The Daily Paul has been archived. Please see the continuation of the Daily Paul at Popular

Thank you for a great ride, and for 8 years of support!
56 votes

Suddenly, NYPD doesn’t love surveillance anymore

This contradiction is now taking center stage in New York City, as Mayor Michael Bloomberg and New York City police commissioner Raymond Kelly wage a scorched-earth campaign to prevent the public from being able to monitor its own police force. And in that crusade comes the frightening assumption about how the terms “safety” and “security” are now defined.

To appreciate the rank hypocrisy of Bloomberg and Kelly opposing the creation of an independent police monitor, remember that they are two of the faces of the modern American Police State — and two of the biggest proponents of 24/7 monitoring of citizens.

Read the rest:

Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Record all police activity

Record all police activity and upload it in real time.

"Share videos privately with family and friends, automatically post to social networks, or broadcast to blogs and video sites.

Videos can be viewed live (right as they are being recorded) or anytime later."

So you do not care

to expose a private citizen's private confrontation with police? So if such a person would prefer his privacy (so his neighbors and boss at work do not see), you still want to expose him?

There is no perception of

There is no perception of privacy in public. The Supreme Court has already ruled this to be so.

In all fairness to

In all fairness to Liberty_First, he did mention "private confrontation with police" and not public confrontation with police.

Maybe there could be some sort of safeguard which would protect the privacy of individuals in private situations while at the same time maintaining a watch over police.

"Private confrontation," for example, might simply be police responding to a domestic dispute with a really horrendous CSI type scene inside the house. Maybe stuff like that shouldn't be broadcast in real-time, but still the conduct of police should be monitored somehow.


Good point, john2k. LF did

Good point, john2k. LF did say private confrontation, a confrontation on private grounds. I commend LF for making this point and you for culling it from his comment because it is easy to oversee.

But here's the rub: Private person versus public person, shouldn't the public person be recorded when on duty? If so, and I think so, how can this recording be done?

How about without recording the private person OR if the private person is recorded, then his face could be blurred if not his voice altered while retaining audio clarity?

I'd say the private person should be asked for his permission to have his face and voice played as they are before the video is aired.

My query concerns news pieces, not home video.

School's fine. Just don't let it get in the way of thinking. -Me

Study nature, not books. -Walton Forest Dutton, MD, in his 1916 book whose subject is origin (therefore what all healing methods involve and count on), simple and powerful.

Ah. Important question.

Worthy of consideration.

What would the Founders do?

I personally would rather have

police cameras on public property than armed Libertarians who drink beer, vodka and take drugs.

Also keep in mind that foreign countries have secret services and FBI is forced to watch everyone here closely as the only way to curb foreign intelligence hostile acts. Weak countries who do not have strong counter-intelligence and army become USA puppets.


drugs. Are we talking about cocaine? Crack? Meth? Cannabis? Elaborate on that please.

If you don't know your rights, you don't have any.

I am not against drugs of any type or guns of any type

Our folks simply are not educated into details of individual rights, since Ron Paul and Rothbard could not explain. Individual rights can claim their validity by default on private property. Individual rights do not automatically extend to public property though. Otherwise, there would be no difference between public and private since the "right" means freedom to act. Public property must be regulated via constitution and local laws.


Ever heard of the 4th ammendment?

Sorry but

my rights don't end at my door step.

"Timid men prefer the calm of despotism to the tempestuous sea of liberty."

Click Here To See The Candidates On The Record

Clever slogan

that anarchists and some socialists adore. Now bring the rational content - right to do what? 1) Bring a huge mega-phone to the street so your free speech is more free than that of others or 2) organize a civil disobedience and block streets so others cannot go to work or 3) drive around in your private tank or 4) expose yourself and giggle in the face of pedestrians or 5) set up "occupy anything" camp on a public park?

judging from your comments and reception here...

I predict you will be banned pretty soon.

:) That has been the pattern

since November 2011. Reason is not the thing that religious or people after a couple of beers can boast about. Therefore, thumb work is the only mental relief for weak-minded populists here.

You don't have any posts and

your comments seemed geared to just irritate people and don't really contribute much to the discussions.
I guess I misjudged you. :)

Man, you want too much from me

I am like a straw man fighting non-stop bringing a fresh air of individualism into this stale fog that is stuck between anarchism and populism. Only thumb work gives them sense of a collective they strive for.

You're not very intelligent.

You're not very intelligent.

"When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty."

You're wasting your time and energy

You can't reason with children.

As long as we have you

on board, my lack of it should not scare anybody.

Well written by Sirota. The

Well written by Sirota. The hypocrisy of state actors knows no bounds.