Baltimore To Spy On Citizens Taking Public Transportation

[Lil Red]

[url="http://www.infowars.com/baltimore-announces-city-wide-surveillance-roll-out-that-records-passenger-conversations-on-city-buses/"]article here[/url]
The surveillance society continues to grow unabated, as the city of Baltimore becomes the latest governmental entity to trample civil rights in the name of “public safety.”

According to the [i]Baltimore Sun[/i], city officials have now authorized the recording of private conversations on public buses “to investigate crimes, accidents and poor customer service.”

Marked with signs to alert passengers that open mics are picking up every word they say, the first 10 buses with the new surveillance equipment began operation towards the end of October. Eventually, officials say they will expand the program to 340 buses, or about half the fleet, by next summer.

[b]‘We want to make people feel safe…’[/b]
The paper said the audio surveillance will be incorporated into the video surveillance systems already on board the buses (no plausible explanations on how an audio capability is supposed to enhance video surveillance, either).

“We want to make sure people feel safe, and this builds up our arsenal of tools to keep our patrons safe,” said Ralign Wells, the [i]Maryland Transit Administration [/i]chief. “The audio completes the information package for investigators and responders.”

At this point, it’s appropriate to remind readers that “public safety” is the excuse of choice for authoritarians who no longer feel constrained by the Constitution. But then, why would they, considering they are being enabled by a federal court system that, time and again, upholds such blatant violations as “reasonable?” The MTA said it first checked with the state Attorney General’s office on the legality of adding audio [url="http://www.naturalnews.com/surveillance.html"]surveillance[/url]; the AG’s office said it was, based on a 2000 appeals court decision, in which a panel ruled such surveillance did not violate state wiretapping laws (no word on how public eavesdropping applies to a law regulating wiretapping, but the use of tortured logic to implement unconstitutional measures is not a new tactic to authoritarians).

The [i]American Civil Liberties Union [/i]does not always come down on the right side of the Constitution either, but in this case, the organization has it right.
David Rocah, a staff attorney with the Maryland chapter of the ACLU, said he was “flabbergasted” by the plan, which he says is being implemented under the guise of a pilot program after a similar proposal was rejected by the state’s highest-ranking transportation official and the General Assembly three times in 2009.

“People don’t want or need to have their private conversations recorded by MTA as a condition of riding a bus,” Rocah told the paper. “A significant number of people have no viable alternative to riding a bus, and they should not be forced to give up their privacy rights.”

MTA police dispatchers say they receive anywhere from 45 to 100 calls daily from bus drivers reporting everything from unruly passengers to criminal activity. Capt. Burna McCollum, commander of the MTA police technical services division, said that while video is a very useful tool in helping to solve crimes, the audio is needed because, essentially, he wants to take away a witnesses’ choice not to get involved.

[b]State senate willing to get involved?[/b]
As reported by the [i]Sun[/i], [i]“Video is a critical tool for investigators sorting out the details of an incident, but when witnesses walk away, are reluctant to cooperate or give conflicting accounts, an audio recording can fill in missing information,” McCollum said.[/i]

Translation: Police will now be able to [i]force[/i] city residents to get involved in criminal investigations, even if they would otherwise choose not to for, say, personal safety reasons (no word on whether police are prepared to provide such unwilling witnesses 24/7 protection for as long as necessary).

Other area transportation systems have chosen the correct constitutional route and have decided against audio surveillance, the paper said.

“It’s an end run and ripe for a court challenge,” Sen. James Brochin, a [url="http://www.naturalnews.com/Baltimore.html"]Baltimore[/url] County Democrat and member of the state Senate Judicial Proceedings Committee. “They have absolutely no grounds to do this. If we can’t get them to listen and change their minds, we’ll deal with this … and make them defend what’s indefensible.”

Here’s hoping that isn’t just bluster.

[Winchester]

Problem 1 is having public transportation, in the first place.

