LAist: The Latest Camera Craze

Colfax

Mon, 31 Oct 2005 15:33:36 -0800

people who have no regard for their liberties make me sad. The asshole responsible for these cameras is councilman Eric Garcetti.

Marleigh

Mon, 01 Nov 2004 08:21:37 -0800

rachel

Sun, 31 Oct 2004 14:20:33 -0800

Illusion of security for the meek--like the meek people who live where drive-by shooting maims their kids? The tapes can be used to ID gang members--like the ones who capped the 14 year old boy in an alley. Most of you have absolutly no idea what really goes on all over the neighborhoods east of La Cienega. Those of you who worry about the cameras probably are the same who screamed about cop corruption at Ramparts--so much so, that the locals got less police protection. LAist seems to be written by people who are here on a tour.

Cameron

Fri, 29 Oct 2004 16:31:50 -0800

Personally, I'm more inclined to ignore the opinion of anyone who uses the word "snarky" in any written submission. Cheap shot aside, I agree with the LAists. The illusion of security for the meek isn't worth the invasion of privacy for everyone else.

smo

Fri, 29 Oct 2004 13:05:32 -0800

If you do not want snarky comments or judgements made perhaps LAist should edit its official postings a bit more carefully before assuming the common reader KNOWS the geographic make-up of LAists writers. Perhaps you didnt read the paragraph I posted that came straight from LAist: *Personally, LAist is an equal opportunity subconscious area-code judger, and would be more than happy to foster friendships with people even from as far as Pasadena. That is, as long as you're willing to drive to the Westside* (And oh shit I posted the wrong link previously! Is there an edit function? Jesus christ, here it is again.... ) http://www.laist.com/archives/2004/09/28/the_area_code_class_system.php Anyhow, the average reader would gather from that article that LAist is very pro-westside. So before YOU go on with your own snarky comments please be secure with your knowledge about LAist's purported geographic 'voice.' And regarding 'staying out of it' I highly doubt any Westside resident's civil liberties are being trampled on with Hollywood installing security cameras. You dont live there, youre probably scared to go 'there,' so please STAY OUT OF IT. And oh, great another 20 mile commuter. Thanks for contributing to traffic, pollution, investment in another community and the like. Furthermore, I would hope LAist staff would be less nasty with their 'rebuttal' postings because they DO want readership encouraged, no?

Marleigh

Fri, 29 Oct 2004 12:11:14 -0800

Before you make snarky comments or judgements about the makeup of the LAist team, keep in mind that we all write in the same persona, as LAist. This does not mean that all of us agree, or even agree to disagree, about anything. The only thing that unites us all is the fact that we write for this blog. By and large, the staff does not live on the Westside—a consequence of accident, not design. Further, those things that affect parts of the city affect all the people living in it, as none of us live only in one part of the city. I spend a majority of my day twenty miles from the city I actually live in. "Staying out of it" is exactly the sort of attitude that causes more problems that it solves, as city policy is generally determined by what is good for the goose and the gander.

smo

Fri, 29 Oct 2004 11:54:07 -0800

Of course, I recognize the fact that LAist readers hail from as far as Palmdale to the outer trenches of the Palisades, but my 'westside' comment was based purely on the fololowing archive, "the area code class system." http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&rd=1&item=4332309710&ssPageName=STRK:MEWN:IT *Personally, LAist is an equal opportunity subconscious area-code judger, and would be more than happy to foster friendships with people even from as far as Pasadena. That is, as long as you're willing to drive to the Westside* 310...isnt Hollywood. Long live 323!

Jess

Fri, 29 Oct 2004 01:34:08 -0800

For the record, most LAist contributors are neither rooted nor live on the Westside (not that there’s anything wrong with that), unless you consider territory between Highland Ave. and Pasadena to qualify as such. Which in all fairness, many LA residents do. And besides, our cognitive maps of the city are highly subjective and nuanced. So while some of us might not consider Hollywood to be “Westside,” it is to plenty of people whose lives are centered east of the LA River. I’m guilty of the narrow Westside frame of reference, too (as well as reverse snobbery when it comes to the “Westside” meaning roughly east of Crescent Heights in my book). Ah, the geographic nomenclature problems of LA! And traffic blockades? You mean those ridiculous bollards that are a pain in the arse, and came down one by one on Whitley and Yucca until there were none left standing? Some literally sat in the gutter for months until Street Services yanked them out. They just reappeared on Whitley a couple weeks ago. If they're so effective, then why did it take so long (other than general bureaucratic inefficiencies) for the City to get around to replacing them? If Mr. LaBonge or Mr. Garcetti has an explanation, I’m all ears… And the cops on Segways at Union Station are the coolest. They'll even offer you a test drive late at night! Hmm, that's a little strange, actually.

smo

Thu, 28 Oct 2004 21:46:29 -0800

I think the cameras are a great idea. Im a 'liberal' who believes in protecting personal privacy but more importantly, I am a Hollywood resident. LAist, with its proud roots on the "westside" seems to jumping on the whiny "Dont invade my privacy! Waa waa civil liberites this and that!." You dont live in the area so I respect your opinion but I think you should STAY OUT OF IT. The cameras will make the area safer for tourists, residents, club goers and the like. Its easy to be removed and live in more suburban parts of Los Angeles, but Hollywood, with its more urban city-like core needs crime prevention if it wants to grow up and into a nicer place to live and visit. Sad, but true. And there are plenty of police in Hollywood. They already have a strong presence. They ride around on horses too! Fun times...

