CCTV

July 6th, 2013 at 8:51 am by David Farrar

Stuff reports:

Every town in the country should have CCTV cameras to installed to help in the fight against crime.

That’s the opinion of one top officer, retiring after 30 years in the force, and who in the course of his career worked some of the country’s most notorious crimes

Retiring Detective Sergeant Glenn Tinsley, formerly of the Waihi Crime Investigation Bureau, was heavily involved in both Operation Sara – the murder of Sara Niethe in 2003 – and Operation Olive – the murder of Paeroa Pizza man Jordan Voudouris in June 2012, two investigations he says would have been a lot easier with the help of technology.

He says if the government and public want to “get serious” about crime prevention, the first step should be a rollout of CCTV cameras coupled with plate recognition technology.

He reckons cameras – paid for by local councils, the New Zealand Transport Agency (NZTA) and ACC levies – should be installed at the entry and exit points of every town.

“If you had a camera set up in all towns either side of Whangamata, Whitianga, Tairua, Coromandel the same, even the [Kopu] bridge at Thames; everything that moves – you are going to catch it,” he said.

Why stop there?

Why not microchip every person born in NZ, with a chip that tells the where you are. So if a crime happens in a specific area, the can work out who was within 100 metres of the crime and haul them in for questioning.

Then after that, we can start work on pre-crimes. Of course that would mean arresting the entire population of Huntly.

Tags: ,

50 Responses to “CCTV”

  1. Manolo (13,394 comments) says:

    The retired cop is a totalitarian at heart.

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. OneTrack (2,619 comments) says:

    Been watching too many movies DPF?

    By your logc, we should ban all CCTV cameras and remove existing ones. Yeah that would be so good.

    [DPF: Nope there is a difference between installing CCTV where there is a clear need, and universal suveilance of the entire population]

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. contheneo (26 comments) says:

    Next thing you know, they will be talking about requiring internal travel papers.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. flipper (3,583 comments) says:

    Typical Police over-reach.
    But what less can be expected of the idiotic Molesworth Street Cowboys (aka The Blue Gang).
    Contheno … the term is “internal Passports”

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. UglyTruth (4,019 comments) says:

    The problem IMO is twofold, the assumption that a universal approach to surveillance is appropriate, and the assumption that the video feed should go only to the police.

    An alternative scenario is that local groups install publicly viewable webcameras for trouble spots.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. slightlyrighty (2,496 comments) says:

    Blanket CCTV coverage would be an over-reaction of Orwellian proportions, however, targetted coverage in certain areas, such as Courtney Place, the main Railway station, Bus Terminals and other high traffic areas would be desirable. CCTV cameras were instrumental in catching the killers of Phillip Cottrell.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. Left Right and Centre (2,823 comments) says:

    Futuristic: Everyone has a video camera in their body that takes footage 24/7. And a blackbox of other data and info.

    And I want a calimetric reader that states how many kilojoules you consume. And kj burnt would be good too.

    Enjoy the stone age while it lasts people… this shit is all coming….

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. xy (152 comments) says:

    Maybe we should allow the GCSB to spy on New Zealanders. OH WAIT.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. niggly (799 comments) says:

    Actually if one reads the entire article the police association’s Greg O’Connor makes some reasoned commentary on the balance “of safety versus surveillance”.

    Ugly Truth questions whether video feeds go to Police, a fair question – but do they (all)? I thought video feeds also go to ‘diverse’ places such as City Council’s (or subcontracted private security companies) monitoring CBD’s and traffic/motorway monitoring places etc (are these under the control of the Police)?

    Ugly Truth’s idea to have an alternative setup for local groups to allow publically viewable webcams for trouble spots is a worthy suggestion. (Mind you it could have shades of big brother – so it would have to be done well and have community support etc).

