Personal Body Cameras

[Big Guy]

There has been a lot of discussion on this board about the use of police body cameras and people using cell phone video.

I was surprised to find out how the cost of this technology has plummeted over the years. A hidden body camera was once affordable to only commercial investigative organizations. Recent prices indicate that they are well within the range of the average person;

http://www.brickhousesecurity.com/category/hidden+cameras/body+worn+cameras.do

If that is indeed the case, then moral and ethical issues may now be involved. If you are taping a phone call you are having you are supposed to tell the person on the other end. If then you are wearing a body cam should you be telling people or (sic) carrying a sign that you are taping?

On a more serious note, what is the morality of taking a video of someone without their knowledge?

Under what conditions would it be immoral or unethical?

I remember years ago when frat brothers, before a house party, would put a tope recorder in the women's washroom and listen to the conversations after the party to find out who was interested in whom. Yes, silly, adolescent and asinine but illegal?

We are now in an age of technology where we have to assume that our e-mails and telephone conversations can/are being recorded and communicate accordingly. Are we now going to have to assume that the guy at your door or the clerk you are questioning or your fellow worker are wearing a body cam and react accordingly?

Brave New World!

[Michael Hardner]

This dovetails to the thread on persistent surveillance as well as the one on so-called mob morality on social media.

And it's even more evidence that technology almost never rolls backward. We should start talking now about how we are / we will handle the pervasive 24/7 watching-each-other society.

[Shady]

This type of technology isn't very far away, if not already existing. Eventually it will become easier, inexpensive, and impossible to tell if anyone is equipped with one. But they'll exist and be in operation.

[Michael Hardner]

This type of technology isn't very far away, if not already existing. Eventually it will become easier, inexpensive, and impossible to tell if anyone is equipped with one. But they'll exist and be in operation.

How about making a cultural practice to "communitize" public cameras and make them viewable by all ?

[GostHacked]

This dovetails to the thread on persistent surveillance as well as the one on so-called mob morality on social media.

And it's even more evidence that technology almost never rolls backward. We should start talking now about how we are / we will handle the pervasive 24/7 watching-each-other society.

That conversation should have started decades ago in order to keep that 24/7 pervasive surveillance in check. But you already started a conversation about it, but don't want to seem to put your foot down in a sense to do something about it. Instead, you ask more questions and why nothing is done about it.

So when do you really want to have a serious discussion about it?

[Michael Hardner]

You're not going to keep it "in check". It keeps expanding.

I think it makes more sense to adapt to it.

Unless you have another plan, my seems better.

[eyeball]

How about making a cultural practice to "communitize" public cameras and make them viewable by all ?

The best policy is to just assume you're being recorded all the time when you're in public and cover your face if you don't like it.

[On Guard for Thee]

The best policy is to just assume you're being recorded all the time when you're in public and cover your face if you don't like it.

Aren't they trying to make that illegal now as well?

[eyeball]

So what? Resistance is not futile in fact its a moral obligation.

In any case, I have faith in the ability of ethical hackers to reveal far more interesting things about the state and it's minions than they could ever hope to get on us.

I get the unease with surveillance and people just recording everything in sight but I think after a generation or even less people will become so used to how normal our little peccadilloes are they'll soon become more interested in finding the holes in the surveillance stream - the real secret stuff with the power to harm us as much or more than the people hiding them.

What we really need are ethical hackers with biting satirical senses of humour, to take the edge off.

[August1991]

In clubs in Europe, staff check people as they enter - and staff check new clients in particular as they leave.

Like much in life, it's a question of trust. If you have a reputation for honesty, if you're a Lutheran Norwegian for example and can spell, other people tend to beleive you.

Edited August 9, 2015 by August1991

[Queenmandy85]

I never type anything into a computer that I don't want to read on the front page of the Globe and Mail. That being said, we seem to be moving into an era where we may have much to learn from the people of North Korea on surviving in a surveillance state. I am even more concerned about the surveillance by my fellow citizens than I am by the Government. We make such an issue of C-51, yet so many of us plaster our private lives on Face Book etc.

[cybercoma]

In clubs in Europe, staff check people as they enter - and staff check new clients in particular as they leave.

Like much in life, it's a question of trust. If you have a reputation for honesty, if you're a Lutheran Norwegian for example and can spell, other people tend to beleive you.

I don't believe you, since you're French Catholic.

[PIK]

In this case , it would help both the police and citizens and they disagree about something.

[Argus]

Some people strap cameras to their chests and walk around in public, like this guy below, taking his daily walk from his apartment around Manhattan. If you appear in the video, that's tough. Anyone doing anything in public is assumed to have no privacy while in public.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LJzCqM1RDKo

[socialist]

This dovetails to the thread on persistent surveillance as well as the one on so-called mob morality on social media.

And it's even more evidence that technology almost never rolls backward. We should start talking now about how we are / we will handle the pervasive 24/7 watching-each-other society.

