City Council Agrees To Expand Camera Coverage

like we need these fools to spend more of are money and dig a deeper hole. thanks king richie and aldercreatures.

"Land of the Free?!" Who does the City Council and the Mayor think they are kidding? This move is George Orwell on a Street Sweeper and the populace is too scared of their own shadows to put a stop to this move that has our Founding Fathers doing high-speed drill bit impersonations in their final resting places!

Our so-called "free" society isn't free - it is now monitored at every turn and at every move.

And all it will take to screw this program up will be a couple of kids with paintball guns... and suddenly Hizzoner and Da Council will be out a bucket of bucks, OUR taxes will get raised AGAIN, simply to replace these stupid cameras that will fail within weeks of being replaced anyway and for what?

"Improved" parking enforcement?!

Hey City Council! Hey Mr, Mayor! How about FIXING some of the TWELVE FOOT WIDE POTHOLES on Lake Shore Drive, Lawrence Avenue and Archer Avenue, instead?

Get a clue, people, and spend the money on something that benefits the PEOPLE you are supposed to be serving and protecting, instead of installing more high-tech garbage to try to "keep us in line!"

Well I do not mind the camera on the street cleaner if it only takes pictures of violators. I also don't have a problem with businesses in a business district giving their feed to the city. I do have a problem where residents in a residential area can attach their feed to the city's network. If a camera is pointed at my home and my family is on the City network, that's invading my privacy and i will get a lawyer myself. My son should not be on any videos....

In the kelvyn park area we have over 15 police cameras throughout the neighborhood. There has been murders,drug dealing and all sort of other activity going on rite under these cameras. I yet to hear of any arrests. Do these cameras even work? This is a bunch of crap if you ask me.

Dan-Chicago wrote:

Well I do not mind the camera on the street cleaner if it only takes pictures of violators. I also don't have a problem with businesses in a business district giving their feed to the city. I do have a problem where residents in a residential area can attach their feed to the city's network. If a camera is pointed at my home and my family is on the City network, that's invading my privacy and i will get a lawyer myself. My son should not be on any videos....

to play devil's advocate for a minute- they did say that hooking up ws not a requirement, but on a voluntary basis. it can be done, but only if private residences want to do it. And I believe that they were only referring to the outdoor cameras, not the indoor ones for residences.(again that's how I read the article)

Just My Opinion wrote:

<quoted text>
to play devil's advocate for a minute- they did say that hooking up ws not a requirement, but on a voluntary basis. it can be done, but only if private residences want to do it. And I believe that they were only referring to the outdoor cameras, not the indoor ones for residences.(again that's how I read the article)

I was saying that even if a resident applied for this and was granted permission to tape the area in front of his house he may capture me and my family also on this footage, I do not want that, and it is an invasion of my privacy. If a city resident wanted to apply for this he would need the consent of all homes around him that would be caught on tape. I do not want to be taped and put on the city's network.

Dan-Chicago wrote:

<quoted text>
I was saying that even if a resident applied for this and was granted permission to tape the area in front of his house he may capture me and my family also on this footage, I do not want that, and it is an invasion of my privacy. If a city resident wanted to apply for this he would need the consent of all homes around him that would be caught on tape. I do not want to be taped and put on the city's network.

You do have a good point there

Just My Opinion wrote:

<quoted text>
You do have a good point there

I won't even have one of those blue lights over my house, I can't beleive there have been no lawsuits from this. These tend to be in high crime spots or at public places. Public places are fine but I've seen them on residential corners in bad areas....These residents should not be allowing that. There are none in any good areas because the residents will not have them.

Dan-Chicago wrote:

<quoted text>
I won't even have one of those blue lights over my house, I can't beleive there have been no lawsuits from this. These tend to be in high crime spots or at public places. Public places are fine but I've seen them on residential corners in bad areas....These residents should not be allowing that. There are none in any good areas because the residents will not have them.

You do mean those "safety" blue lights with a panic button/phone or whatever, right? I think that they put them in the "high crime" areas just to make people think that they are safe because they can just reach out and touch someone. Personally, they don't do a thing to make me feel safe. but I don't understand why you wouldn't want to see one in your neighborhood.

As long as the cameras don't look inside of homes and/or other places where there is an expectation of privacy, then the courts have ruled the cameras are legal.

There is no expectation of privacy on the public way

If cameras worked than there would be no bank robbing going on. Just another way for the government to assume more power & control! Sheeple being led to the slaughter!

Just My Opinion wrote:

<quoted text>
You do mean those "safety" blue lights with a panic button/phone or whatever, right? I think that they put them in the "high crime" areas just to make people think that they are safe because they can just reach out and touch someone. Personally, they don't do a thing to make me feel safe. but I don't understand why you wouldn't want to see one in your neighborhood.

I don't want them in my area because they are not like the red light cameras or the street sweeper cameras....These cameras only take pictures if a violation has occured. The Blue crime light is a constant live feed which means even if you are doing nothing wrong, you are being watched. I'm fine with public places but on a corner in a residential area, my home is being watched, and my home is not public domain at all. I could be playing with my kid on the front porch and someone is filming me? No way. Also the Blue lights in residential areas will give the impression that that area is a high crime area, because that's where they all currently are, thus reducing property values and quality of life by inviting gangs.

