Horace Posted April 17, 2009 Report Share Posted April 17, 2009 So council's are to be told they can't use advanced surveillance technology to "snoop" on people commiting "trivial offences" such as littering or allowing their dogs to foul public places. Why are these offences "trivial"? They affect me more than the so-called more serious offences which, apparently, councils will still be allowed to deal with. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted April 17, 2009 Report Share Posted April 17, 2009 Believe the UK has more CCTV cameras per capita, than any other Country - and they still can't detect illegal immigrants, or prevent a crime occuring! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter T Posted April 17, 2009 Report Share Posted April 17, 2009 Buying and installing is one thing, training in the use of, is a different matter all together, and might require joined-up thinking. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevofaz25 Posted April 17, 2009 Report Share Posted April 17, 2009 Seems the CCTV is often "facing the wrong way" or the criminals it actually identifies can argue their human rights have neen violated- being advised by solicitors taking legal aid payments from taxpayers at the same time... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazj Posted April 18, 2009 Report Share Posted April 18, 2009 I think CCTV tapes seem to go missing in more cases where police are involved. Just think of Hillsborough, De Menezes, G20 etc... there always seems to be "no CCTV evidence available".... until someone with a mobile phone and youtube shows them all up to be a bunch of liars anyway! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.