is committed and they need some evidence.

In London there is roughly one camera for every 14 people. The authorities say citizens should not worry about being closely surveyed — unless they are doing something wrong.

Again, that implies that all of those 14-1 camera's are used by Police. Wrong again. I would bet that 13 out of the 14 are in shops, malls and private business.

We can just look around here in the USA, anyone in any city, we notice occasional cameras, sporadic locations, nothing like the cameras that SHOUT at you in the UK. Even with these low numbers, people are saying that ITS TOO MANY. Even with these low numbers people are starting to fight this intrusive invasion of privacy in the USA, but I really don't see this happening to be the case in the UK. Why not? Is crime really that bad that the people there have laid down the sense of privacy?


Video: Big Brother State
Source: Youtube

[edit on 6-6-2007 by greatlakes]

Still no figures to back up your claims that the UK has more CCTV camera's than the USA then?

The "shouting" camera's are merely on trial and are not widespread.

And yes, crime is bad. Especially in towns at pub closing. I actually feel safer walking through town at 11 at night knowing that if I get sprung by a group of drunken lads, the Police will be there in a jiffy. Without the camera's, who knows how long they would take to turn up!

And it is hardly an invasion of privacy as your out in PUBLIC. What right to privacy do you have when in a public space? What about businesses right to operate free from crime?

Again, I cannot stress this enough, the misconception that the CCTV camera's in the UK are all owned and operated by the Government is so far off the mark as to be laughable. That article you posted as a source is a joke.

Originally posted by stumason
Still no figures to back up your claims that the UK has more CCTV camera's than the USA then?

Too lazy yourself eh, ok these are figures from NYC, which I'm sure
you'll agree is a fairly sizable city

In 1998 3,000 CCTV systems were found in New York City.

en.wikipedia.org...

And Chicago:

There are 2,200 CCTV systems in Chicago.

en.wikipedia.org...

Originally posted by stumason
The "shouting" camera's are merely on trial and are not widespread.

What do think trial means, it means that if the people don't make too much of a fuss over the 'trial' cameras, then the trial becomes a success, and the SHOUTING cameras become more widespread. What will you say then when that happens, that the cameras keep you safe and prevent dangerous jaywalkers from crossing the street?

Originally posted by stumason
Again, I cannot stress this enough, the misconception that the CCTV camera's in the UK are all owned and operated by the Government is so far off the mark as to be laughable. That article you posted as a source is a joke.

Now DO YOU have the figures to backup your statements?

And BTW the article did not state that ALL of the cameras were state/police owned, only that the UK accounts for ONE FIFTH of the public surveillance CCTV cameras in the WORLD.



[edit on 6-6-2007 by greatlakes]

Maybe the Brits NEED intensive monitoring. In my part of the world they have been recruiting police officers from the UK. When asked what they like about being here, the most consistent reply is along the lines of, "the low level of violence when they are on the job".

There are a large number of private cameras in the UK put in place by citizens who are desperate to stop the slide into criminal anarchy.

What more can they do? There are tens of thousands of smartypants lawyers out there using fair means and foul to return career thugs to their employment. There are hordes of anti-civilization milk-sop limp-wristers who attack any person or institution that disciplines youth and so help to provide a continuing supply of conscienceless sub-intellects.

When the authorities lose control of the streets, it is the responsibility and right of private citizens to restore the rule of law.

And before you say that the streets are under control, answer these questions; Do you walk alone unarmed, anywhere, anytime or do you go in a group or in a car or avoid certain areas? How many cars in your street have been tampered with or stolen last year? How many homes in your street have NOT been broken into or vandalised last year? How many old people in your town/suburb have been harrassed or mugged in the last twelve months?

It's fine to talk about reduction in freedom/rights from surveillance cameras but the real threat to your/our freedom is from the scum that cannot live respectfully within decent societies and the support structures that encourage them.

Originally posted by greatlakes
Too lazy yourself eh, ok these are figures from NYC, which I'm sure
you'll agree is a fairly sizable city

Not at all. I read that Wiki article myself, but you made the claims, you back it up

Originally posted by greatlakes

In 1998 3,000 CCTV systems were found in New York City.

en.wikipedia.org...

And Chicago:

There are 2,200 CCTV systems in Chicago.

en.wikipedia.org...

In 1998? Got any current figures rather than one's from 9 years ago? That's why I dismissed the Wiki article myself

Originally posted by greatlakes
What do think trial means, it means that if the people don't make too much of a fuss over the 'trial' cameras, then the trial becomes a success, and the SHOUTING cameras become more widespread. What will you say then when that happens, that the cameras keep you safe and prevent dangerous jaywalkers from crossing the street?

Jaywalker? Not a crime here mate. And you say we're a police state ?