Ben

Thu, 28 Oct 2004 20:06:17 -0800

The cameras are an old story. They've had them for years down at MacArthur Park and even before then on Yucca in Hollywood back in the early/mid 90s. Both times, the ruse worked. You can walk around the Park now (at least in the day), and the cams + traffic blockades dramatically reduced violent crime in what used to be called the Yucca Corridor. Now we can all club there in peace! Yea to cameras!

Jerry

Thu, 28 Oct 2004 19:10:58 -0800

Honestly, the civil liberties aspect isn't what bothers me the most about this plan. To me, it sounds like the equivalent of the LAPD throwing up their hands and saying, "We give up!" Cameras are no substitute for actual police on the streets. And who's going to watch the cameras anyway? What kind of response lag will there be if there's an actual crime taking place? It sounds like the real plan here is to hope that the presence of cameras scares people out of committing crimes. Good luck. And if you want to reduce the crime rate without raising taxes, move to Fantasyland. (Or pick a program to be cut instead.) Even cameras cost money -- plus the film, and the people to monitor them (if any). I'm willing to pay for safer streets. But only if the plan is valid.

Marleigh

Thu, 28 Oct 2004 18:17:21 -0800

And what about all the false tickets that have been given out because of blurred or illegible license plates in those red light photos? If you are the unlucky person who lives close to the intersection with a car of the same or similar description and you can't prove (with physical evidence, like a place ticket) that you are not the culprit, your ass is in a sling. I'd be concerned that an innocent person of similar description (or race, or sex) could get nabbed for a crime unless they have proof they were somewhere else, just because they look like the blurry face on the video and they are unlucky enough to live/work/hang out in the area.

Paul Davidson

Thu, 28 Oct 2004 16:26:29 -0800

Candy -- here's an idea that will reduce crime and which will not increase taxes in the long run: Build a huge dome around Hollywood like in Escape From New York and house all the criminals there and build a huge electric fence so none of them can leave. Anytime you get convicted, you go to the Hollywood Dome Prison. Sure it's science fiction, but if you told citizens about 60 years ago that cities would be placing cameras at every corner to catch thieves, they might say that was crazy too.

Candy

Thu, 28 Oct 2004 15:54:12 -0800

Frankly, as a female, I would feel safer driving the streets of Hollywood at night knowing cameras are there. And gimme a break with the "oh no, think of the lawsuits/my civil liberties!!" crap. I hear that and I hear my mother's voice "If you aren't doing anything wrong, then what do you have to worry about?" And as far as other ways of reducing crime, please suggest some rather than just posing a rhetorical question that helps no one but just makes you feel better about yourself...oh, and try to have suggestions that WON'T RAISE TAXES, thankyouverymuch. I have friends in the UK, where they have tons of cameras and they do take some comfort in knowing the police are watching the streets...particularly as some CCTV cameras have been able to catch criminals (including child murderers) and put them in jail. Remember, victims have civil liberties too.

Jess

Thu, 28 Oct 2004 15:28:07 -0800

I'm sold too, Drew. Sign me up as a segment producer! But seriously, I work on Whitley, and if the level of sketchy activity that takes place on the first of the month in the alleys and driveways just north of the Boulevard is any indication, it's all just going to move someplace else. The BID cops on bikes who we call when we see particularly blantant and/or outrageous stuff just aren't all that effective. This is partially because Hollywood is a resilient neighborhood with er, resourceful denizens. During the time since Hollywood & Highland opened and the western section of Hollywood became more heavily patrolled and "cleaned up," the misdeeds and crime has seemed to move further east. Granted I don't know the stats and am instead relying on anecdotal evidence and a highly impressionistic sense of things. But this doesn't change the fact that sneaky surveillance tactics are facile band-aids that do nothing to address the complex causes and root of crime.

Drew

Thu, 28 Oct 2004 12:26:39 -0800

Scary. And funny. As someone who works in the world of reality TV, do you think a FOX show can be far away? "They're your friends...your neighbors...but have you seen what they're doing on Hollywood Blvd at night????" Coming this fall, FOX takes it TO THE STREETS. OK. I've changed my mind. I'm sold.

Garrison

Thu, 28 Oct 2004 12:15:40 -0800

OK, the cameras are bad. No argument there. But much worse are the loudspeakers that shout warnings at you down in Little Tokyo and lord know where else. More than a little alarming.