Just My Opinion wrote:

<quoted text>
You do mean those "safety" blue lights with a panic button/phone or whatever, right? I think that they put them in the "high crime" areas just to make people think that they are safe because they can just reach out and touch someone. Personally, they don't do a thing to make me feel safe. but I don't understand why you wouldn't want to see one in your neighborhood.

Yeah, the safety blue ones. I don't want them in my area because they are not like the red light cameras or the street sweeper cameras....These cameras only take pictures if a violation has occured. The Blue crime light is a constant live feed which means even if you are doing nothing wrong, you are being watched. I'm fine with public places but on a corner in a residential area, my home is being watched, and my home is not public domain at all. I could be playing with my kid on the front porch and someone is filming me? No way. Also the Blue lights in residential areas will give the impression that that area is a high crime area, because that's where they all currently are, thus reducing property values and quality of life by inviting gangs.

I do understand that you don't want them in the area, but they do not lower your property values. And if you look into it, you may even get a break on your homeowners insurance if they are there. Unfortunately for you, if they are on a street corner, pointed only at the sidewalks and street and not filming the yards, 1. I don't think that you will be abvle to stop them, and 2. it isn't a violation of your privacy.

Just My Opinion wrote:

I do understand that you don't want them in the area, but they do not lower your property values. And if you look into it, you may even get a break on your homeowners insurance if they are there. Unfortunately for you, if they are on a street corner, pointed only at the sidewalks and street and not filming the yards, 1. I don't think that you will be abvle to stop them, and 2. it isn't a violation of your privacy.

If the intent for putting them there his high crime how could they not lower the home values? People do not want to buy in a high crime spot. And actually thet are pointed at a very wide spectrum and do capture homes in the footage.

Dan-Chicago wrote:

<quoted text>
If the intent for putting them there his high crime how could they not lower the home values? People do not want to buy in a high crime spot. And actually thet are pointed at a very wide spectrum and do capture homes in the footage.

I hear your point, and if the cameras have wide angles and get the homes in the screen, then you may have something there to complain about.
But if the city starts putting them up all over and not just in high crime areas, then it can't lower the home values. Just like in my neighborhood, we don't have curbs and gutters, but the value of the homes is still up there. And if they put in the curbs and gutters, it won't raise the value of the home any either.(we may get billed for it in our taxes, but the value of the home won't increase for it.) So I just don't see how it will lower the home values..But you are entitled to your own opinion, and I mine.

Tax payer wrote:

In the kelvyn park area we have over 15 police cameras throughout the neighborhood. There has been murders,drug dealing and all sort of other activity going on rite under these cameras. I yet to hear of any arrests. Do these cameras even work? This is a bunch of crap if you ask me.

I have heard of story's about crimes being caught on those CPD cameras. I'm not saying they all work, maybe some of them are fake. Don't know ,don't care.
I'm a good boy.

the cameras are monitored at the 911 center. they DO NOT have enough people hired into the positions (the title is "crime detection specialist")to watch 24/7.

cat out of the bag... they watch for about 15 hours about 5 days a week. its on a rotating basis but not 24/7.

Just My Opinion wrote:

<quoted text>
I hear your point, and if the cameras have wide angles and get the homes in the screen, then you may have something there to complain about.
But if the city starts putting them up all over and not just in high crime areas, then it can't lower the home values. Just like in my neighborhood, we don't have curbs and gutters, but the value of the homes is still up there. And if they put in the curbs and gutters, it won't raise the value of the home any either.(we may get billed for it in our taxes, but the value of the home won't increase for it.) So I just don't see how it will lower the home values..But you are entitled to your own opinion, and I mine.

I don't think can put them whereever they want to. They have to justify their use by proving that numerous incidents have takien place there or that it is a crime hot spot. You entitled to your own opinion and maybe the residents in your area don't mind them.

Lee Darrow wrote:

"Land of the Free?!" Who does the City Council and the Mayor think they are kidding? This move is George Orwell on a Street Sweeper and the populace is too scared of their own shadows to put a stop to this move that has our Founding Fathers doing high-speed drill bit impersonations in their final resting places!
Our so-called "free" society isn't free - it is now monitored at every turn and at every move.
And all it will take to screw this program up will be a couple of kids with paintball guns... and suddenly Hizzoner and Da Council will be out a bucket of bucks, OUR taxes will get raised AGAIN, simply to replace these stupid cameras that will fail within weeks of being replaced anyway and for what?
"Improved" parking enforcement?!
Hey City Council! Hey Mr, Mayor! How about FIXING some of the TWELVE FOOT WIDE POTHOLES on Lake Shore Drive, Lawrence Avenue and Archer Avenue, instead?
Get a clue, people, and spend the money on something that benefits the PEOPLE you are supposed to be serving and protecting, instead of installing more high-tech garbage to try to "keep us in line!"

Dont worry about "big brother" these cameras dont work anyways, All show