    I don’t personally mind CCTV cameras in CBD’s to identify people beating up or raping other people – it’s sickening to think these sorts of behaviours are considered perfectly ‘normal’ by some elements of society even in this day and age where there have been concerted public campaigns against such behaviour for the last 30 years or so.

    And seeing we live in a liberal drinking society where it is perfectly normal to have bars open till 5am in the morning and the ensuing drunken rampages, well tough shit then, the more CBD CCTV cameras the better. Perhaps it is the doctors and nurses at A&E wards that should be allowed to make the decision on the appropriateness of CCTV cameras (numbers and locations)?

    DPF – isn’t that a step too far in comparing this article with microchips? Have you been suckered in by the paranoids at the recent select committee complaining about their privacy being breached? I thought the GCSB were more interested in terrorism and transnational crime rather than what the likes of Penny Bright’s next great big protest idea ;-)

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. Redbaiter (7,642 comments) says:

    The problem is not the need for cameras, but the need for a civil society.

    Our civil society has been attacked by the Progressives, and as always, the result of this is a need for a greater and more powerful state.

    If Progressives had not attacked our culture with their brain dead moral relativity, we would still have the civil society we have lost, and Mr. Tinsley would therefore not see cameras as necessary.

    Its the same old same old same old. As Progressives continue to break down our culture, so does the authority and intrusiveness of the government increase.

    Glen Tinsley is probably a good guy, but he is wrong in calling for mass surveillance. He just does not know how to deal with the ever increasing wave of public disorder and lack of civility.

    The real solution is not to install cameras, but to repudiate the Progressive political class.

    Vote: Thumb up 17 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. Nookin (3,037 comments) says:

    Once you have accepted surveillance in some areas then you accept it for all areas. Why should someone be more deserving of the protection afforded by CCTV in, say, a railway station than outside a dairy somewhere?

    If it is accepted that surveillance is good, prevents crime or results in apprehension(which in turn is preventative) then that is the end of the story. The principle is established. It reminds me of the story of a guy who asked his secretary if she would sleep with him for $1m. “Of course” she replied. “What about $5?” “What do you think I am she protested — a whore?” “We have already established that” he said “We are just haggling over the price”.

    As I said, once the principle is established, the rest is a haggle over the price.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. Mr Nobody NZ (397 comments) says:

    The only issue I have with the cops suggestion is the method of payment.

    Why involve unnecessary levels of bureaucracy which will each claim their “cut” of the fees.

    In Wattle Downs where I live we rolled on NZ’s first private CCTV camera system in 2011 which the local community funds through either direct payments to the scheme or through the two local dairies who happy to act as “collection agents” for the scheme.

    If the community feels that it doesn’t offer value they will not pay to support it and therefore it will fail. However we have seen the rates of burglaries and tagging/vandalism decrease significantly as since their introduction.

    Take a look at http://www.stuff.co.nz/auckland/local-news/manukau-courier/4936364/Green-light-for-CCTV if you want more information.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. Left Right and Centre (2,823 comments) says:

    niggly 9:45 am

    I don’t personally mind CCTV cameras in CBD’s to identify people beating up or raping other people – it’s sickening to think these sorts of behaviours are considered perfectly ‘normal’ by some elements of society even in this day and age where there have been concerted public campaigns against such behaviour for the last 30 years or so.

    here here

    ….where it is perfectly normal to have bars open till 5am in the morning and the ensuing drunken rampages

    I’ve got to say… I’d like to see numbers/ evidence for the rates of alcohol fueled aggression/ violence on a fri/ sat night in town. From what I see it’s not exactly ‘Fightclub’ on every street corner. That’s in Courtenay Place. One fight is one too many…. but at the same time it’s not a constant Bruce Lee fight scene either… at least in town…. hmmm…

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. Left Right and Centre (2,823 comments) says:

    Redbaiter 9:55 am I think whatever else is happening in society there will always be criminals. Cameras vs no cameras….. will convict more criminals with cameras surely? Deter poor behaviour and actions? Cameras good in that sense, no?

