Question of the Day: Surveillance Cameras

New license plate readers are up on Glen Cove Avenue, with more surveillance equipment planned to go up around the city in the next month. How do you feel about it?

A Department of Justice grant has brought new surveillance equipment to Glen Cove, with license plate readers storing data on thousands of vehicle movements per day on Glen Cove Avenue near the Ballroom Legacy dance studio. Another will be placed on Route 107, according to chief of police William Whitton, and video cameras will go up in the city's two parking garages and in some public spaces, mayor Ralph Suozzi has said.

Their purpose is to deter crime and provide authorities more tools to use to catch perpetrators in the event of a crime. It is a trend and a rationale being seen in many other cities, towns and villages across Long Island and the rest of the country.

Are you comfortable with the increased surveillance methods?

Does your opinion fall on one side of the issue, or do you see pros and cons to the methods?

What positive consequences might you foresee?

What risks are posed by such measures?

Do you feel it is you, the citizen, that is the target of these cameras, or somebody else?

What do you think is a responsible way for the city to handle its surveillance?

james February 18, 2012 at 05:17 PM
Please give us an example of how this can be used against an innocent person? Please. I really can't think of one.
myob1776 February 19, 2012 at 06:27 PM
Sure. Let's start with targeted enforcement. Say a particular official has a personal issue with someone and uses the camera data to identify when that person is in the city. Beginning with a stop and question and rising to a pretextual arrest and detention, that official can abuse his authority to make that person's life very difficult. This type of abuse has been documented in the UK, where license plate recorders and official video surveillance is very common. Information sharing is another issue - selling information to private attorneys, say in connection with a divorce proceeding. You may think that "would never happen." But in an unregulated world, it can and does. The International Association of Chiefs of Police has made some recommendations concerning the use and storage of data from license plate cameras. These include regularly auditing the department collecting the data to make sure that information is being used appropriately; restricting those with access to the data to limit the opportunity for misuse; avoiding data collection in “areas known to reflect an individual’s political, religious or social views,” such as churches and abortion clinics, unless doing so is “directly related to criminal conduct or activity.” It's not enough for the GCPD to simply say "we're collecting the information." It's reasonable for the PD to also tell us how it is using and safeguarding the information.
james February 19, 2012 at 08:28 PM
Haha. Go back on your meds. Law enforcement doesn't give out all of their techniques. Its not all public information. For good reason. You are spending your time worrying about the wrong things. These cameras will never have any effect on my life other than to protect my family. Some people are just Soooooo anti authority. The police are handcuffed by people like you and the liberal justice system.
myob1776 February 19, 2012 at 09:02 PM
James, if you believe you can trust the police then you haven't been reading many newspapers over the past 50 years or so. "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." That's a quote from an anti-authoritarian liberal named Benjamin Franklin.
Dr Know Righer Wrong February 19, 2012 at 10:49 PM
There is nothing wrong with using cameras in public places provided that the information gathered from those cameras is not misused or abused. Yes any new technology ( or old one) can be abused. Cameras in public places are not a bad thing Misuse of that information very well could be. Put in the cameras and make sure that people who misuse that information are punished . Make all people accountable for their actions!
Tom Terrific February 19, 2012 at 11:00 PM
"Some people are just Soooooo anti authority" ==================================== And some people think the entire law enforcement community walks on water. Probably the same people who polished the teacher's apples when they were in school.
Mike Bruschini February 20, 2012 at 01:55 AM
Without taking a side - the Patriot Act, while passed under the banner of terrorism, has been used in 1,618 drug cases, and only 15 terrorism cases, as of Sept. 2011.
james February 20, 2012 at 02:29 AM
I trust the police 100%. I am a retired NYPD detective and never took a dime that wasnt mine, never arrested someone who didnt deserve it, and never wrote a ticket that wasnt legitimate. My family is filled with police officers with the highest integrity. If you dont trust the police than PLEASE PLEASE dont call them when your neighbors dog is barking, your 10 speed is stolen, or you get into an auto accident. I know i would never ask assistance from someone I didnt trust. But you will, you will.
james February 20, 2012 at 02:42 AM
Poor drug dealers getting caught up in the patriot act. Who cares they are drug dealers selling to our children. This is proof of how terrorists receive funding. They go hand and hand. Jeez
myob1776 February 20, 2012 at 02:46 AM
James, you may have walked the beat with a halo over your head during your career, but unfortunately, the same can't be said for many of your fellow cops. Trusting in anybody without checks and oversight is just a bad idea. Cops should welcome that; too often they don't.
