Policing By Camera: A Discussion of Red Light and Surveillance Cameras as a Tool of Law Enforcement
On Wednesday next week, the Show-Me Institute and the Saint Louis chapter of Liberty on the Rocks will co-host a discussion of the use of cameras in public places as a law enforcement tool. During the past few months, red light cameras and surveillance cameras have been in the news, and we’re excited to have Sen. Jim Lembke and Alderman Antonio French, both of whom have taken strong stances on these issues, speaking at this event!
The discussion will begin at 7:00 p.m. on Wednesday, June 9,
at the Show-Me Institute Office at 4512 W. Pine.
Please RSVP either by email, to info@showmeinstitute.org,
or by phone at (314) 454-0647,
or by commenting on this blog post.
Sen. Lembke, who represents part of the city of Saint Louis and Saint Louis County, has spoken out against the use of red light cameras, on the grounds that they entail the presumption of guilt. As he said in a Post-Dispatch article, “[the use of red light cameras] takes liberty away in that there’s no other crime that I know of on the books where I as a citizen am guilty until I prove my innocence.”
Alderman French, who represents the 21st ward, has been campaigning hard to have surveillance cameras set up near high-crime areas in his ward. In the Riverfront Times blog, French explained that the crime is coming from a small group of people, and that surveillance cameras might deter that activity. From the RFT:
“It’s the same group of bad guys doing bad things,” French says. “We’ll advertise the hell out if it, that there’s cameras. One of reason people do things is because they think that can get away with it. If they know somebody is watching it’s very likely they’ll go somewhere else to do drug activity and violence.”
One of the most interesting aspects about the use of both red light and surveillance cameras is that the cameras will likely soon be able to identify, without a doubt, the individual committing a crime. At that point, although camera surveillance seems to be a particularly un-American activity, is there any constitutional argument against it? Do cameras really infringe upon our liberties if they are placed in public places where any police officer could also be placed?
French and Lembke will have the opportunity to answer these questions, and others, on June 9. If you are free, please drop by. The discussion will be informal; it our hope that attendees can ask the elected officials questions directly, and be part of an engaging conversation about the trade-offs between liberty and security.
Liberty on the Rocks is a nonpartisan, nonprofit, social organization that seeks to unite individuals, regardless of political affiliation, who desire liberty. With the goal of facilitating networks, friendships, and intelligent conversation, Liberty on the Rocks seeks to initiate the energy and dialogue necessary to move America from the grassroots up, toward the constitutional principles of freedom used to found this nation.





20 reasons to oppose photo radar:
http://www.meetup.com/camerafraud/messages/boards/thread/7496696
Comment by Stacey — June 3, 2010 @ 11:43 a.m.
Do we have a right to/presumption of anonymity (dare I say privacy) while on the public streets? I tend to say no.
For the red light cameras, it is a money grab, plain and simple. For Alderman French, I am more sympathetic. You’ll push the crime elsewhere, but the cameras can expand, too.
Comment by Papillon — June 3, 2010 @ 12:45 p.m.
[...] Sen. Jim Lembke, a St. Louis-area Republican, thinks the cameras represent an affront to liberty. Tonight in St. Louis he will debate Antonio French, a city alderman who believes in cameras’ crime-fighting [...]
Pingback by Study: Red-light cameras do not keep cars from colliding – Pitch Weekly (blog) | Red Light Revolt! — June 9, 2010 @ 10:33 a.m.
Using cameras may deter crime, protect the innocent, and assure the civil rights of those who deserve it.If you’re not doing anything wrong then you should have nothing to worry about. And why should people who are committing crimes have their civil liberties protected when they are violating someone else’s civil liberties by committing the crime in the first place. The use of cameras may also prevent false arrests and accusations. There are way too many people who are wrongfully accused, arrested, prosecuted, and convicted for crimes that they did not commit. I am currently being accused and prosecuted for a crime that I did not do. I have also been viciously attacked ( on more than one occasion) by the same person who has made the false accusation against me. The fact is, my civil rights are already being taken away. My career, reputaion, financial, and emotions well being are at stake. I work hard and I always try to be honest and do the right thing, but still, a career criminal has managed to make people believe otherwise. How can I prove my innocence in my situation other than with the use of surveillance cameras? I wish that they had surveillance cameras on every corner in my area because then I may not have had to go through (and still going through)the vicious attacks and harassement by another person who is violating my civil rights to live my life peacefully.
Comment by MS — January 8, 2012 @ 10:01 a.m.