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. nasska (10,689 comments) says:

    A CCTV camera on every corner is a policeman’s wet dream but it should mesh nicely with the likely future wish list of the GCSB & their mates at the FBI.

    But I can allay fears people may have of being detained at a random checkpoint because they left their “internal passports” at home by mistake….Mr Plod will merely scan the microchip that will be implanted under your skin & then check GPS records for where your car has been over the past few months. He’ll probably have a look at your bank accounts to make sure everything is in order there too.

    The required legislation is probably being drafted now & will be introduced under the back door tied in with some other “security” or “public safety” issue.

    Then we will be a police state & the sheep will applaud the government of the day for looking after them.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. Redbaiter (7,642 comments) says:

    “I think whatever else is happening in society there will always be criminals.”

    That’s right, same old same old. Try and make excuses for your support for more police powers and a bigger and more powerful state.

    Of course there will always be criminals. What a fucking dumb thing to say. What the fuck is the relevance of that? Its merely a feeble attempt to lay smoke over the real issue, which liberals can never deal with, and that is the abject failure of our society since they have become ascendant.

    Why do you deny the massive increase in crime and moral and social decay that has accompanied this rise to ascendancy? I’ll tell you. Its because to do so you would have to admit your basic ideology is fucked, and you won’t do that. You’ll take our whole society completely down the drain before you’ll ever admit to being the reason for its descent into crime and violence.

    There will always be crime you say. Fuck me. What a fucking pathetic piss weak pathetic cop out. Why don’t you just shut the fuck up with such bullshit platitudinous shit and admit once and for all that it is your ideas that have fucked our society…????

    The issue is THE DEGREE OF CRIME.

    And don’t tell me it hasn’t fucking increased. Just talk to your grandmother you idiot. She’ll tell you she remembers when she didn’t have to lock her car. Or even take the keys out of it. She remembers when she didn’t need security screens on her doors and windows. She remembers when she could walk the streets at night alone.

    You prog/ liberal fuckers are responsible for the appalling decline of morality in our society and now you want fucking cameras to watch it all because you won’t admit it was your fucken attack on our culture and our CIVIL SOCIETY that is the real problem.

    Excuse my irritation but your moral cowardice and your vanity and the problems we have to bear because of it actually piss me off more than a little bit.

    Man up and take responsiblity for what you have done you coward.

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. duggledog (1,362 comments) says:

    The entire population of Huntly? Steady on there! Up the back of Huntly, behind the lake is reasonably well to do.

    Aside from the surveillance which is never going to be practical in a country the size of NZ with so many dark little corners, we could always try some meaningful punishments – I know it sounds crazy but all the Police I know and have spoken to candidly in my years of involvement with them ask Santa for this every Christmas.

    They spend their entire careers running around after mongrels of every stripe only to have them pretty much get off with a bit of home D, if that. They see them again, and again, and again and the damage they cause is phenomenal, and the related costs to society are massive.

    NZ would be 95% crime free if we sent our prisoners to China to do their lag.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. Yoza (1,551 comments) says:

    “[DPF: Nope there is a difference between installing CCTV where there is a clear need, and universal suveilance of the entire population]“

    Isn’t this the issue with the GCSB that National is so keenly promoting, the ability to carry out surveillance on the entire population all the time?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. CJPhoto (218 comments) says:

    Keys holiday retreat (Omaha) has had this for years. Only one road in monitored by cameras

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. Left Right and Centre (2,823 comments) says:

    Redbaiter 11:00 am What would you do to reduce crime Reddy? You can do change laws however you want- you’re in charge, you’re the govt- what do you change from the way the country is now to reduce or eliminate crime?

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. nasska (10,689 comments) says:

    ….”what do you change from the way the country is now to reduce or eliminate crime?”…..

    That’s simple LR&C….you just pull your time machine out of wherever you hide it & dial the country back a hundred years or so.

