You must be registered to comment and vote on comments.
People remember DNA being stored forever from a simple blood test at birth, newspapers publishing interactive maps of who has applied for a gun permit, massive database of car plate locations purchased by any citizen, sign a petition and get harrased by the opposition, children denied a vacation flight because their name matches a name on a no-fly list. All this and more is remembered when government asks for more record-keeping. YES, useful for original purpose, YES often abused and nobody knows until too late.
Since the most useful pictures gathered are from a private business security camera, perhaps the ACLU should lead the way to boycott that business for the infringement on the rights of these two disenfranchised youth. It only just.
starboy123, there is a huge difference between a government network monitoring everyone and random businesses recording activity. A simple recording by itself doesn't do much to affect innocent people. If a crime is committed the police can get a warrant and watch the video. Things are far different when the camera is hooked up to a network and the images are processed electronically. Tools are being developed right now to identify people based on their picture, record their whereabouts, and store it in a database for further analysis. Work is being done to sound alarms anytime the camera sees something out of the ordinary. I recall a case where I was standing on a public sidewalk taking a picture of a public building. Someone watching through a camera notified a nearby security guard who approached me and hassled me for doing so. I wasn't doing anything wrong but law enforcement still threatened me.
Your comment is being reviewed for inclusion on the site.
Comments will be reviewed before being published.
425 Portland Av. S.
Minneapolis, MN 55488
© 2013 StarTribune. All rights reserved.
StarTribune.com is powered by Limelight Networks