Police Tell a Skeptical Audience That Port Surveillance Cameras Won't Spy on Alki Homes


It seems like the principal use of cams so far has been to expose examples of police brutality...so why is everyone so worried? You can put a webcam on me 24 hours a day if you like the site of a large pasty behind (and I know you do).

The only way to find and prosecute assaults where the assailant is unknown is gonna be these webcams.

I say, lets hook up some Kinects programmed to scan for "crime moves".


Is there no tinge of embarrassment that the cameras are right across from the volleyball courts where high-quality athletic women play volleyball?

I want to see the videos of low-quality women playing volleyball.
Thank God they're using these cameras to protect us from Commies. Those Commies are everywhere, and they'll stop at nothing to destroy everything beautiful and good about this country. Including Disneyland!!! Those awful Commies, they never seem to stop. There's an endless supply of them, threatening us! We must be diligent!

Oh, I meant gay people.

Or perhaps I meant Arabs.

Or was it drug-users?


Sure, fine, whatever.

They're threatening our God-given American freedoms! They hate us because they hate us! We must do whatever it takes to protect ourselves from [whatever].
dont worry fellow statists; we'll get our way soon enough. Heck; we might even get a total gun ban and mass surveillance package deal if one of these incompetent extremists can manage to put together a proper manifesto beforehand.
They CAN be used to spy on private homes. They CAN be used to spy on beachgoers. They CAN be used to watch women's volleyball. Regardless of what the police say they intend, the cameras will be used for these purposes.
If the cameras have too wide a field they should at least be masked, but I'd be more in favor of actual masks than "digital masks". Cut a plastic shield so the camera can only point the way it was intended.

Worrying about surveillance cameras is a little paranoid. However the quality of cameras has gone way up and so has the ability for software to recognize faces and license plates. As technology makes it easier to erode our personal freedoms we should step up and make it clear we value those freedoms.
Alki Beach? Old people watching jeopardy.
> protect our waterways from acts of terrorism

Can we just eliminate the entire police department and rebuild it from scratch with all new people? Perhaps a few that paid attention in logic school?

Can Kimerer name the last terrorist attack to happen within 1,500 miles of Seattle?

(No, that one is more than 1,500 miles away. Try again.)
I think avoiding a terrorist attack is supposed to be the point. So the fact that there hasn't been one within 1500 miles is sort of a moot point. The only way we can prove the police wrong is for something bad to happen and then we can say the cameras didn't work. I am not going to hope they are wrong. That is stupid.
@10: Avoiding a terrorist attack that is not going to happen in our lifetimes or even our children's lifetimes has no point. Even less when it involves millions of dollars and hundreds of spy cameras pointed at our homes.
I wish someone would edit this article for typos. And the "high-quality athletic women" quote is unsettling. In fact, many of these quotes do not lend credibility to their authors, and the whole thing just makes me feel like everyone involved is drunk. Everyone go home, sober up, and come back and do this whole meeting/article-writing thing over again tomorrow!
Also: seriously, the city of Seattle has been rigged with surveillance cameras and this isn't front page news? Go home Seattle, you are drunk!
@12, I accidentally omitted a word in the headline, which I've fixed. Please let me know if there are other typos because I don't see any.

As for the quotes, I don't know what to tell you. It's my job to report on what was said, not put words in people's mouths.
@14 -- If you're not going to put words into people's mouths, then who is young lady?

It might not be your job, but its your responsibility to make sure all of the words find the proper mouths in which to be put.

@K: You're crazy or don't know your history if you can't name a terrorist "attack" in Seattle. Chris Monfort? Ian Stawicki? Naveed Afzal Haq?

These all happened in the last five years. If we include crimes against property, the list is too long to even start writing.

That said, I'm still against the cameras. We may make promises about what we're watching now, but they don't stop future people from breaking those promises without telling us.
This kind of power naturally attracts assholes and other scumbags who are inclined to abuse it. How do we not already understand this in dealing with the excessive force issues from SPD? Take power AWAY from the police state, don't give them MORE opportunities to abuse the public trust.
Welcome to Soviet Russia, Komrades!
"Barefoot Bandit Brigade, Puget Sound, USA: 17 Security Cameras Disabled and Destroyed in Puget Sound Region.

In the opening weeks of February, 2013, we have removed and destroyed 17 security cameras throughout the Puget Sound region. This act is concrete sabotage against the system of surveillance and control. It is also a message of solidarity and a wish of strength to the Seattle Grand Jury Resisters, those currently incarcerated and those not. Finally, this act announces our participation in the game of CAMOVER, called for by comrades in Germany.

Why not have the camera feed available live to the public?

If they're not watching anything creepy, why not let everyone see it?
@19 I'll go you one further: so long as the cameras aren't being used to track terrorists in their inflatable suicide boats, they should automatically track every police car and/or officer that comes within their field of view. Ditto to the point of public access: if there's no harm in having cameras in public, they should be available to the taxpayers who are funding their operation.