[Ed Normile]

No one seems to care they film your child on the school bus. Nor does anyone mind the multitudes of cameras on every street and building, nor the cameras that most department stores use in their dressing rooms to " save you money by cutting down on the loss incurred by theft". Next time you enter the mall, smile for the camera that is monitoring your every move. Keep you hair and makeup nice for all tose cameras on every stop light, no, not the ones that send out automatic tickets for running the red light, the surveillance cameras that are everywhere. They are on your ATM's at your gas station and convenient stores, your grocery stores and restaurants. This battle is already lost in the Nanny States of America

ed

[Winchester]

No one is proposing to control what one does with one's private property. We're talking about government surveillance.

[4588686]

[quote name='Winchester' timestamp='1352735363' post='2508596']
Problem 1 is having public transportation, in the first place.
[/quote]


Wouldn't want the poor to have cheap means of travel. Might give them too much ability to move around in search of other work opportunities. The important thing is to make sure that capital has all the power.

[cmotherofpirl]

[quote name='Lil Red' timestamp='1352735246' post='2508595']
[url="http://www.infowars.com/baltimore-announces-city-wide-surveillance-roll-out-that-records-passenger-conversations-on-city-buses/"]article here[/url]
The surveillance society continues to grow unabated, as the city of Baltimore becomes the latest governmental entity to trample civil rights in the name of “public safety.”

According to the [i]Baltimore Sun[/i], city officials have now authorized the recording of private conversations on public buses “to investigate crimes, accidents and poor customer service.”

Marked with signs to alert passengers that open mics are picking up every word they say, the first 10 buses with the new surveillance equipment began operation towards the end of October. Eventually, officials say they will expand the program to 340 buses, or about half the fleet, by next summer.

[b]‘We want to make people feel safe…’[/b]
The paper said the audio surveillance will be incorporated into the video surveillance systems already on board the buses (no plausible explanations on how an audio capability is supposed to enhance video surveillance, either).

“We want to make sure people feel safe, and this builds up our arsenal of tools to keep our patrons safe,” said Ralign Wells, the [i]Maryland Transit Administration [/i]chief. “The audio completes the information package for investigators and responders.”

At this point, it’s appropriate to remind readers that “public safety” is the excuse of choice for authoritarians who no longer feel constrained by the Constitution. But then, why would they, considering they are being enabled by a federal court system that, time and again, upholds such blatant violations as “reasonable?” The MTA said it first checked with the state Attorney General’s office on the legality of adding audio [url="http://www.naturalnews.com/surveillance.html"]surveillance[/url]; the AG’s office said it was, based on a 2000 appeals court decision, in which a panel ruled such surveillance did not violate state wiretapping laws (no word on how public eavesdropping applies to a law regulating wiretapping, but the use of tortured logic to implement unconstitutional measures is not a new tactic to authoritarians).

The [i]American Civil Liberties Union [/i]does not always come down on the right side of the Constitution either, but in this case, the organization has it right.
David Rocah, a staff attorney with the Maryland chapter of the ACLU, said he was “flabbergasted” by the plan, which he says is being implemented under the guise of a pilot program after a similar proposal was rejected by the state’s highest-ranking transportation official and the General Assembly three times in 2009.

“People don’t want or need to have their private conversations recorded by MTA as a condition of riding a bus,” Rocah told the paper. “A significant number of people have no viable alternative to riding a bus, and they should not be forced to give up their privacy rights.”

MTA police dispatchers say they receive anywhere from 45 to 100 calls daily from bus drivers reporting everything from unruly passengers to criminal activity. Capt. Burna McCollum, commander of the MTA police technical services division, said that while video is a very useful tool in helping to solve crimes, the audio is needed because, essentially, he wants to take away a witnesses’ choice not to get involved.

[b]State senate willing to get involved?[/b]
As reported by the [i]Sun[/i], [i]“Video is a critical tool for investigators sorting out the details of an incident, but when witnesses walk away, are reluctant to cooperate or give conflicting accounts, an audio recording can fill in missing information,” McCollum said.[/i]

Translation: Police will now be able to [i]force[/i] city residents to get involved in criminal investigations, even if they would otherwise choose not to for, say, personal safety reasons (no word on whether police are prepared to provide such unwilling witnesses 24/7 protection for as long as necessary).

Other area transportation systems have chosen the correct constitutional route and have decided against audio surveillance, the paper said.

