<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
  <title type="text">Conversation on The Sacramento Press about: Civil liberties advocates protest city's plans to install surveillance system</title>
  <link rel="alternate" href="http://www.sacramentopress.com/headline/8329" />
  <subtitle>Civil liberties lawyers and advocates are objecting to the city of Sacramento’s plans to install new security cameras and related surveillance equipment at several locations in the city.

Jim Updegraff, the chair of the Sacramento County Chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), told the City Council Tuesday that the planned surveillance system would be “an affront to the privacy and civil liberties of the citizens of the City of Sacramento.”

Mayor Kevin Johnson and Police Chief R...</subtitle>
  <dc:creator>KathleenHaley</dc:creator>
  <entry>
    <title type="text">By: devedsmith</title>
    <link rel="alternate" href="http://www.sacramentopress.com/headline/8329/Civil_liberties_advocates_protest_citys_plans_to_install_surveillance_system" />
    <author>
      <name>devedsmith</name>
    </author>
    <updated>2009-05-28T21:30:29Z</updated>
    <published>2009-05-28T21:30:29Z</published>
    <summary type="text">Jim Updegraff is an affront to common sense. Anyone with a video camera and the time can do the same thing on any street corner. He probably thinks using turn signals when driving is a violation of  his privacy.</summary>
    <dc:creator>devedsmith</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2009-05-28T21:30:29Z</dc:date>
  </entry>
  <entry>
    <title type="text">By: Dale Kooyman</title>
    <link rel="alternate" href="http://www.sacramentopress.com/headline/8329/Civil_liberties_advocates_protest_citys_plans_to_install_surveillance_system" />
    <author>
      <name>Dale Kooyman</name>
    </author>
    <updated>2009-05-28T16:46:03Z</updated>
    <published>2009-05-28T16:46:03Z</published>
    <summary type="text">Questions for ACLU:  Between calls for service in many cities, police sit in cars stationed in high crime areas to observe individuals and activities.  When the police see individuals, some of whom are recognized as having  past criminal history, engage in illegal activities, they investigate and sometimes arrest those they find are engaging in an illegal activity. 

 I've often wondered if ACLU considers  this police surveillance  a breach of civil liberties too.  If so, why?  If not, why not?</summary>
    <dc:creator>Dale Kooyman</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2009-05-28T16:46:03Z</dc:date>
  </entry>
  <entry>
    <title type="text">By: Kelly Krehbiel</title>
    <link rel="alternate" href="http://www.sacramentopress.com/headline/8329/Civil_liberties_advocates_protest_citys_plans_to_install_surveillance_system" />
    <author>
      <name>Kelly Krehbiel</name>
    </author>
    <updated>2009-05-27T20:48:50Z</updated>
    <published>2009-05-27T20:48:50Z</published>
    <summary type="text">To me, this issue is less about deterring crime, and more about solving crimes that have occurred. Video evidence can be difficult to refute in many cases, and has been instrumental in solving countless crimes of all types - all around the world. I believe that the concerns expressed by the ACLU are grossly exaggerated. People in public are going to be seen. Creating a record of that serves the greater good in many ways, each of which far outweigh any potential privacy concerns that may arise. Perhaps the ACLU can enlighten us as to what evil will befall us if these cameras are installed? I must be missing something - At worst, we'll be seen. In public...</summary>
    <dc:creator>Kelly Krehbiel</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2009-05-27T20:48:50Z</dc:date>
  </entry>
  <entry>
    <title type="text">By: Brian McDonald</title>
    <link rel="alternate" href="http://www.sacramentopress.com/headline/8329/Civil_liberties_advocates_protest_citys_plans_to_install_surveillance_system" />
    <author>
      <name>Brian McDonald</name>
    </author>
    <updated>2009-05-27T16:59:53Z</updated>
    <published>2009-05-27T16:59:53Z</published>
    <summary type="text">Both great points. But i don't see what cameras are going to do to deter unemployed desperate and/or loser people from committing crime. Just yesterday i was propositioned by 4 people for money or to use my phone at gas stations, and my car got broken into last week. The Police department &amp; Sheriff are stretched so thin even before layoffs and downsizing that most of downtown and nice neighborhoods go unpatrolled because they are called away to deal with in progress crimes &amp; bad neighborhoods. Think about how many cops you see patrolling in your own neighborhood. Then if you have to call the police you're looking at an extended hold time because they downsized 9-1-1 centers too. But cameras are going to save us?</summary>
    <dc:creator>Brian McDonald</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2009-05-27T16:59:53Z</dc:date>
  </entry>
  <entry>
    <title type="text">By: Kasey Cotulla</title>
    <link rel="alternate" href="http://www.sacramentopress.com/headline/8329/Civil_liberties_advocates_protest_citys_plans_to_install_surveillance_system" />
    <author>
      <name>Kasey Cotulla</name>
    </author>
    <updated>2009-05-27T15:06:14Z</updated>
    <published>2009-05-27T15:06:14Z</published>
    <summary type="text">I do appreciate the ACLU's protection of our privacy rights and I wouldn't have predicted any other stand than opposition to cameras in the public space.  But, the mayor and police are taking a reasonable approach to use technology for safety in public areas.  I foresee the benefits of video monitoring outweighing any perceived intrusion of privacy.  I can't envision a group of sinister government agents pouring over hours of footage to invade my privacy.  If public cameras can offer some crime deterrence and investigative tools in the city center then it would be a worthwhile use of Homeland Security dollars.</summary>
    <dc:creator>Kasey Cotulla</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2009-05-27T15:06:14Z</dc:date>
  </entry>
  <entry>
    <title type="text">By: Jeff McCrory</title>
    <link rel="alternate" href="http://www.sacramentopress.com/headline/8329/Civil_liberties_advocates_protest_citys_plans_to_install_surveillance_system" />
    <author>
      <name>Jeff McCrory</name>
    </author>
    <updated>2009-05-27T06:56:44Z</updated>
    <published>2009-05-27T06:56:44Z</published>
    <summary type="text">Unless you are a total hermit, your image is captured on CCTV cameras at least once a day.  The difference here is that private businesses own the cameras, not the government.  I'd support the city using CCTV cameras as long as a) the video footage was streamed live on the internet for all to see and b) went immediately into  the public domain.</summary>
    <dc:creator>Jeff McCrory</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2009-05-27T06:56:44Z</dc:date>
  </entry>
</feed>

