Full Time Video Surveillance

[fz6adventure]

In the Thursday budget deliberations, our brilliant Kelowna council voted to fund full time video surveillance of the people in Kelowna. Councillor Singh is on record as saying "it is an important piece for security". One would expect that someone in such a powerful position would at the very least do a little research into the matter of video surveillance before sanction such an intrusive act. I guess she missed the presentation by the former Privacy Commissioner of Canada to the Kelowna Chamber of Commerce.

Just another troll following in Mattuissi's and Basran's misguided vision of utopia? I'll vote for anybody but our current mayor and council come the next civic election!

Very frankly, I'm here to ask for your help. You here in Kelowna are at the heart of a national test case about the most urgent and fundamental privacy issue facing Canada today - video surveillance of our public streets by the police, by the state.The choices you make will quite literally help determine what kind of society - how free a society - we have in Canada, not only for ourselves, but for our children and grandchildren.

That's how important this is, and that's why I'm here.

I want to talk with you about the implications of this one camera that's now in Kelowna, and the five more that are supposed to be installed, and those that will be added after that - and all the cameras in all the other cities that will follow suit if the warnings of the Privacy Commissioner are ignored. This camera is the thin edge of the wedge that will irrevocably change our whole notion of our rights and freedoms.

What I'm talking about is what Justice LaForest of the Supreme Court of Canada said in a 1990 decision:

"To permit unrestricted video surveillance by agents of the state would seriously diminish the degree of privacy we can reasonably expect to enjoy in a free society. . . We must always be alert to the fact that modern methods of electronic surveillance have the potential, if uncontrolled, to annihilate privacy.

*snip*

Read the rest here:
https://www.priv.gc.ca/en/opc-news/news ... _b_020206/

[Jflem1983]

This council needs to go. All of them

[gsc]

Where do they plan to put all these cameras? Down town or every street in Kelowna? I guess I'm the odd one out as I'm not super concerned about them and live in an area that could probably use them.

I don't have any thing to hide and don't break the laws. Any one can walk past my place and see most of my yard and house already. For me my privacy is in my home any time I leave any one can see what I'm doing already.

I get that lots of people are going to be totally against this but in all reality what's the difference then if your neighbor has cameras and can see you already.

The money to do all this on the other hand bugs me. One camera alone is not cheep let alone hundreds. Also there is a lot more expenses then just cameras as they need to be installed, wired, the main brain, all the monitors and a place to have all this.

My concern is going to be what new bull s*** tax are they going to come up with to pay for all this.

[alanjh595]

There are 8 cameras in the downtown area already that record 24/7/365.

Do you really feel that these cameras are an invasion of your person rights to privacy?

How about these?
https://www.castanet.net/scenic-web-cam ... ameras.php

How many private cameras does Castanet have pointed on the downtown streets of Kelowna?

Is this an invasion of privacy? They are on full-time and on-line for everyone with a computer or a smart phone to view in real time.

By comparison, NOW how invasive are the proposed cameras the city wants?

[normaM]

I'll have to ask my toaster.
What is the point of the random cameras now?

[Scrobins94]

Not bad. The article lists parkades and the Queensway bus loop. For these places, I think surveillance cameras will be a good deterrent and useful for investigations.

As long as they are pointed at only public places I think it should be fine.

[jasonjb]

Everyone has a cellphone on them nowadays and will film the instant something happens anyways. Not too worried about this since I dont plan on doing anything illegal and if I was I wouldnt be planning on doing it in the downtown core with loads of people around

[the truth]

if your doing nothing wrong who cares, the more the better imo

[Sparki55]

if your doing nothing wrong who cares, the more the better imo

Edward Snowden: "Arguing that you don't care about the right to privacy because you have nothing to hide is no different than saying you don't care about free speech because you have nothing to say."

[FreeRights]

Edward Snowden: "Arguing that you don't care about the right to privacy because you have nothing to hide is no different than saying you don't care about free speech because you have nothing to say."

How much privacy and in what method are we entitled to in public places?

[Jflem1983]

Edward Snowden: "Arguing that you don't care about the right to privacy because you have nothing to hide is no different than saying you don't care about free speech because you have nothing to say."

How much privacy and in what method are we entitled to in public places?

Fair point. There are already thousands of cameras. On traffic lights on businesses. Why do we need any more. Queensway has had cameras for 20 years

[alanjh595]

How much privacy and in what method are we entitled to in public places?

Good point. In any PUBLIC space, there is NO right to privacy. That includes streets, parks, walkways, parking lots, roadways, grocery stores, Okanagan Lake, and gas stations.
In any private spaces like businesses, restaurants, bars, malls and shopping centers, and Tim Hortons are left up to the the discretion of the owners.
Airports are under Federal control, bus stations, parks, playgrounds, schools, are under Provincial/city control.
Workplaces are either under owner or Worksafe control.

The public can only have complete control over the residence that they live within or the the property that they own. This does NOT include renters.

[Sparki55]

There are many reasons why I have an issue with constant 24/7 surveillance in public places. Cameras, cell phones, car gps can all be used to track law abiding citizens. This technology has been used in the past to track down criminals and press charges. Criminals are well aware of this and do what they can to limit what technology they carry with them and scope out cameras before committing a crime.

My example that I know of and I hope they caught the right guy was for vandalism. The app he was using on his phone at the time had access to his location and there were a few cameras in the area which picked him up. No cameras were at the actual location of the crime, but his location gave away he was there sometime that night when it happened. Over $1000 in damage was caused and the police were able to have the app turn over the location of people in that area and searched whatever cameras to be pretty certain it was this guy. Now it probably was him but if this style of police work becomes more common, mistakes will be made.

You could be in the wrong place at the wrong time and be brought in for questioning.

[Spartan463]

I wont go into to much detail regarding it, but I was one of the people monitoring the Camera's during the trial period, and I am happy to see that the city is proceeding with this. As mentioned in the article, we were able to dispatch security, bylaw, or police when the incident happened or even before if there was suspicious activity. Within the first month of the trial we already saw a difference in the reduction of unwanted activity in the downtown area. When it comes to concerns with privacy, there are so many people on so many cameras that we really didn't care what you were doing, as long as it wasn't suspicious or illegal.

[Jflem1983]

I wont go into to much detail regarding it, but I was one of the people monitoring the Camera's during the trial period, and I am happy to see that the city is proceeding with this. As mentioned in the article, we were able to dispatch security, bylaw, or police when the incident happened or even before if there was suspicious activity. Within the first month of the trial we already saw a difference in the reduction of unwanted activity in the downtown area. When it comes to concerns with privacy, there are so many people on so many cameras that we really didn't care what you were doing, as long as it wasn't suspicious or illegal.

Creepy