They have actually discussed deploying them to my own town, but that was widely rebuffed by residents and councillors together, so it won't be happening here. It's down to the local authority whether to deploy them or not.

Originally posted by greatlakes
Now DO YOU have the figures to backup your statements?

From your own wiki article, it provides the numbers chap. Apparently 400,000 camera's in London are privately owned. Now, that figure was derived from a working paper by Michael McCahill and Clive Norris of UrbanEye. This is cited in the Wiki article. In that report, found here, it cites that 84% of CCTV systems are "in-house", ie privately owned by business, and "in house" staff operate 90% of them. Only 3 % have the facility to relay any images to the police.

It has to be said though, that this report which everyone else is basing their assumptions on, only studied one small district of London and based upon their findings, they extrapolated to the entire UK. Whether it is in anyway accurate or not is another matter.

Originally posted by greatlakes
And BTW the article did not state that ALL of the cameras were state/police owned, only that the UK accounts for ONE FIFTH of the public surveillance CCTV cameras in the WORLD.

Read what I said again. It's not what they explicitly say, but rather how it is written and what they imply.

Are Brits sleepwalking into the nightmarish Big Brother world envisioned by Orwell?

Yes. But its not the British citizens 'fault' really, its media manipulation that helps to further the invasion of privacy, as can be seen here in the US as well.

Originally posted by greatlakes
Yes. But its not the British citizens 'fault' really, its media manipulation that helps to further the invasion of privacy, as can be seen here in the US as well.

What "invasion of privacy"?

EDIT: i might add that CCTv use in the UK is controlled and regulated by the Data Protection Act.

In the USA, no such regulation exists.

[edit on 6/6/07 by stumason]

Originally posted by stumason
EDIT: i might add that CCTv use in the UK is controlled and regulated by the Data Protection Act.

The data protection act, I just read about that, THAT IT WAS BEING VIOLATED IN THE UK

Here:
www.dailymail.co.uk...

And here:

community.channel4.com...

We are living in the surveillance age but 90 per cent of Britain’s 14.2 million closed-circuit television cameras may be failing to comply with the law.

and being used for other purposes ALL AGAINST THE DATA PROTECTION ACT.

Viewing monitors are often wrongly sited in public areas, so other people can see who is being filmed, and a number of the 3,500 CCTV systems are not registered under the Data Protection Act, as is required.

Additionally, cameras are frequently used for another purpose than the one for which they were registered and the necessary clear signage is regularly missing.

And found this:

Last October we reported on the trial scheme of these cameras in Middlesbrough. At the time we predicted "The voice of Big Brother has already echoed across several major cities and the program will no doubt be unfolded nationwide once the salivating control freaks in council offices have their way." Now this has indeed come to pass.

Shouting Big Brother Cameras To Use Child Voices

Psychological warfare to shame dissenters into obedience

In a bizarre psychological move the cameras will speak in a child's voice.
In an incredibly Orwellian move, loudspeakers are to be fitted to surveillance cameras throughout major cities, allowing CCTV operators to bark commands at people who drop litter, act in an aggressive manner or loiter

SOURCE

Yes those MIGHTY DANGEROUS LOITERERS AND LITTERBUGS! LOL

Wakeup. This is going to coming to a city near you (in the USA).




[edit on 6-6-2007 by greatlakes]

Ahh, the Daily Mail. Such a lovely, non-alarmist rag.....

If the DPA is being violated, then the Police should take action. If the Daily Mail cared so much, then why have they not filed a complaint with the Police?

In my experience, any CCTV I have been around has observed the DPA.

Reading those links you provided, I notice you made some omissions....

new national advisory body for the industry, CameraWatch, which has the backing of the police and the Information Commissioner’s Office, claimed yesterday that the vast majority of CCTV is used incorrectly and could potentially be inadmissable in court.

Emphasis mine.. So, with the backing of police and it being inadmissable in court because of DPA breaches, what exactly is it your worried about? If it is illegal, then they cannot use it.

Not only are they SHOUTING at you, now it seems they're LISTENING IN ALSO!
Not talking about listening to your email or phone conversations, they already do that, but listening to the 'man on the street' with MICROPHONES stationed at strategic locations. The company is in talks with city officials from LONDON, this was ONE YEAR AGO.

www.timesonline.co.uk...

Last month Martin Nanninga of VCS Observation, the Dutch company marketing the technology, gave a presentation to officials from Transport for London, the Metropolitan police and the City of London police about the CCTV system. Nanninga is to return next year for further discussions.

“There was a lot of interest in our system, especially with security concerns about the Olympic Games in 2012. We told them about both our intelligent control room and the aggression detection system,” Nanninga said.

Scary stuff. Its not that the US doesn't have similar plans and products in place, but ITS JUST SO EASY TO FIND for the UK. Its everywhere on the net.

[edit on 6-6-2007 by greatlakes]