digg

Facebook Connect Join Digg About

Houston Police Chief Wants To Put Surveillance Cameras In Your Private Home

informationliberation.com — "I know a lot of people are concerned about Big Brother, but my response to that is, if you are not doing anything wrong, why should you worry about it?" - Police Chief Harold Hurtt

Who dugg this? Made popular Feb 17, 2006

Digg DudeWhat is Digg?

Digg is a place for people to discover and share content from anywhere on the web. Digg surfaces the best stuff as submitted and voted on by the community. Take the Tour to learn more.

213 Comments

show profanity settings
expand all
  • inactive, on 10/12/2007, -6/+31
    Anyone who does not understand the evil in his proposal should simply be removed from the gene pool. Its time that we took a logical approach to the *****-uped-ness that is becoming the USA. If you want to turn the USA into a police state, you deserve to be shot in the face - that goes for anyone, including the president - and before you feign outrage at the comment, research our founding father's comments on the subject, you might be surprised.

    The truth is that crime is on the DECLINE it has been for 20 years.

    This fear mongering is almost entirely a product of the neocon media.
  • 16x9, on 10/12/2007, -1/+21> Techknowpagan wrote: "This fear mongering is almost entirely a product of the neocon media."

    It's strange: real Republicans were always among the first to stand up against these kinds of activities. But now it seems that so many of them are quick to trot out that " if you are not doing anything wrong, why should you worry about it" line.

    I'm trying to understand how being attacked by a mad man living in Afghanistan means that we should suddenly lose faith in our fellow citizens. Sure, there are bad people in the U.S. Hell, there are bad people everywhere. But this sudden desire of our government to keep such close tabs on everything we do, and without judicial oversight, has be terrified.

    Folks, even if you think President George Bush is the most trustworthy human being on the planet, he won't always be in office. And once these mechanisms are in place that will be used to secretly spy on us, they will be almost to remove; regardless of who runs our government.
  • earthtoandy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6"if you are not doing anything wrong, why should you worry about it"

    one of the oldest and most retarded arguments ever.

  • Strahd, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Every time these privacy issues come up, it seems someone always mentions "you don't have any constitutional right to privacy".

    True enough - but perhaps we should change that. We need to seriously consider a constitutional amendment to protect the privacy rights of law-abiding americans.
  • Petronski, on 10/12/2007, -3/+9***** fascist.
  • Reddog_x2000, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Dear Chief Harold Hurtt

    Why should we worry about this? Because we have fought many wars so that we could live free. Part of that program is the freedom from unreasonable search and seizure. Millions of people moved here because they wanted to live free. Millions have died to preserve it. And, you'd like to take that away because policing is expensive? Well you know, so are many, many unconstitutional social programs. So is imprisoning people for Vice (gambling, drugs & prostitution etc.) rather than actual crimes. So, why not try to divert money from illegitmate spending to legit. You took an oath to uphold the constitution, not to subvert it. Why don't you do what you swore to do you ***** bastard?
  • chrisc2, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4"That is the worst idea I have ever heard."

    I propose that we give AIDS to the entire population and start clean!

    ...

    There. Now this isn't the worst idea you've ever heard.
  • musicmantrs, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I live in Houston, crime is up because we got several hundred thousand people from New Orleans. Mainly the people that were too poor to get out of New Orleans. Our top most wanted people in Houston are a gang from New Orleans that keep killing rival gang members.
  • inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Get over the party lines. Anyone who doesn't think that BOTH sides of the aisle want to get into your private life and your mind AND your bank account are narrow-minded.
  • tim11198, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Sed Quis Custodiet Ipsos Custodes?
  • kali25, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2"if you are not doing anything wrong, why should you worry about it"

    Because everyone does something wrong sometimes. Even the police chief. what is "wrong" is determined by the "community". To make the "community" run smoothly. Now what you do in your private home. It comes down to privacy. why no just take all the doors down and have toilets in public squares.
  • inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2i will allow camera's in my home, when i'm allowed to watch all the camera's in everyone elses homes.

    don't like that idea? now you know how i feel about it.
  • znicket, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2You guys are more paranoid than a crackhead on cocoa puffs.

    London, Manchester and every metropolitian area in the UK is already being watched with these cameras. If you go to the UK - be prepared to be watched. And you know what - the population is completely ok with it because this helps catching criminals.

    @Jadx
    "Thats not freedom. Freedom is when you are FREE from the "eye"."

    Well, some people consider being able to go outside at night without having the threat of muggers holding a gun to your head... a more valuable kind of freedom.
  • there, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2"Well, some people consider being able to go outside at night without having the threat of muggers holding a gun to your head... a more valuable kind of freedom."