    If you could bear reading any of Reddy’s wafflings that he’s been cut & pasting over the net for about the fast fifteen years it would all be clear to you. After the next Tardis comes up for sale on Trade Me you’ll notice an immediate improvement in crime statistics.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. Yoza (1,551 comments) says:

    The London model seems the most acceptable. As I understand it, the CCTV set up there is available to be viewed by the general public all the time. The most well known example of the exploitation of this set up was a band which made a video for one of its songs by playing in front of the various CCTV set ups around London then editing them into a coherent music video.

    I would be ok with this kind of model as long as all the data collected was open to the public in archived form all the time and none of the security agencies could get in there and delete inconvenient footage after or during protests – it is curious the way non-establishment footage of demonstrations are generally at odds with the official narrative.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  23. UglyTruth (4,019 comments) says:

    You prog/ liberal fuckers are responsible for the appalling decline of morality in our society and now you want fucking cameras to watch it all because you won’t admit it was your fucken attack on our culture and our CIVIL SOCIETY that is the real problem.

    Sure, cameras don’t treat the actual cause of the problem. But the problem is civil society itself, in that civil society seeks to supplant lawful society by applying the meme that what people want (via the democratic process) is the highest virtue.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  24. Colville (2,085 comments) says:

    Will CCTV cams save me from a band of roving thug Harawiras?

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  25. UglyTruth (4,019 comments) says:

    I would be ok with this kind of model as long as all the data collected was open to the public in archived form

    Something like the bittorrent model would probably work here. In this model people who get the data also make it available to others to download, so in general the availability depends on the level of interest in a particular source.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  26. Colville (2,085 comments) says:

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-559547/Graffiti-artist-Banksy-pulls-audacious-stunt-date–despite-watched-CCTV.html

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  27. Nookin (3,037 comments) says:

    “Isn’t this the issue with the GCSB that National is so keenly promoting, the ability to carry out surveillance on the entire population all the time?”

    No. And there has never been any suggestion that it should be apart from those critics of the bill who either haven’t read it or who, like Norman, have read it and deliberately set out to distort its effect to promote his own political agenda.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  28. kowtow (7,652 comments) says:

    Redbaiter @955

    As always Red nails it in one.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  29. Left Right and Centre (2,823 comments) says:

    Redbaiter 11:00 am Even if the level of crime was the same now as it was at its lowest at any other time in history… cameras still make sense to try and catch those criminals still committing crime. It’s got nothing to do with what your political stripes might be.

    Have you heard of Crimewatch mate? Police 10/7? Police need your help to find this person. Here’s a *picture* or *footage* of them.

    How do you define ‘civil society’? It’s fairly civil, isn’t it? I’m being fairly civil… you’re being you but probably not breaking any laws.. most people aren’t going around being uncivil. Could it be better? Yeah sure. I don’t know if anything would make a difference to crime rates… any particular political ideology. Not anything that’s going to happen in NZ anyway, or sort of possible under the whole democracy thing. We don’t have dictators… we don’t behead criminals…

    Just shifting demographics of the country. The brown folks have higher rates of crime and there’s bloody heaps of cuzzies now compared to way back when. That’s one factor. And nothing to do with now vs then except all of that gorgeous breeding time. And nothing to do with anything else politically either.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  30. Redbaiter (7,642 comments) says:

    What would you do to reduce crime Reddy? You can do change laws however you want- you’re in charge, you’re the govt- what do you change from the way the country is now to reduce or eliminate crime?

    For fuck’s sake man, you’re head is just so far away from understanding the real problem I don’t know where to begin.

    Its not the “gummint”. Fixing it is not going to be down to the government.

    Its a social cultural problem.

    Whereas the situation is exacerbated by having Progressives in government, its not the real problem.

    The problem is you and only you can solve it.

    Not the government.

    YOU YOU YOU.

