Snap-crappy: 183 Brit local authorities operate 80,000 CCTV cams between them, says surveillance watchdog "There are over 6,000 systems and 80,000 cameras in operation across 183 LAs!" So exclaimed the UK's outgoing Surveillance Camera Commissioner as he detailed just how many council CCTV cameras there are across the nation. In a public plea asking councils to take compliance with surveillance laws seriously, Tony Porter lifted …
It's out of control. Small cameras have appeared on lamp-posts where I live, a village of 1000 people. There's no notice to say who operates them or what they're for. An FoI request to the highways authority led them to claim that they had no knowledge of them.
It's quite scary.
Since they claim to have no knowledge!!!!!
Phone highways and ask them to remove unauthorised Camera's as you beleive they are being used by peodophiles to monitor children, give them 7 days to comply or you'll report to the peoples champion "The Sun" or other sleazepaper.
Mention the ICO https://ico.org.uk/ and ask who you need to consult about information requests about CCTV coverage of an event you where involved in, like Damage to your vehicle whilst you where present since its on their equipment.
Ask if you can put up your own unauthorised Camera as well, whats the penalty, would they threaten to immediately remove for instance.
Also if you climb up (a ladder) and remove the illegal camera is that OK, can you have it since its not theirs and obviously illegally abandoned (although presumable fixed illegally to their lamp post) and as long as you don't damage the lamppost obviously.
Point out their isn't a notice of CCTV and a data controller identification so if its theirs i THINK they are in breach of something or other.
Anon since this is me having fun and not legal advice and i'm too scared of the MAN to do any of these things (I definately wouldn't paintball the camera either)
Some cameras like that appeared around here a while ago. They were put up on behalf of a housing developer to measure traffic flows to prove that there was road capacity for them build x000 new houses.
Such a shame that the cable to the camera appeared to be damaged when I saw it - they didn't get any useful data from that (and the council were made aware that the evidence they tried to present was bollocks).
Coincidentally there was also a drive-over pneumatic sensor at a nearby junction that appeared to have a full-circumference leak in the rubber.
Obviously I've no idea whether that was sabotage or who may have done it but I would certainly buy them a pint if I did.
Very few of them are actually closed circuit. I'm sure some will argue that the term CCTV has lost all meaning and now just refers to any and all cameras, but I think it's useful to be clear what we're actually talking about. A closed system that can only be used by a small number of people with the correct authority may still not be great in terms of privacy, but would be a hell of a lot better than a bunch of insecure webcams that can potentially be viewed by pretty much anyone with an internet connection.
Probably not true now but when unwired 'CC'TV cameras first arrived you could stand in the town centre with a TV tuner/dongle and screen and look at the camera picture yourself!
Now that the cameras are digital and, hopefully, encrypted this is probably not possible - but maybe if the citizens could also see the pictures there maybe less angst against these intrusions in our privacy right to go about our daily business unhindered.
(Oh! wait, forgot, those rights have been removed by the Covid regulations and we now need Hand-on-cock's permission to venture out of our house)
Scope creep has invaded the CCTV matter and no doubt will the Covid Regulations.
What is the justification that these councils have for having all these cameras? I can understand that certain ones would be beneficial to reduce crime or monitor traffic. But a lot just seem to be there for the sake of it. With local authorities feeling the squeeze from extra costs caused by COVID19 perhaps its now time to review which necessary and remove those that cannot be justified even if its just to save on the electricity costs of having them running 24/7.
Doesn't matter where you point a camera, there's always a non-zero probability it'll reduce crime (and even greater probability it'll detect or help prosecute crime while not reducing it). Whatever their cost it's a tiny fraction of that needed to have a police office wandering around and for now creates much more believable evidence so I doubt they're going to succumb in large numbers to a cost-benefit analysis anytime soon, unfortunately.
(Unless there is some kind of significant litigation cost created, by privacy laws for example).
"I can understand that certain ones would be beneficial to reduce crime or monitor traffic. "
I have seen a couple of studies that show that CCTV does reduce crime in the areas where it's installed e.g. town centres so is reported as a 'success' by local politicians. The caveat is that crime becomes distributed around the surrounding area where it is less obvious but no less.
So no more drug dealing in the town, where police have a chance of catching the culprits, but an increase in the residential areas where there are no police patrols so little enforcement.
Equally as the crims are dissuaded from shoplifting they move to house breaking. Overall the 'Net' result of CCTV on crime may be zero but the measured affect on town crime is hailed as a success by our Councils and Chief Constables.
Can you link any of the studies indicating net result of CCTV on crime may be zero? The studies I've seen show a portion of crime can be displaced in some circumstances, while in other circumstances crime also falls in surrounding areas not covered by cameras (fitting the whole broken windows, crime breeds crime model of criminality), but none with net zero or increase in crime.
No effect, other than an increase in sales of hoodies and face "coverings".
My local council is in "partnership" with DVLA, and has installed several dozen ANPR cameras.
As well as operating a fleet of vans fitted with ANPR to "deter" people from running tax-free-cars!
Also newly-installed are average speed cameras, painted yellow, but on top of 10-metre steel poles, so obviously going to be noticed!
Local crime hot-spots see the arrival of a white mercedes tractor rig, fitted with front-and-rear video.....which everyone already knows about....sigh..
I live just off of one of the most 'notorious' streets in the UK (thankfully Covid is killing off the Nightclubs and cheap bars too so that's one upside) and it's covered in CCTV cameras from every angle.
However, assaults still happen (I have told them drunks don't think about CCTV) and when they do the Police come knocking on our doors asking us if we have any CCTV in our block that might help them. I reply "No! However, haven't you enough cameras out there as it is?" The copper then looks crestfallen and walks off.
Reading some of this tin foil hattery reminds me of a couple of incidents around here in the last few years.
Firstly there was the great speed camera flap. On day shortly before a certain famous bicycle race came to town social media lit up with warnings that the local authority had suddenly installs loads of stealth speed cameras along a couple of main roads and that we were all going to get hit with speeding fines. Now these "stealth" cameras were on long telescopic poles strapped to lampposts. Not exactly stealthy. It also didn't take a genius to spot that the cameras were along the route of the cycle race and nowhere else. Wonder what they could have been used for. Both the local authority and police made it known that these cameras had been installed for the purpose of policing the race and would be gone shortly after the race completed (as indeed they were). None of this prevented the tin foil hat brigade from continuing to claim that the cameras were being used for speed enforcements (no cases came to court) or that they were being used to spy into people's houses (the cameras pointed along the roads and were fixed). But the funniest thing was the day the contractors came and took the cameras down the alcan bowler brigade were on social media claiming a victory over the police state.
The other even more amusing flap was the time that social media once again lit up with a spy camera controversy. You've probably noticed weather stations at the side of roads all over the country. These are used for highway management, mostly in winter to assist with gritting and in some exposed locations to monitor wind in case roads need to be closed to high siders. A short-ish pole with a few sensors including a pretty obvious anemometer on one arm. A few years back there were some upgrades rolled out and some stations got what appeared to be a camera on top pointing at the road surface. These a basically measuring the temperature of the road surface. One a couple of miles from here got the upgrade and once again the hatters were out on social media either claiming these were speed cameras or spy cameras. Of course I asked how these could be used for either function as they were pointing straight down at the road surface. My particular favourite being the facebook lawyer saying that the council had to have a sign up saying what the CCTV was used for. No matter how many times I told him they didn't as the device wasn't actually a camera he couldn't grasp it.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
