h a l f b a k e r yCompound disinterest.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
I don't know if anybody else has had this experience, but I read 21
Quest's title and assumed they meant something else and said
"Hey,
what a great idea!" In this case I assumed it was "make criminals
wear cameras on their heads along with those tracking ankle
bracelets so their actions could
be monitored while they're on
parole
or house arrest."
That wasn't what Quest meant, but what I thought they meant
does
seem like a pretty good idea. They'd wear a headband with a
camera
on the forehead showing what they're up to and it would broadcast
to the agency monitoring their parole or house arrest.
You wouldn't even being invading their most personal privacy,
bathroom actions and such, as the camera isn't aimed at them, it's
aimed at what they're doing which is what you're concerned about.
Even so, if guy's a convicted serial criminal and repeat offender,
I'm
not all that concerned about his privacy anyway.
I don't think you need to get into putting electrodes into the
headband to monitor brain areas associated with violence or
sexual
arousal in the case of rapists but you could. I guess you could just
tell
them it's equipped that way, most criminals are pretty stupid.
And yes, there would be the added benefit of the person being
clearly marked as being somebody on parol or house arrest since
it's
hard not to notice somebody wearing a camera on their head.
I know you Londoners probably aren't crazy about the idea of
putting more cameras anywhere, but wouldn't you rather put more
cameras on criminals and fewer on honest citizens?
[link]
|
| |
Invasion of genital privacy can be further safeguarded against by adding a stiff tu-tu to the get up. This would, if of large enough circumference, also help to cut down recidivist willy waving. |
|
| |
That's spooky, I thought of making them wear a tu-tu for that
purpose myself. Tell 'em it's to protect their privacy but
make wisecracks when they put it on. |
|
| |
Or you could just drop the camera thing and make violent
criminals wear tu-tus. Either one works for me. |
|
| |
And violent criminals only please, no pot smokers or other
non-violent "offenders". |
|
| |
So how long does it take even the thickest criminal to face one way while mugging bystanders at gunpoint the other way? |
|
| |
The camera would in fact be pointed at honest citizens and not at the convict. |
|
| |
Violence in tu-tu's - Clockwork Orange? |
|
| |
If everyone was forced to wear one all the time, then there would be multiple video evidence of any crime committed. All the footage could be streamed live on YouTube and archived for, say, one week - or perhaps in perpetuity, which would give a good financial incentive for the development of ever larger disk drives. |
|
| |
[+] "stick a camera on convicts" = "cameras in local 'hotspots'" + "non-association with other lowlife types who would rather not be recorded"... but I don't think it's a good idea. |
|
| |
"So how long does it take even the thickest criminal to
face one way while mugging bystanders at gunpoint the
other way? The camera would in fact be pointed at honest
citizens and not at the convict." |
|
| |
So the video would show the guy walking up to the exact
place a crime was committed at the exact time a crime
was committed since the video would be time stamped.
Then the victim would say: "It was a guy wearing a camera
on his head at this location at this time". If it was aimed at
a witness to the crime that would establish that they were
really there as well. |
|
| |
Unless there's multiple guys with cameras on their heads
at that exact location at that exact time it kind of narrows
down the possible suspects. |
|
| |
As far as it being cruel or vengeful punishment, I doubt
you'd find one criminal on Earth that would choose being
locked in a cage over wearing a camera on their head. |
|
| |