Topic: Does Mass Surveillance Lower Crime? - page 2. (Read 684 times)
I think that mass surveillance is more negative than positive for society. The perp wears a mask and can safely do whatever he wants under a video camera. Personally, I see all this as a violation of my rights and freedoms because I am a law-abiding citizen.
Does Mass Surveillance Lower Crime?
Only if the crooks know it exists, and there isn't anything they can do about it. It's called fear of reprisal.
Only if the crooks know it exists, and there isn't anything they can do about it. It's called fear of reprisal.
You understand very well how the backstage forces (which control the world) work - at first they organize some kind of event, then they attack it (saying that this is for our good), although in fact it is done to achieve greater control. Remember any situations with fake terrorist attacks and subsequent wars in order to take a more advantageous position for control and influence. There are a lot of such examples.
Now think about why mass surveillance are being introduced around the world. Who will follow us? Personally, I do not consent to surveillance of me, because I am primarily a human, like each of you.
Now think about why mass surveillance are being introduced around the world. Who will follow us? Personally, I do not consent to surveillance of me, because I am primarily a human, like each of you.
Mass Surveillance and Crime
Government's propaganda states that mass surveillance can help decrease crime rates.
On the contrary, many "soldiers of privacy" all over the world argue that mass surveillance not only acts as a serious threat to human freedom, but it's also quite ineffective about preventing and fighting criminality.
Are there actual data that support the latter or the former opinion? Otherwise, without proper data, they are just opinions and ideology.
Government's propaganda states that mass surveillance can help decrease crime rates.
On the contrary, many "soldiers of privacy" all over the world argue that mass surveillance not only acts as a serious threat to human freedom, but it's also quite ineffective about preventing and fighting criminality.
Are there actual data that support the latter or the former opinion? Otherwise, without proper data, they are just opinions and ideology.
mass surveilence are not a defence against suicidal invaders, they are a observation system on citizens behavior.
stop confusing both.
to defend against suicidal invaders you don't have police and cameras you have automatic sentry towers with lethal force.
Mass Surveillance and Crime
Government's propaganda states that mass surveillance can help decrease crime rates.
On the contrary, many "soldiers of privacy" all over the world argue that mass surveillance not only acts as a serious threat to human freedom, but it's also quite ineffective about preventing and fighting criminality.
Are there actual data that support the latter or the former opinion? Otherwise, without proper data, they are just opinions and ideology.
Government's propaganda states that mass surveillance can help decrease crime rates.
On the contrary, many "soldiers of privacy" all over the world argue that mass surveillance not only acts as a serious threat to human freedom, but it's also quite ineffective about preventing and fighting criminality.
Are there actual data that support the latter or the former opinion? Otherwise, without proper data, they are just opinions and ideology.
Jump to: