Post Number: 47
|Posted on Tuesday, March 24, 2009 - 12:43 pm: || |
Can anyone offer any intelligence regarding the survelance cameras and satellite equipment going up in the city on major intersections? Based on the deficit of the city, something tells me it comes from a more sofisticated organization.
Post Number: 706
|Posted on Tuesday, March 24, 2009 - 12:46 pm: || |
Maybe the WSO ?
(World Spelling Organization)
Post Number: 5426
|Posted on Tuesday, March 24, 2009 - 12:47 pm: || |
Just because the city has a deficit not everything comes to a screeching halt. The city has had some cameras in place for a long time. Kudos to them for expanding the project.
Post Number: 48
|Posted on Tuesday, March 24, 2009 - 1:18 pm: || |
why do folks get so defensive on this forum. do you have good information about this? I have lived in Detroit all my life and have a pretty good sense about what doesn't get done. Just trying to understand what the deal is with the survelance going up. If it is the DPD, good for them since they are short staffed.
Post Number: 1278
|Posted on Tuesday, March 24, 2009 - 1:22 pm: || |
More than likley Joymac, they are traffic monitoring systems, much like what you see on TV traffic reports. In fact, all of the traffic cameras are apart of the MITS system.
There is no police monitoring system in Detroit ala Police Cameras...
Post Number: 844
|Posted on Tuesday, March 24, 2009 - 1:44 pm: || |
Post Number: 966
|Posted on Tuesday, March 24, 2009 - 1:54 pm: || |
But my next door neighbor, a woman of 63 years and a follower of Malik Shabazz and Horace Sheffield (appearing at their many protests) has a huge surveillance system: digital surveillance cameras in her two front windows, a camera in her kitchen window facing my house and surveilling only me (!), a camera in a window in the back of her house and a camera over her driveway. This is all to demonstrate to her neighbors that she is NOT TO BE MESSED WITH. If any bad thing should happen to any of her neighbors and the tape is requested, she will always say that the system does not work.
Truth be told, it does not work (she doesn't know how to retrieve the images) - but the red and green lights are always flashing like Big Brother.
Post Number: 5427
|Posted on Tuesday, March 24, 2009 - 2:00 pm: || |
"There is no police monitoring system in Detroit ala Police Cameras"
See Hart Plaza area cameras and DPD substation there
Post Number: 837
|Posted on Tuesday, March 24, 2009 - 3:26 pm: || |
Those trafic monitoring camears are going up all over the metro area. I've seen them sprouting like weeds throught Macomb and Oakland County.
Southwestmap-> You should shine a bright "Security" Light from your house directly into the lens of her camera. Talk about an invasion of privacy!
Post Number: 968
|Posted on Tuesday, March 24, 2009 - 4:11 pm: || |
Thanks Raptor - but such an action is invariably met with an adverse reaction. She is crazy. Once she smeared dog feces all over my house while I was at work. She cuts down, removes anything of mine that she doesn't approve of or can't afford herself. No flags allowed. My window boxes removed when I am at work. New fences installed on my property when i am work. A floodlight would cause a BIGGER floodlight to shine in my house (ten feet away) all night!
Pray that you never get a crazy loco neighbor!
Post Number: 1035
|Posted on Tuesday, March 24, 2009 - 4:43 pm: || |
That reminds me of a customer of a home improvement company that I worked for many years ago. The salesman went out and quoted a new wood fence for her yard. She accepted the price and he had her fill out a credit application. It turned out that she actually needed the fence to keep out DEMONS.
Post Number: 839
|Posted on Tuesday, March 24, 2009 - 4:50 pm: || |
Southwestmap-> I don't suppose you've tried prosecuting this lovely member of society?
Post Number: 188
|Posted on Tuesday, March 24, 2009 - 4:52 pm: || |
southwestmap: thank you for the funny, altho you may not consider it so humorous. i was having a grim day.
you've reminded me of this website: FuckMyLife
Post Number: 601
|Posted on Tuesday, March 24, 2009 - 4:54 pm: || |
At least she's not breaking into his house.
Post Number: 9119
|Posted on Wednesday, March 25, 2009 - 2:11 am: || |
You don't need a bright light...but you can get one of those cutesy little laser lights and shine it precisely at that motherfucking camera and send its auto-contrast circuitry berserk!
She won't know where it is coming from if you shield it just right...and you can turn it off when you're not home so she won't find it.
There is always a discrete solution to vexing problems...
Post Number: 9121
|Posted on Wednesday, March 25, 2009 - 2:14 am: || |
...if you get a high-energy green one, you just might be able to roach that optical sensor...literally cook it slowly. But Homeland Security will want to meet you if you buy one now.
Post Number: 9123
|Posted on Wednesday, March 25, 2009 - 2:27 am: || |
As for the cameras, I'm sure these are crowd and traffic CONTROL devices...and your pausing at red lights will NOT change one whit.
When they installed the first range of these in the metro area a decade ago on Rochester Road...there were long articles insisting that they were for traffic flow ONLY, no surveillance of citizenry bordering on privacy invasion without any reasonable cause.