    “Human rights can only be assured among a virtuous people. The general government . . . can never be in danger of degenerating into a monarchy, an oligarchy, an aristocracy, or any despotic or oppresive form so long as there is any virtue in the body of the people.”
    George Washington

    “Only a virtuous people are capable of freedom. As nations become more corrupt and vicious, they have more need of masters.”
    Benjamin Franklin

    “Laws without morals are in vain.”
    Benjamin Franklin (Motto of the University of Pennsylvania)

    “Sell not virtue to purchase wealth, nor Liberty to purchase power.”
    Benjamin Franklin

    “A nation as a society forms a moral person, and every member of it is personally responsible for his society.”
    Thomas Jefferson

    “No government can continue good but under the control of the people; and . . . . their minds are to be informed by education what is right and what wrong; to be encouraged in habits of virtue and to be deterred from those of vice . . . . These are the inculcations necessary to render the people a sure basis for the structure and order of government.”
    Thomas Jefferson

    “It is in the manners and spirit of a people which preserve a republic in vigour. . . . degeneracy in these is a canker which soon eats into the heart of its laws and constitution.”
    Thomas Jefferson

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  31. nasska (10,689 comments) says:

    “-You have no respect for excessive authority or obsolete traditions. You’re dangerous and depraved, and you ought to be taken outside and shot!”
    ― Joseph Heller, Catch-22

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  32. OneTrack (2,619 comments) says:

    Yoza – “Isn’t this the issue with the GCSB that National is so keenly promoting, the ability to carry out surveillance on the entire population all the time?”

    Not in any way, shape or form.

    Maybe you should actually know something about the policies you are against instead of just the tribal – “if its not my tribe its bad” model.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  33. Redbaiter (7,642 comments) says:

    Nasska with his constant sneering at anybody who challenges his Progressive political views, and his complete and utter contempt for the habits and conventions that once made our society civil is a good example of the reason why so many people believe we now must have constant surveillance of the citizenry. A social white ant of the worst kind, and that kind is at the heart of our society’s degeneration.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  34. Left Right and Centre (2,823 comments) says:

    Redbaiter 12:12 pm Yep… so what do you want me to do to solve…. ‘the problems’? The crime?

    I live near a ghetto…. maybe go door-to-door and give them some pointers?

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  35. UglyTruth (4,019 comments) says:

    How do you define ‘civil society’?

    By its system of law.

    civil law
    n.
    1. The body of laws of a state or nation dealing with the rights of private citizens.
    2. The law of ancient Rome as embodied in the Justinian code, especially that which applied to private citizens.
    3. A system of law having its origin in Roman law, as opposed to common law or canon law.

    http://www.thefreedictionary.com/civil+law

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  36. gump (1,491 comments) says:

    There seems to be some confusion here.

    The Policeman is specifically talking about putting CCTV on the country’s main roads, with automated plate readers to track vehicle movements. It’s a proposal to monitor cars – not people.

    I have no problem with this. Such technology is used extensively overseas and it works. Even in Singapore – Redbaiter.

    If you drive on Auckland’s motorways, you are already being tracked by these systems.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  37. Left Right and Centre (2,823 comments) says:

    Redbaiter 12:17 pm I was watching one of those rubbish programmes… it was British… and nothing but catching turds up to no good on CCTV… and telling them off or catching them. Places like… I don’t know.. Luton town centre or something. They followed one robbery suspect camera to camera and got him. Without the cameras they wouldn’t have caught him…. or seen a crime happening. So I’m thinking the cameras if anything reduce crime. A good thing. The price to pay is I might be on CCTV minding my business. And….?? What privacy have you lost…. a shot of you walking around the local shops picking your nose? Jesus mate… who cares?