    And there you have it.

    The truth is some people live in utter fear of criminals and terrorists and advocate police and guns rather than education and research to solve problems. Their paranoia is so complete, they would give away their own constitutional rights rather than take a risk with freedom.

    Fear these people. They are the same one that allowed totalitarians throughout time to take control in the name of "security" and "righteousness". Instead of solving social and political issues--those people prefer to throw all the "witches" into the fire.

    Truly brilliant enlightened thinking.
  • theonlybigboss, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2i think that this amout of big brother is almost a form of treason and should be tooken care as such, the people of this town need to get their ***** together and tell this man to piss off and never return again.
  • modian, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I think this proposal is double-plus ungood.
  • runner1, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Not EVER in my neighborhood would this be tolerated! I'm sure we would see what kind of destruction a high velocity rifle projectile would reek on sensitive electronics. Then If they put them in bullet proof enclosures I bet we would find out what a high energy co2 laser will do to a ccd.
  • ghaze, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Ben Franklin had something to say about this that pretty much sums it up.

    "He who sacrifices freedom for security deserves neither"

    Here's another from the "Father of Our Country".

    "Government is not reason. Government is not eloquence. It is force. And, like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master."

    These guys understood what happens when goverments get too much power. Do you?
  • Herb4983, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Sounds like Old Glory's going to be replaced by USSR sickle before to long. just my 2cents......
  • P0W3RMAC, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1If this sh*t starts to happen in my neighborhood, I'm out of this country before it's to late.

    I got relatives in other "safer" countries so my family and I can move into their homes until we find a place to live.

    I learned my lesson from WWII stories about families who were too stubborn to move before they were taken over and sent to prisoner camps. That's not going to be my outcome. I'll move the moment this type of stuff happens.

    Trust me.

    [PM]
  • Edibear, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1The thing is, the whole situation is spun out of proportion. I definitely don't agree with the cameras either but the exaggeration is just not appreciated. Did he make the speech? Sure. Did he suggest installing lots of cameras in public places and apartment complexes? Yes. Did he actually advocate putting cameras in each and every private home? No. He talked about the POSSIBILITY of monitoring the backyards of convicts.

    Goddamn news sources.
  • virtualdc, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Let's put the camera in his home as he is clearly insane and needs to be watched!
  • vaq007, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Actually it was a report on the local NBC news station here in Houston, he was actually talking about placing cameras in high traffic areas, such as downtown... that off-hand comment about 'big brother' was directed to critics who didn't like the idea of 5 cameras or so around the Main street for example. More importantly, it was a segue from the cops installing cameras on traffic lights.
  • ghaze, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1ScottMaximus
    The guy you qouted is from England. They've already given up so many personal
    freedoms in the name of security they might as well have cameras in their bedrooms.
    They took all the honest people's guns and crime went through the roof. I guess they are
    worried about getting mugged, I believe it is against the law to defend yourself over there.
    I don't think Ben is as revered of a figure over there as he is here, either. :-)
    Sic Semper Tyrannis
  • msaunds83, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Next thing will be putting boxes on people's heads with rats in it for punishment.
  • chrisc2, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"ummm this is worse than communism....."

    Have you ever lived under communism?
  • saikojay, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1ummm this is worse than communism.....
  • ryanknapper, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Either the site is satire or run by fanatics; my guess is fanatics. Other story titles include the following:
    VA Nurse Investigated for “Sedition” for Criticizing Bush
    Latest Airline Terror Threat: People Who Read Books
    Traitorous bitches and bastards
    N.Korean Cheerleaders Banished to Camps
  • Mekun, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Anyone trust that site??

    Its a tinfoil hat site. Lets see a non biased report of this so called news.
  • Drahknon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"Ask the mayor and police chief why they don't just militarize the hood."

    Damn, that pesky Constitution and its "4th Amendment." If only the government could just do away with the presumption of innocence, too.
  • mogley, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1That is the worst idea I have ever heard.
  • Dracos, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Houston Mayor needs to fire this f*cktard, take away his constitution-imprinted toilet paper, and ship him to China.
  • AKron, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Park a news truck in front to Mr. Hurtt's house, and train a camera on it 24 hours a day. Follow him with a camera everywhere he goes, and log it on the internet for all to see. Record every conversation he has that is possible, and make that available for all to listen to. Follow him to the pharmacy, and find out what prescriptions he's getting. Find out what he eats, and how much alcohol he drinks. Follow his wife, children, relatives, and friends the same way. If they have nothing to hide there shouldn't be a problem, correct?
  • Poland, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I would sooner die then have this happen.

    This is unacceptable.

