TexasCHLforum.com

Hurtt doesn't want regular folk to carry handguns in their cars, but now he wants "surveillance cameras in apartment complexes, downtown streets and even private homes" !!??

http://www.kten.com/Global/story.asp?S=4508858

"Police chief wants surveillance cameras in Houston apartments

HOUSTON Houston's police chief is suggesting putting surveillance cameras in apartment complexes, downtown streets and even private homes.

Chief Harold Hurtt today said it's another way of combatting crime amid a shortage of officers.

Houston is dealing with too many police retirements, too few recruits and a population increase of about 150-thousand hurricane refugees.

Hurricane Katrina slammed the Gulf coast in late August.

Rita hit southeast Texas about one month later.

The Houston City Council is considering a public safety tax to pay for more officers.

Scott Henson with the American Civil Liberties Union calls Hurtt's proposal to require surveillance cameras as part of some building permits -- "radical and extreme."

Houston Mayor Bill White hasn't talked with Hurtt about his idea, but sees it as more of a "brainstorm" than a "decision.""

He needs to be fired and stripped of his TCLOSE credentials! Anyone sworn to defend the constitution who would even suggest such a thing has proven himself unfit for the job. What scares me is some people will probably support this in the name of safety.

I want the first audio/video bugs placed in his office, home, car and shirt pocket so we can keep an eye on him. People like this are far more dangerous to the freedoms we enjoy than most of the people behind bars. To make matters worse, Mayor White tries to downplay the matter by saying it was just brainstorming. Would racial cleansing have been more palatable if it were merely mentioned during a brainstorming session with the mayor? A port commissioner privately describes her dislike of a certain genre of music using an ill-advised racial slur and the entire City of Houston government wants her head on a platter. But the Chief of the Houston Police Dept. suggests an absurd and constitutionally repugnant policy of mass video surveillance and no one in City Government bats an eye!! I cannot adequately convey how much I detest what the City of Houston has become. Now I have a suggestion: a State law making it illegal for anyone not born in Texas to hold an elected or appointed office in Texas or to be head of any law enforcement agency. If we’re going to ignore the constitution, let’s go all the way.

I'll be back; I have to run around the block in the cold rain to cool off at bit!

Chas.

+1 to Chas.

If I wanted to live in a socialist state I'd move to New York...

The sad thing is I think Chas is correct- some people WILL support this in the name of safety.

First it was cameras to monitor interesections, now this...hate to see what's next...

After Hurtt's reactions to Katrina and car carry... I had no confidence in him.

Now it's definitely time for him to go.

He just can't do the job. He's proven it. He needs to go.

What really got me was this:

"I know a lot of people are concerned about Big Brother, but my response to that is, if you are not doing anything wrong, why should you worry about it?" Chief Harold Hurtt told reporters Wednesday at a regular briefing.

Unbelievable. I worry becuse it infringes on my rights and because of the possible abuse by HPD!

Mr Hurtt definitely needs to rethink how HPD will deal with the recent surge in crime. London-style surveillance state tactics might only help after the dirty deeds are done, (that is, if they can find officers willing/able to follow up on what the cameras capture). It sounds as if he needs to solve his staffing shortage before thinking about putting cameras in everyone's carports, foyers, bathrooms and bedrooms. (I also have to wonder if Mr Hurtt himself is causing &/or aggravating the manpower problem.)

If he refuses to reconsider this and many of his other ill-conceived policies, then all of you Texans need to send him back to Arizona, soon. (Not that it matters, but I happen to agree with Charles' apparently facetious suggestion of "native-Texans only".)

onerifle wrote:If I wanted to live in a socialist state I'd move to New York...

In defense of my state of birth, they do not thumbprint people for their driver licenses in NYS. And having observed the state of Texas off and on for over a year, I have learned, experienced and seen other things that evince that the great state of Texas is sometimes capable of slouching in a "socialist" direction. Examples:

1. the proposition of building state-wide toll roads (already tried and done in NY; please do not do this)
2. a surprising, and disturbing, reverence for public education, equal or surpassing that in NY
3. Travis County existing as a giant, mid-state 24/7 speed trap (in fairness, the county sherriff & city/town law enforcement agencies are probably more responsible for this situation than the state government)
4. Heavy state involvement in the taxation and regulation of alcoholic beverages (just like most other states in the country), as well as a well-intentioned-but-ill-consequenced effort to stamp out underage drinking
5. The billboards exhorting motorists to report smoking vehicles (vaguely reminiscent of communist East Germany, where up to 1 in 4 citizens were involved in spying on their neighbors on behalf of the State)
6. Elected officials like Rod Ellis & Ronnie Earle (a Chuck Schumer wannabe, and a stand-in for Eliot Spitzer)

Just to be clear, NYS does most if not all of this, and more, and worse. You have it pretty good in Texas; please do not let anybody (transplants or otherwise) mess it up!