    It doesn’t mean that first it’s CCTV cameras and then next they hide cameras all over your fucking house unabated… where they’d only get a shot of a man wearing out a keyboard…

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  38. duggledog (1,362 comments) says:

    200+ cameras on Auckland’s motorways and more coming. Many of them can move and zoom in

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  39. Left Right and Centre (2,823 comments) says:

    UglyTruth 12:31 pm The very general term ‘civil society’ is subjective. Especially in the context of someone saying the ‘need for *a civil society*. Which civil society is that? What does it look like exactly? So it’s an uncivil society now?

    It’s a general common-usage term that doesn’t have an exact well accepted meaning or definition. Only a general one. Perfect for people who can’t give you anything specific…. just vague flowery suggestions.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  40. Left Right and Centre (2,823 comments) says:

    gump 12:33 pm I saw the London version on TV. Great for catching stolen cars. I’m sure that wasn’t all they did? Maybe it was….

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  41. Redbaiter (7,642 comments) says:

    Those scenes you were watching on TV are the end result of four or five decades of listening to the conscienceless lies of progressive politicians and their useful idiots among us.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  42. Left Right and Centre (2,823 comments) says:

    Redbaiter 12:50 pm Yeah, well agree or not, at least they caught some stolen cars eh? Fact. Is that a bad thing? You catch them stealing a car, maybe they won’t steal another car for a while.

    So.. who are the progressive politicians? All of them? What are the ‘conscienceless lies’? Do I have to search the whole internet or do you want to narrow the search a bit for me?

    Sue Bradford and the anti-smacking bill. Is that an actual example you might provide of ‘progressives’ creating a culture more prone to producing criminals?

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  43. hj (6,373 comments) says:

    Jane Jacobs talks about urban design and how the businesses around the street are the eyes and ears, this is the opposite of nationals plan for fast population growth and suburbia.
    Oh yes it is!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  44. Redbaiter (7,642 comments) says:

    “What are the ‘conscienceless lies’?”

    Are you really that dim you can’t find them?

    That utopia will come if we just allow gummint to shape and mould us. Especially our children.

    That families and moral codes are only fit for sneering at and mocking.

    That our society is “progressing” and not degenerating.

    That crime is something we just have to live with, no matter how bad it gets.

    That more police and more jails will save us from a degenerate society.

    That you need a time machine to turn it back- perhaps one of the most gutless and cowardly ones of all. Mussolini and fascism were turned back. So were Hitler and Nazism. All as popular among the chattering classes as Progressivism is today.

    There’s no reason we can’t turn back Progressivism. All we need to do is turn our backs on those who preach it and proslytize for it.

    That is only a few of the lies off the top of my head. There are hundreds of them. All propagated by the same brain damaged proslytizers for the cause of Progressivism.

    I’m sure you can think of a few more. Can’t you?

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  45. Grant Michael McKenna (1,156 comments) says:

    Putting aside Mr Fletcher’s tired tirades, the quote that the Detective Sergeant “was heavily involved in both Operation Sara – the murder of Sara Niethe in 2003 – and Operation Olive – the murder of Paeroa Pizza man Jordan Voudouris in June 2012″ makes it sound as if he should have been arrested for those crimes. Any idea why the sub-editor left out the phrase ‘investigation of’ to qualify what the Det. Sgt.’s involvement was?

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  46. Bad__Cat (137 comments) says:

    Slightly OT.

    We have recently had monitored GPS units installed in our work units. Reasoning is we travel a lot, sometimes in remote areas, and can turn on an alert switch in an emergency.

    Some staff are most upset. After all, the only have long lunches, or go on private jaunts, or go home early on VERY RARE, VERY JUSTIFIABLE occasions.

    Doesn’t bother me. I’m not ashamed of any of my action while on the boss’s time lock.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  47. Yoza (1,551 comments) says:

    Nookin (2,546) Says:
    July 6th, 2013 at 11:57 am

    “Isn’t this the issue with the GCSB that National is so keenly promoting, the ability to carry out surveillance on the entire population all the time?”

