Quotes of note:
"sophisticated video surveillance systems to watch students inside and outside the public schools as part of a citywide security system to monitor and deter criminal activity"
So it is NO LONGER about "terror," huh? Remember, that's why they sold you this 'security,' citizens.
"with video surveillance in most of the schools, is about to start a pilot program allowing police to use cameras to monitor one of two housing projects"
Where does it end? Your bedroom?
"if they aren't doing anything wrong, they have nothing to worry about -- Medford Police Chief Leo A. Sacco Jr.
A SUPREMELY FASCIST MENTALITY!!!
"The Lowell system, which is wireless, is being constructed on fiber laid more than a decade ago by a cable TV company.... The city is waiting on a $150,000 federal stimulus grant to fire up the system"
Ain't technology grand? But they never had this planned, uh-huh! Clinton's telecom bill gave them the $$$$, and a decade later?
"In Medford, video security systems were included in the design of new schools"
Wave of the future.
"You don't want a police state -- Longtime Medford School Committee member Lena DiGiantommaso
But you are going to get one anyway!
"Lexington police, with the help of a $46,750 federal grant, soon will have the technology for video interchange between the Police Department and two elementary schools and one middle school.... police say they see installation of communitywide surveillance systems as the wave of the future.... We're all headed that way -- Police Chief Francis J. Hart III, of Burlington"
What is TRULY SAD is that the agenda-pushing MSM article is basically a TOTAL PROMOTION PIECE for the POLICE STATE.
Full article:
"Cameras on increase in public sites" by Connie Paige, Globe Correspondent | March 26, 2009
Police in Lowell are installing sophisticated video surveillance systems to watch students inside and outside the public schools as part of a citywide security system to monitor and deter criminal activity.
While the use of security cameras is viewed in some quarters as a possible violation of civil liberties, a Lowell police spokesman said he believes residents do not have cause for concern.
"By us having video surveillance cameras mounted throughout the city, it's certainly not an intrusion of anybody's privacy in accordance with the Constitution," said Lowell police Captain Randall J. Humphrey. "People may have the opinion it is; however, our interest is public safety, and public safety only."
A number of other communities in this area are planning less ambitious video surveillance systems linking police to some school and municipal buildings, including, in at least one case, a housing project. Medford Police Chief Leo A. Sacco Jr. said his city, already equipped with video surveillance in most of the schools, is about to start a pilot program allowing police to use cameras to monitor one of two housing projects. He believes it will help the residents.
"Quite honestly, if they aren't doing anything wrong, they have nothing to worry about," Sacco said. "If the bad guys know there's cameras out there, they're not going to commit the crime. They'll go somewhere else."
Local officials say cameras that stream live video to the police station are needed to help prevent, or deploy forces to, emergencies such as the massacre at Columbine High School in Colorado in 1999, or lesser crimes and acts of vandalism.
Yup, the COLUMBINE LIES of GUN-CONTROL TYRANNY!!!!
Among area communities, several have funding to install the police-connected systems in some or all schools and other municipal buildings, or have already done so. Lawrence has the capability but has yet to get its system up and running because of the expense. Lexington has a limited system in three schools.
The Lowell system, which is wireless, is being constructed on fiber laid more than a decade ago by a cable TV company, said police administrative officer Mark Trudel. The system eventually will connect the Police Department or officers in individual cruisers with City Hall, other municipal buildings, and crime hot spots around the city, as well as the schools.
The city is waiting on a $150,000 federal stimulus grant to fire up the system, Trudel said. The 20 new cameras for the city will supplement 26 already in the schools, he said. Installation will dovetail with construction of a new emergency operations center, he said....
*********
In Medford, video security systems were included in the design of new schools.... Sacco said cameras add an extra layer of protection in a city that has seen its police force plummet from 132 to 110 police officers since 2001 because of budget cuts. "With what we're facing today, with shrinking resources and shrinking numbers of people on the staff, this is a great tool," Sacco said.
Oh, the BUDGET CUTS make this GOOD IDEA, huh? As the state unloads tax dough out the door! Hmmmm, an AGENDA being SOLD if I'VE EVER SMELLED ONE!!!!
Longtime Medford School Committee member Lena DiGiantommaso said she understands Sacco's concern, particularly since the schools have had to lay off most of the district's security guards to save money. Still, she said she worries about police monitoring the cameras and wants the panel to come up with a policy guaranteeing privacy for students. "You don't want a police state," she said.
Lawrence Mayor Michael J. Sullivan, whose office window was shattered by a bullet last month, said it would have helped to have a surveillance system to determine who fired the gun. Police have yet to identify a suspect in the weekend shooting, which caused no injuries, but Sullivan said officials are now installing video cameras in and around City Hall. Sullivan said that the cameras, part of a five-year campaign to update the city's information technology, should be running by next month.
Kevin Clement, manager for safety in the Lawrence public schools, said the high school has 400 cameras and two or three are put in various other schools each year as the budget allows. He said the systems are capable of real-time feeds to the Police Department, but money constraints have kept the city from setting it up.
Lexington police, with the help of a $46,750 federal grant, soon will have the technology for video interchange between the Police Department and two elementary schools and one middle school, said Lexington police Lieutenant Detective Joseph O'Leary. However, the police will have to obtain permission from the schools before firing up the monitors, he said. O'Leary said the town has no other video surveillance equipment tied into the department.
But some police say they see installation of communitywide surveillance systems as the wave of the future. "I really think we're all headed that way," said Police Chief Francis J. Hart III, of Burlington, which does not have video surveillance systems in the schools but has three cameras in the local mall.
Hart said Burlington's municipal buildings and parks have been fitted with fiber-optic cable that could be used to set up a townwide video security system connected to the police station. In the current economic climate, however, Hart said the town has priorities more pressing than police surveillance.
Sure doesn't sound like it according to this agenda-promoting piece.