“It’s an end run and ripe for a court challenge,” Sen. James Brochin, a [url="http://www.naturalnews.com/Baltimore.html"]Baltimore[/url] County Democrat and member of the state Senate Judicial Proceedings Committee. “They have absolutely no grounds to do this. If we can’t get them to listen and change their minds, we’ll deal with this … and make them defend what’s indefensible.”

Here’s hoping that isn’t just bluster.
[/quote]
HAH, the first thing I thought of was to sit by a mike and recite the Rosary

[Winchester]

[quote name='Hasan' timestamp='1352774953' post='2508905']


Wouldn't want the poor to have cheap means of travel. Might give them too much ability to move around in search of other work opportunities. The important thing is to make sure that capital has all the power.
[/quote]
More question begging. And reframing the position so it appears to come from a place of selfishness.

[Papist]

Perhaps the video footage could be streamed to city's public website....next the streaming video from cameras in elected officials' offices.

[4588686]

[quote name='Winchester' timestamp='1352812245' post='2509140']
More question begging. And reframing the position so it appears to come from a place of selfishness.
[/quote]


Because a free market would provide cheap transportation to fit a market need? Perhaps (any case studies?). But your categorical description of public transportation as the original sin of the problem described in the article is just as dogmatic and I think merited an equally dogmatic response.

Edited November 13, 2012 by Hasan

[KnightofChrist]

[quote name='Hasan' timestamp='1352834017' post='2509290']
Because a free market would provide cheap transportation to fit a market need? Perhaps (any case studies?). But your categorical description of public transportation as the original sin of the problem described in the article is just as dogmatic and I think merited an equally dogmatic response.
[/quote]

Isn't it more important to you that Baltimore is spying on citizens when they just want to ride the bus? What kind of libertarian are you anyway?

[4588686]

[quote name='KnightofChrist' timestamp='1352834493' post='2509296']
Isn't it more important to you that Baltimore is spying on citizens when they just want to ride the bus? What kind of libertarian are you anyway?
[/quote]


I don't identify as a libertarian, in the American political context. Oh, hey! We're back to political positions and their normalcy being relative to the political context within which the discussion is occurring!

Yes, obviously the program is probably stupid and certainly appalling, whatever its efficiency. But I'm pretty sure everyone here feels that way, if for no other reason than the fact that it is occurring while Obama is in office (hmmmm.....) and so didn't feel the need to announce it.

[KnightofChrist]

[quote name='Hasan' timestamp='1352834878' post='2509299']



I don't identify as a libertarian, in the American political context. Oh, hey! We're back to political positions and their normalcy being relative to the political context within which the discussion is occurring!

Yes, obviously the program is probably stupid and certainly appalling, whatever its efficiency. But I'm pretty sure everyone here feels that way, if for no other reason than the fact that it is occurring while Obama is in office (hmmmm.....) and so didn't feel the need to announce it.
[/quote]

Radical!

[Slappo]

[quote name='Hasan' timestamp='1352774953' post='2508905']


[b]Wouldn't want the poor to have cheap means of travel[/b]. Might give them too much ability to move around in search of other work opportunities. The important thing is to make sure that capital has all the power.
[/quote]

Exactly! They might take a bus to the local polling place and vote. We wouldn't want that now would we.

[Winchester]

[quote name='Hasan' timestamp='1352834017' post='2509290']
Because a free market would provide cheap transportation to fit a market need? Perhaps (any case studies?). But your categorical description of public transportation as the original sin of the problem described in the article is just as dogmatic and I think merited an equally dogmatic response.
[/quote]
It might. I don't know. It might be we wouldn't have spread out cities, and all the greens would be ecstatic. Or maybe Grumman would have gotten bored and started a militant corporate state, culminating in our terraforming other planets, eventually encountering an alien species with acid for blood.

Dogma is only bad when it's dogma you don't like. This is true of everyone.

The first mistake is having public transportation. "Public" property is really owned by the State. It's not the original sin, which is believing that a special group of magical people called the State, in the first place. I'd rather believe in a magical sky daddy.

[Gabriela]

unsurprising. papa calls MD "The People's Republic of Maryland".