Surveillance cameras: what is to be done about this imposition?


Samizdata has an interesting analysis of the problem of the UK being the most state-videoed nation on the planet, and yet our crime statistics are not good. They put us somewhere near outer-Jipoo-poo-land, where the guvmint lives behind mined and wired walls and rides about in “Mercs-4-Jerks” so it does not matter to them.

The point made is that “criminals” live by one set of rules, which they understand perfectly and which the criminal-processing-bureaucracy also understands. Camerae are of no deterrent value whatever, for the criminals know what to say at every turn, and the law-abiding with lots to lose fear to get tangled up. Samizdata contends, probably rightly, that while camerae inconvenience us since we would not want to brush with the state and indeed do not know how to, they do not inconvenience the Wicked Classes, who have taken a decision to be like that.

I wonder if it’s time to get tough universally on criminals? That is to say, people who violate the Natural Rights of others? Yes yes yes I KNOW bureaucrats do this too, but that’s a different battle, where we’d choose different ground to fight on….

A criminal taking or dealing in drugs would not concern us since he is probably not harming anyone at this moment – merely degrading his own life (I think all drugs ought to be legalised by the way.) A criminal stealing our car, or rummaging in our garage, or mugging our wife, is a different matter.

It is becoming increasingly clear that bad laws ought to be, indeed must be, broken, and broken and broken again and angain and again, on the wheel of reality, until they are no more. It must now beocme the duty of good-people to break laws that give advantage to bad-people, given that it will take two or three (or more) generations of time to eradicate the socialist-driven production of bad-people, and we can’t just go out today and kill all the bad-people (even if we mostly know who they are, and where they live….)

Bad-people who, say, mug us, or break into our houses and cars to take things that belong to us and not them, ought to not complain if they find themselves partially-dismembered or punctured in the chest with a handy pen-knife, and left to bleed to death, or shot in the face at less than a yard with a b-b-gun, and blinded. Further, we might then need to confiscate their mobile, while kicking them repeatedly in the balls, so they can’t ring for the police or an ambulant thingy. They have interfered with our Natural Rights (there are no others as we all know.) We might then stamp all over them and put them in the wheelybin, or bury them in the back garden. The more of such people who would disappear without trace, the more word would get round that it may not be as profitable as was thought, to be like that. I can’t see that the “police” need to be much involved at all, since their attentions only end up a hinderance to the law-abiding  – under the current settlement about law and crime. (An interesting development would ensue when the Wicked Classes begin to inform the Police of their own whereabouts when just about to commit some nefarious deed….then we will know we are winning.)

About these ads

2 responses to “Surveillance cameras: what is to be done about this imposition?

  1. I think the camera culture is proliferating, and not just in the UK; I read the other day that France plans to increase its surveillance cameras by 200%

  2. 200% of probably not a lot is not a lot. We have, at the last count, 4 million. And that does NOT count “security” camerae in shops etc, or on private property.