james February 20, 2012 at 02:54 AM
No halo just honesty. I also did a lot more than walk a beat. Are you more concerned about the police or criminals who pose a danger to society? Typical liberal new yorker.
james February 20, 2012 at 02:57 AM
By the way, the NYPD has 35000 cops, you don't think there will be a bad apple? There are way more good cops than bad. Im done arguing about the police because I just wanted to expose your true agenda, hatred towards the young men and woman who protect you.
myob1776 February 20, 2012 at 02:58 AM
I'm not labeling anybody, James. Just using the many, many instances of abuse of power to justify my position. If you choose to resort to name-calling to support yours, more power to you.
james February 20, 2012 at 03:02 AM
Liberal new yorker is name calling?
myob1776 February 20, 2012 at 03:07 AM
Ah, you meant it as a compliment! My mistake. I assume your advice to "go back on your meds" was offered in the same good spirit.
james February 20, 2012 at 03:08 AM
http://www.nypdangels.com/nypd/smith.htm You are on the wrong team pal. Im done with this thread.
myob1776 February 20, 2012 at 03:14 AM
Your use of that link makes my point. Using the September 11 attacks to justify unfettered use of surveillance technology - with no oversight and no consequences for abuse - is exactly the sort of unthinking, sheep-like response that gives the terrorists the victory they were hoping for back in 2001 and continue to strive for today.
james February 20, 2012 at 03:20 AM
She was a friend. A hero. Someone who would have saved you. That was my reason for posting the link. I don't care about surveillance. You do. Im trying to show you cops do a lot more than write tickets. Which side are you on? Ours or theirs? Were you in the armed forces?
myob1776 February 20, 2012 at 03:23 AM
If you don't care about surveillance then do as you promised two posts ago and leave the thread. My point is that when people ignore the means and focus only on the results, they lose perspective. As you have done here.
james February 20, 2012 at 03:25 AM
I couldn't leave because people like you, liberals, are aggravating and sick. Thank a young officer don't hate them.
james February 20, 2012 at 03:28 AM
Negative on the armed forces?
Mike Bruschini February 20, 2012 at 03:36 AM
This discussion is geared towards surveillance cameras in Glen Cove, not whether you support terrorists or police, or the armed forces, with all due respect.
myob1776 February 20, 2012 at 03:37 AM
Well, James, I've looked over these posts and I have to say that I'm not the one who sounds aggravated. And I'm not the one who's meandered well off-topic. I'm not name-calling. I'm calling for reasonable oversight and disclosure. If that makes me sick, then I don't want to get better.
james February 20, 2012 at 03:43 AM
Definetly has a lot to do with trusting police.
Tom Terrific February 20, 2012 at 04:22 AM
Trust is earned, not blindly given. Even if someone has a badge. There are good citizens who do great things and there are bad citizens who do terrible things. There are good cops who do great things and there are bad cops who do terrible things. That's the reality. Sorry if you can't deal with it.
james February 20, 2012 at 10:23 AM
Ok tom. Thanks for putting everything in perspective haha
Tom Terrific February 20, 2012 at 12:15 PM
It comes down to a simple matter that we're all human and we all slip up on occasion. Humans have a capacity for good and a capacity for malevolence. I'm fortunate to have known more people who were good than bad. Others may have had different life experiences thru no fault of their own.
pocopazzo February 23, 2012 at 03:13 PM
The home invasion on North Lane is just one good reason to have the cameras. There were helicopters flying around, and the perps were probably long gone by then. Who expects privacy on a public street anyway?
David February 23, 2012 at 05:03 PM
Did they ever get them?
Kristina S. Heuser February 27, 2012 at 03:14 PM
I have the utmost respect for police and the job that they do, and I trust that our police chief is entirely well-intentioned and have had nothing but good experiences with the Glen Cove Police Department. The police are not the issue here. While I would like the police to be equipped with tools to combat crime in the community, I am not willing to sacrafice my liberty and rights guaranteed to me by the Constitution (and before that, God) for this to happen. I have read the comments above and heard it from other people (including my own husband) that innocent people have nothing to worry about, only criminals do. The problem is - who decides who is innocent? I bet in Germany before Hitler came to power Jewish people did not think they were in danger by giving the government information about where they lived and worked, but once the Nazi regime took over, certainly they were disadvantaged by the fact that the government had all of this knowledge. While some may say it is "paranoia" to think that the government could turn on you or on me, our forefathers warned us to always be vigilant. The quote above about sacraficing liberty for security gaining us neither is right on point. The founders knew something about this because they would have been executed for treason by the British government for their revolutionary actions had they been caught, and there would have been no United States. Surveillance by the government curtails freedom, and THAT is not safe.


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something