    This is evil, simple and pure.
  • aurifex, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I suppose it's cliche to quote George Orell's 1984 again and again, but it's just a perfect example of this age we're entering.

    BIG BROTHER IS WATCHING YOU.

    Time to break out that "victory gin".
  • Drahknon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"I call hoax on this story. If you put the text from the supposed "Associated Press report" into google, every single link goes to some kind of libertarian lets-freak-out-over-the-big-bad-government website."

    Well, I got two links... to local news outlets:

    http://www.click2houston.com/news/7092489/detail.html?rss=hou&psp=news
    http://www.team4news.com/Global/story.asp?S=4508858&nav=0w0v

    Good enough for me.
  • DigitalWarrior, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1The day they take my gun ( for hunting ) put a dam camera in my house, is the day i say f*** you U.S.A and find me another country to live in. That is just pushing it to far. If I ever go to a restroom and there are cameras in there I will make sure they do not work any more. "Oh yes, if you are not doing anything wrong, why worry that someone may be watching you shower or piss. Hell, why pay for porn when you can switch on and watch any one of a million couples going at it at any time?" That is a very good point. When do we need to be watched all the time, yes when i am taking a sh** and planing to take over the word, well that is when i plan on taking over the world. If a restroom is getting that bad put some one in there problem solved, Or start handing out harder punishments for crimes. But that is another point where to put them, Charge 1.50 from every American including those behind bars, select a back woods state and area and build a really big, really big prison with its own farm for food etc. Maybe a closed military base.
  • dirtyfratboy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1haha i wonder if he ever read 1984... or any other book for that matter...
  • 5blocksfree, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1tokyopimp wrote: I have no problem with a camera outside my home, or around my neighborhood. I am not doing anything in the least bit illegal.

    You need to think a little beyond the next few minutes. There are many reasons that the government should not be installing surveillance cameras in public places. The biggest, and one of the ost important, is that they can easily be used as a vehicle in the harrassment and intimidation of "undesirables". If you think I'm talking about crack dealers, pimps, or gangs, you're wrong. I'm talking about people who hold a political position that is unfavorable with those currently in office. There is just far, FAR too much potential for abuse. Second, it's not just "watching" that concerns me - it's the RECORDING- the systematic invasion of peoples' lives as their every move is stored in some manner for later reference.

    I don't care if it's "public" - the government has no right whatsoever to be watching ANYONE unless they have been identified as a potential suspect in the commission of a crime, AND the surveillance has been approved by a judge. I'm hoping a constitutional challenge at some point will put an end to this madness.
  • EvilBadger, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Gotta love the speculation and wild accusations with no data to back it up in this article.
  • inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Who gives a *****? As long as you can still get Coca-Cola at the supermarket and Desparate Housewives is still on the air, nobody gives a *****. Things like this are not very important.

    After all, compare the outcry over any invasion of privacy no matter how extreme compared to the outry over a 10 cent raise in gas prices. One will be the topic of countless blogs, news articles, news segments and talk radio shows and water cooler conversations. The other will not.
  • kleenex007, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1the government does illegal things on a daily basis, can we put cameras in their homes? and cspan doesn't count
  • Hamletlere, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1If you don't want to believe the site referenced by the story, you can go search the AP news site itself, which turns up the following (non-crackpot) link:

    http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/P/POLICE_CAMERAS?SITE=ALANN&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT
  • zonk3r, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"if you are not doing anything wrong, why should you worry about it?"

    heh, that is the classic argument law "enforcement" makes and that kind of thinking is coicidentally part of the reasoning why folks a couple hundred years ago decided to go off and start up a new country... one that those same types of folks are doing their best to muck up.
  • tankko, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1>>I dont have a problem with cameras in public areas.

    Several posters have said this. I DO have a problem with cameras in public areas. It might be one or two now, but what if it was every public area. Every road and street. Every inch of area that was public. This 24 hour monitor of even "public" areas is a gross restriction on my freedom of movement. I should be able to leave my house and go to your house without being tracked by the government.

    The freedom to move and meet with and talk with whomever you want is fundamental to basic freedom. Don't give that up too fast.
  • natorator, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2You win chief; I agree - on one condition:

    //Yours// will be the first home to install the camera that all of //us// can watch.
  • tablatronix, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Im this close to becoming one of those gun nuts ->||-<

    Everyday it becomes more apparant to me that we will soon have to violently defend our freedoms from these lunatics that are taking over the asylum.

  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 100 of 217 discussions

  • Add a Comment

    Login or register to comment!
    Or, sign-in super fast with your Facebook account ...


© Digg Inc. 2009 — Content created and posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain | Terms of Use Updated | Privacy Policy
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.