A year later, the Oakland Press had a cover story about how many people had been arrested due these cameras, including someone who was stupid enough to lay their sidearm on the dashboard. There were an alarming number of simple open-intoxicant and marijuana criminals boasted about as well.
So, who's zooming who on this bullshit?!
These cameras will be used during the coming economic meltdown, when the 1978 FEMA laws are enacted and all transportation, communication, and food production falls under the direct command of what is NOW called Homeland Security...and we will get to meet the recently renamed and laid-off Blackwater Security goons in their jackboots.
Sorry to piss on anyone's fantasy that these are somehow related to anyone's actual safety and security...
Post Number: 902
|Posted on Wednesday, March 25, 2009 - 3:04 am: || |
Relax Gannon..when the world ends, you're welcome to crash at my place. Are you well-versed in the care & feeding of the Remington 870?
FWIW, I've been led to understand that a mild scuffing of the license plate to remove the reflective crap, followed by a coat of high-gloss clear on the whole plate, along with a high-intensity halogen license lamp bulb, will pretty much render most GATSO (traffic camera) pics useless for ID purposes..
Not that I would know personally, of course..
Post Number: 780
|Posted on Wednesday, March 25, 2009 - 3:11 am: || |
a simple minded money grab abounds
Post Number: 1051
|Posted on Wednesday, March 25, 2009 - 12:34 pm: || |
I think I know what you are talking about, Joymac. I've seen a couple of these intersections that are being redone with new traffic signals and all sorts of other cameras and sensors. They look quite complex and I would be interested to know what their functions are.
Post Number: 427
|Posted on Wednesday, March 25, 2009 - 12:39 pm: || |
A few interesting reads:
http://www.michigan.gov/mdot/0 ,1607,7-151-9615_44489---,00.h tml
For those of you whole believe this system is developed for other purposes, this may be of interest:
Post Number: 903
|Posted on Wednesday, March 25, 2009 - 2:03 pm: || |
Based on the reality of the situation, belief that traffic monitoring devices will NOT be warped into "traffic control/revenue gathering" devices is pretty foolish.
As an avid breaker of speed limits (sorry, but there it is), I tend to keep abreast of this technology..the fact of the matter is that community after community continue to expand the use of these devices to mete out traffic violations. The bottom line is that the bottom line is BEAUTIFUL from a revenue-generation standpoint, and money talks the loudest all the world 'round..
If you doubt that Big Brother will eventually arrive in Detroit, your head's in the sand.
Post Number: 153
|Posted on Wednesday, March 25, 2009 - 4:13 pm: || |
Why hasn't anyone guessed that yet???
Post Number: 227
|Posted on Wednesday, March 25, 2009 - 5:36 pm: || |
The Autoscope cameras that are used for vehicle detection for the FAST-TRAC system don't have tilt or pan. They're pretty much focused in on the intersection.
On top of that, the images from the cameras are processed at the intersection. No video feed is sent back to the traffic operations center in Waterford.
There is no way images from those cameras could be used to bust people, such as the claim that the person had a gun on their dash.
MDOT does have CCTV cameras along the freeways. The operation center is in the city.
http://www.michigan.gov/mdot/0 ,1607,7-151-9615_44489_44992-1 19729--,00.html
Post Number: 9128
|Posted on Wednesday, March 25, 2009 - 5:53 pm: || |
RO, that is exactly what the reports said when the Rochester Road cameras were being installed. So, why then the follow-up a year later in the Oakland Press? I don't have time to dig it up, but I didn't imagine this.
All video surveillance cameras made in the past five years, especially the wireless with direct internet access, have been 'regulated' by the FCC. Closed-circuit devices less so.
An entire class of extraordinary performing wireless cameras were outlawed because they couldn't be retrofitted with the 'Big Brother' technology chip.
Inexpensive cameras going up EVERYWHERE will be accessible to whomever holds the backdoor key...while they are being sold as private, that one has to have the security code in order to view through it.
Silly folks are doing the work FOR Big Brother, giving a potentially unethical future leader full access where-ever these are installed!
Post Number: 909
|Posted on Wednesday, March 25, 2009 - 9:01 pm: || |
The camera's now in place have little to do with what's going to happen in the future. Once the infrastructure is in place, camera upgrade is the cheap/easy part.
I can't wait for the wacky GATSO speed enforcement cams to make their debut in Michigan..popular internet folklore pegs 160-something MPH as the speed needed to be moving too fast to be recorded..wanna put that little theory to the test.
Post Number: 842
|Posted on Wednesday, March 25, 2009 - 9:42 pm: || |
Wouldn't they have to change the law to give tickets from camera detection? Currently if I am not mistaken the officer has to see you in person commit the offense in order to pull you over and give you a ticket. For further reading on the subject see the story in Troy where someone called in a drunk driver and the driver got off because the police didn't see the guy swerving or anything. So as it stands now you couldn't get a ticket in Michigan because there is no law enforcement present in a camera.
Post Number: 395
|Posted on Wednesday, March 25, 2009 - 11:28 pm: || |
Don't tell that to people in Chicago. Just a picture alone of you making a right on red at the wrong time will get you a ticket in the mail, complete with a picture of your car making said illegal turn, even if you're not the one driving.