The Conservatives are the only party that wish to keep firearms in the hands of non-criminals. The other parties vowed to ban firearms from non-criminal use. We all know the laws aren't going to stop criminals, so at least they're interested in allowing us to defend our homes, land, family, and neighbours. And for a large population of Canadians, a firearm means independence to live wherever in Canada we choose. Being a Canadian, from a culture where we used to be able to buy ammunition from the drug store and nobody raised an eyebrow, and kids weren't getting drugged up on prescription medicine and shooting classmates. A time when we could draw whatever we wanted to draw, or write whatever we wanted to write, and we wouldn't be discriminated against. I don't have a choice anymore.

[August1991]

I don't believe you, since you're French Catholic.

It's more than a personal observation. Young women are more trustworthy when driving cars so their insurance premiums are lower than premiums of young men.

Of course, body cameras make this observation more objective: until certain people start to cheat in their use.

[cybercoma]

It's more than a personal observation. Young women are more trustworthy when driving cars so their insurance premiums are lower than premiums of young men.

Of course, body cameras make this observation more objective: until certain people start to cheat in their use.

That's actually not true anymore. They can't discriminate between male and female drivers with varying premiums. The only way a woman gets a reduced premium is if she's a secondary, rather than primary driver on a vehicle.

[August1991]

That's actually not true anymore. They can't discriminate between male and female drivers with varying premiums. The only way a woman gets a reduced premium is if she's a secondary, rather than primary driver on a vehicle.

Huh? Insurance corporations can't discriminate among young drivers? Cybercoma, provide a link to your post - I'm genuinely curious.

Edited August 15, 2015 by August1991

[GostHacked]

You're not going to keep it "in check". It keeps expanding.

I think it makes more sense to adapt to it.

Unless you have another plan, my seems better.

You are right, you can't keep it in check. I guess if the government wants to rape you, they can, and you will just have to adapt to it. Your plan is to do nothing, not even to educate yourself on what is what.

The lack of will to do anything by blase Canadians is part of the reason this type of activity keeps expanding. If you won't say 'no' now, don't come crying to me when they finally cross your line and you then decide to take a stand.

You are right Mike, I should just accept the tyrannical actions from our government that claims they are for freedom and democracy.

[Michael Hardner]

Your plan is to do nothing, not even to educate yourself on what is what.

You're clearly wrong - as I have educated myself as I usually do, via MLW. I enjoy being wrong, because it gives me a chance to change and adjust my position more to reality as I have done on this issue.

The lack of will to do anything by blase Canadians is part of the reason this type of activity keeps expanding. If you won't say 'no' now, don't come crying to me when they finally cross your line and you then decide to take a stand.

That's how all politics works. Don't despair, though, because there are signs that ordinary Canadians are paying attention.

You are right Mike, I should just accept the tyrannical actions from our government that claims they are for freedom and democracy.

Hyperbole. Everyone makes trade-offs with liberty and security, even you. Just because our balance points are different, doesn't mean that my position is worthy of ridicule.

[GostHacked]

You're clearly wrong - as I have educated myself as I usually do, via MLW. I enjoy being wrong, because it gives me a chance to change and adjust my position more to reality as I have done on this issue.

That's how all politics works. Don't despair, though, because there are signs that ordinary Canadians are paying attention.

Hyperbole. Everyone makes trade-offs with liberty and security, even you. Just because our balance points are different, doesn't mean that my position is worthy of ridicule.

What I find strange is you wait till this site tells you what is up. You have no desire to go do your own homework. But my last line is more of how much corruption and tyrannical actions are you willing to put up with? Trading privacy for security and loosing both in the process.

It is worth ridiculing, your tolerance for getting screwed over by the powers that be seem to be quite high. Almost a Stockholm Syndrome type scenario.

[Michael Hardner]

What I find strange is you wait till this site tells you what is up. You have no desire to go do your own homework.

These points tend to come up as 'breaking news' when leaks surface, so it's just more efficient to rely on my MLW brothers and sisters to point out the most egregious points.

But my last line is more of how much corruption and tyrannical actions are you willing to put up with? Trading privacy for security and loosing both in the process.

You missed my point: you also trade privacy for security so you can't stand on principle for this one. We just have different switch points.

It is worth ridiculing, your tolerance for getting screwed over by the powers that be seem to be quite high. Almost a Stockholm Syndrome type scenario.

I don't think it is, anymore than people who ridicule you for not caring about Canadians' security. We're all in the same boat, and it will sail in the direction of consensus. If you want to change peoples' minds, ridiculing them doesn't seem like a good way.

[Big Guy]

I am becoming more and more a fan of personal body cameras - hidden ones. Just dealt with a very rude clerk at a big chain store. She was not only not helpful but rude - not only with me but with others. I would have liked to have had a video of her actions to share with the manager of the store.

[cybercoma]

Huh? Insurance corporations can't discriminate among young drivers? Cybercoma, provide a link to your post - I'm genuinely curious.

I said they can't discriminate against male and female drivers, not young and old (read: inexperienced and more experienced). But for what it's worth, in NB they have a 1-strike regulation. Young drivers can't be charged higher rates until their first accident.