I don’t feel safer. The more they are, the less likely they are to be keeping watch. On the other hand, maybe that’s a *good* thing.

“I’d guess those people welcome cctv cameras in otherwise potentially scary, historically dangerous locales like subway stations, and this ad is targeted at them.”

Is this a British thing? Because in NYC, I feel much safer in the Subway/on the train than I do above ground. Not saying that I feel unsafe above ground, and I can agree with the ‘historically dangerous’ part, but of all the places I’d think somebody might mug/rob/assault/whatever me, the subway and the train station are VERY low on the list. But, New Yorkers seem to me to be a very, very different breed than Brighton-ers.

Then again, CCTV is a pretty moot point for our rail system. I don’t remember where I read this, but an article that came out not too long ago talking about the feasibility of CCTV in New York said that because of the girders, supports, overall tunnel height and other things it’d take an absurd number of cameras to cover all the angles in a given station.

On a related note, On the London Underground the posters always seem to be written by someone who really doesn’t like people. It’s quite an achievement to make “please don’t put your feet on the seats” sound like “f**k off, scum”.

They really do get pictures of criminals (e.g. there’s pictures of the 7/7 terrorists from station CCTV, and on the train).

What’s *wrong* is only what’s done with the pictures. How long are they kept? Who has access? Are the cameras monitored, or just passively recording?

It’s worth noting that the trains (including the subway) is generally very safe in south-east England. Most people are comfortable riding alone, or using their phone etc.

My British wife looked at it and said it didn’t bother her.

I’m ‘British’, and it doesn’t bother me.

However, on our local trains (NE England) there are signs on the doors saying “Smile, you’re on CCTV” (or something very similar) which I do find rather offensive.

I think it’s because the poster above assumes the reader is a law-abiding passenger who would be in favour of more security; the ‘smile’ sign implies that the reader is about to commit a crime, and would be wise to reconsider.

Might make some people think about the subject for once.

Have you considered moving back to The Bay Area? We don’t have quite as many CCTV cameras as in Brighton – except, of course, in poor neighborhoods. And no one is unreasonably monitored… at least, no one worth mentioning.

-S

For anyone who hasn’t yet – join ORG!

Oh, they have security cameras on all corners monitoring everyone.
And there’s a control centre.

Perfect.

I have no doubt these posters are real.

Personally, CCTV can make me feel somewhat safer, justifiably or not. To be honest, though, I’d prefer some actual human presence as a security measure on trains and train platforms. I find the emptiness of train carriages and platforms more frightening than a lack of surveillance.

To be honest, if someone’s the kind of person who’s going to beat the shit out of me on a train platform or carriage, I really don’t think some cameras will deter them.

Why not just spend the money on more police in the subways? That way if I get mugged, a policeman might stop him or, wonder of wonders, prevent the mugging in the first place merely by being there. All a camera does is give them a picture, and I’m sure the guy who stole your drinking money is going to be priority #1 for the boys in blue…

You know?

Those who ate the uncut meat from the tables of the aristocrats during the Tudor reign were nepotistic generation after generation of gene subroutines folded upon themselves. They like blood in their soup though. I’ll never understand a foreign country’s people. Forest, trees, dirty knees, rhymes for fees.

There are adults now who’ve never had a man on the moon. What first did the man say anyway? Adultery is Ok, first phrase. Humans are carrying a world of world of a whole world. Planet Dirt.

I like your blog.

:)

:D

My British wife looked at it and said it didn’t bother her.

I think its real.

(+50 BBpoints plz, kthx)

This same poster could have different text and carry an anti-surveillance message. It’s almost ambiguous as it stands.

Regarding #34, and in the interest of Cory not spending 8 hours a day explaining this, maybe we should get a static page or something laying out the difference, so that we can just link to it whenever the whole “OMG U SAID U HATE CAMERAZ BUT U LIEK CAMERAZ!!1″ thing comes up.

Also, am I the only person here that doesn’t get #26?

*looks around nervously*

Is it… is it art or something?