Baltimore: Voyeurism and Privacy Violations Can Lower Crime

After the kerfuffle about the warrantless spying by agencies under the Bush administration, coupled with the numerous stories concerning the FBI overreaching their authority and other law enforcement officials trampling on the privacy rights of individuals all in the name of safety and security, one would surmise that any new initiatives that had privacy implications would be greeted with a skeptical, if not hostile, response.

So why does Baltimore Transit want to install microphones to record all conversations on their buses and trains?

Set aside for a moment the cinema-concept that criminals have migrated to city public transportation to meet with Lex Luthor to plan how to bring Metropolis to its' knees. What are the odds that someone will be listening at the exact moment some criminal act is mentioned, and that they will be able to action it in a sufficient timeframe as to prevent the crime in the first place? Sounds a bit like a recent Tom Cruise movie. And not a good one, either.

What about the privacy aspects? Do I give up all expectations to privacy while on a city bus? How about the person on the other end of my cell phone call - do I need to warn them that my half of the call is being recorded and archived for an unknown amount of time? And how usable will the recordings be, especially if twenty people are talking at the same time, mixed with the usual sounds that accompany mass transit?

This is a stupid idea that wastes precious financial resources in a time of crushing fiscal circumstances. It will neither reduce crime nor will it accomplish anything except lining the coffers of those vendors who will sell, install, and maintain the recording systems.

I'd lose my job if I spent money this way without showing significant results. Baltimore should be held to the same standard.

Baltimore transit wants to use microphones to record all conversations on trains and buses, via BoingBoing

Image by mab via flickr