    No. And there has never been any suggestion that it should be apart from those critics of the bill who either haven’t read it or who, like Norman, have read it and deliberately set out to distort its effect to promote his own political agenda.

    and

    OneTrack (611) Says:
    July 6th, 2013 at 12:19 pm

    Yoza – “Isn’t this the issue with the GCSB that National is so keenly promoting, the ability to carry out surveillance on the entire population all the time?”

    Not in any way, shape or form.

    Maybe you should actually know something about the policies you are against instead of just the tribal – “if its not my tribe its bad” model.

    TECH LIBERTY NZ would beg to differ:

    “Firstly, as a civil liberties group we are concerned that this bill significantly expands the powers of the GCSB. There has been a lot of spin one way or another on this issue, but we see:

    1. The GCSB’s new purpose of protecting NZ’s cybersecurity being used as an excuse to give them broad oversight and control of the country’s telecommunications networks.

    2. New permission to use their equipment and people to assist the SIS, Police and, oddly, the Defence Force.

    3. The ability to spy on New Zealanders for a number of reasons including both of those purposes just mentioned.

    4. Incredibly wide-ranging warrants and access authorisations that can be granted over classes of people and systems with little meaningful oversight.

    We believe that these powers combine with what is left unsaid in the bill to prove a real threat to the security and well-being of New Zealanders. In particular we fear that this bill will allow significant mass surveillance.

    If these people in organisations like the GCSB or the SIS are allowed the opportunity to carry out “significant mass surveillance” they will, only a fool would expect otherwise. Society coming under surveillance from CCTV cameras is insignificant when compared to the powers Key is planning to hand over to this county’s covert security apparatus.

    Perhaps it is you two who should spend more time considering the ramifications of allowing a kind of mass surveillance of the population that would make a totalitarian dictator blush.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  48. Harriet (4,528 comments) says:

    Redbaiter @955

    As always Red nails it in one.

    Yep kowtow always.

    The public property that the cameras will be looking over was once the ground that parents, neighbours and God watched over.

    Yet crime rates on all Church property btw is still next to nil – and those places are open to the public of any and all social standing.

    I wonder what Tinsley’s explaination for that is – probably more ‘progressive speak’ like ‘generational patterns of behaviour in young persons’.

    Anyway, people no longer care about good personal behaviour and as Red points out :

    “…..Glen Tinsley is probably a good guy, but he is wrong in calling for mass surveillance. He just does not know how to deal with the ever increasing wave of public disorder and lack of civility……The real solution is not to install cameras, but to repudiate the Progressive political class.”

    Or in other words – Tinsley’s current ‘beliefs’ are the product of Godless progressive institutional behaviour. :cool:

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  49. gump (1,491 comments) says:

    @Harriet

    Sometimes even God needs a CCTV.

    http://www.odt.co.nz/news/national/261492/pastor-disappointed-theft-church

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  50. niggly (799 comments) says:

    Yoza (487) Says:
    July 6th, 2013 at 3:44 pm

    In particular we fear that this bill will allow significant mass surveillance

    Actually no, and Tech Liberty’s off track. Jim Vietch gives useful insight into the process and activities of the GCSB:
    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/opinion/news/article.cfm?c_id=466&objectid=10895052
    And its not big data collection. It’s not even collecting metadata.

    In a domestic context the GCSB simply assists SIS and Police (GCSB doesn’t spy on NZers).

    Rodney Hide explains further (and puts the boot into MP’s than ought to know much better – Norman and Shearer -for politicising the GCSB simply to attack John Key).
    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/opinion/news/article.cfm?c_id=466&objectid=10895192

    Anyhow to protect NZers metadata privacy, why not make reference in the new proposed Act to this (that it is unlawful to harvest it rountinely) except that metadata collection would only occur under a signed warrant? Oh, and throw in heaps of additional oversight and have more public reporting on GCSB’s activities. Happy now? :-)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.