Hot Fuzz and Hot Speakers with EYES...

Saw the much-anticipated "Hot Fuzz" flick this weekend, and enjoyed it immensely. The boys have done themselves proud.

Here are the lads being playful. Vaguely homo-erotic, isn't it?

One scene that comes to mind is the command center for Sanford's Neighbourhood Watch Association (cleverly labelled NWA), which maintains a bank of digital cameras covering every conceivable inch of "England's prettiest village".




While these cams are ubiquitous in London and other parts of Europe, there are just beginning to be utilized here in the States. I noticed this piece in The Independent today on how the Labour Party has changed everyone's way of life through creeping big-brother-watching solutions to policing the streets: And one very interesting addition to the thousands of cameras. Adding a speaker to it to screech at the 'yob' who is doing the offending in the camera lens! Quoth the Independent:


"Could Foucault be talking about his future vision of Middlesbrough, the town which has adopted talking CCTV cameras in its town centre, presided over by council apparatchiks who bellow to citizens from their screen-filled observation posts that they are to pick up the fag end they just dropped, or risk arrest? Or is he talking about the whole of Britain, a nation so in love with the CCTV camera that it boasts one for every 14 citizens, and has spent, in the last 10 years, more than three-quarters of its Home Office crime prevention budget on this technology of record?"


I am sad to say that, considering recent events, perhaps these cameras are needed to keep an eye on our gun toting loons. Not that it would have stopped what happened on the Virginia Tech campus last week, but a system like this set well in place could have helped to reduce the body count (as if that mitigates the horror).

Do I think I am losing my liberty if a city camera can see me when I commit a civil transgression? Like running a stop sign (GUILTY in the PAST) or flipping the bird to a fellow motorist (DITTO- PLUS UNCIVIL AGGRESSION)?

Frankly, that train has already left the station. We are always being observed at least as a flock, by our financial transactions, our web clicks/choices, even where we are driving (do you use a transponder to pay your road tolls? --or parking?) While we do have the right not to incriminate ourselves in a public hearing or a court of law (key concept here), the right of the individual to privacy does not include a secluded glade wherein one can commit capital crimes. That's like saying, "If a tree is raped in the woods, and no one sees it, does it matter?"

(Believe me, in New England it could happen.)

What constitutes my right to privacy is no one invading my home to observe me using the john at 3AM, or to record my public utterances without my permission (I have had to get those disclaimer releases signed about a billion times, an utter pain in the ass, but I wouldn't give it up for anything). OR have anyone listen in while I worship with my family in church (STOP THAT LAUGHING, RIGHT NOW). OR watch me vote for that matter, though I guess they will find out the result eventually (except in Florida - snort!)

That's the same illusion as the guarantee of private communications on the Web. PLEASE! The only guarantee of secrecy on the Internet is hiding in plain site. Too many places to look, so who's going to find you?

Those are the keys to maintaining a free citizenry, unshackled by Big Cheney's plan to listen to each registered Democrat's individual farts at night. THAT kind of guy is dangerous. You know, the kind of fellow that reads spy novels by Robert Ludlum, or maybe Scooter Libby.

Or hires him to do dirty deeds done dirt cheap.