Charles L. Cotton wrote:He needs to be fired and stripped of his TCLOSE credentials! Anyone sworn to defend the constitution who would even suggest such a thing has proven himself unfit for the job. What scares me is some people will probably support this in the name of safety.

I want the first audio/video bugs placed in his office, home, car and shirt pocket so we can keep an eye on him. People like this are far more dangerous to the freedoms we enjoy than most of the people behind bars. To make matters worse, Mayor White tries to downplay the matter by saying it was just brainstorming. Would racial cleansing have been more palatable if it were merely mentioned during a brainstorming session with the mayor? A port commissioner privately describes her dislike of a certain genre of music using an ill-advised racial slur and the entire City of Houston government wants her head on a platter. But the Chief of the Houston Police Dept. suggests an absurd and constitutionally repugnant policy of mass video surveillance and no one in City Government bats an eye!! I cannot adequately convey how much I detest what the City of Houston has become. Now I have a suggestion: a State law making it illegal for anyone not born in Texas to hold an elected or appointed office in Texas or to be head of any law enforcement agency. If we’re going to ignore the constitution, let’s go all the way.

I'll be back; I have to run around the block in the cold rain to cool off at bit!

Chas.

+10

My sentiments exactly. I don't live in Houston, but have relatives and good friends that do. Sorry... you guys have a "nitwit" for Police Chief.

Also, there is a difference between "blamestorming" and "brainstorming" in case the Mayor doesn't know.

removed

I read the article and I didn't see where he was quoted as saying he was suggesting putting cameras INSIDE private buildings. The word "IN" was the reporter's words - not the Chief's What I got from this piece of 'journalism', (and don't get me started on reporter's biases and hidden agendas which - this piece smacked of), was putting cameras in PUBLIC areas such as apartment parking lots and street areas.
I don't live in Houston so I have no first-hand experience with the PD chief so i can't speak as a local but why is this any different from red-lite cameras? They are becoming more and more commonplace statewide and as time goes on I don't see it subsiding.

I'm not trying to start a debate on civil-liberties. I wanted to bring up a question.

Trainman, I admit I got a little bit carried away. Hurtt's brand of nanny-statism is still unwelcome, and he is still going to have to address his personnel shortage before trying to put cameras everywhere. At least with the red light cameras, as I understand them (I have never been snared by one) single photographs are taken under more-or-less narrow circumstances (when the system is tripped by a motorist blitzing through when it is unlawful for him to do so). What comes to mind with Hurtt's proposal is a UK/London-style surveillance system (24/7 police CCTV monitoring and recording of public and private space). If it comes to that, then the thugs, gangbangers, jihadis, etc, have already won. So much for our freedoms.

I had to go to HPD to run a records check last week. They've taken the officers off security on the front door, and now they have overweight, civilian contract-security, 60 old women doing the screening.

The Hispanic gentleman in front of me, with four loud mouthed kids, and his wife, told the woman, "metal in boots". She hand scanned his boots (only) and told him to go on through. He could have been carrying any number of handguns, knives, etc. It's pretty pathetic.

I don't know about now, but they were allowing concealed carry in the building. You got a PURPLE badge, while everyone else had WHITE. Guess it's so everyone would know who was carrying.

Another article:

http://abclocal.go.com/ktrk/story?secti ... id=3909198

"Cameras could soon help cops monitor high crime areasChief proposes video surveillance to help fight crime
By Andy Cerota
(2/15/06 - KTRK/HOUSTON) - First it was red light cameras at certain intersections. Now Houston police are looking to install other cameras to help them fight crime. It's a solution other cities have come up with and it's always met with controversy.

With all this talk of hiring more police officers and not enough money to do it, Houston's police chief has offered a new proposal. This plan includes placing surveillance cameras at crime hot spots such as malls, apartment complexes and those areas where prostitutes and drug dealers hang out.

The video would be fed directly into the police department. Chief Harold Hurtt says it's really no different that the red light cameras which will eventually be installed at 50 intersections. In fact, there's already a plan to install five of those surveillance cameras in downtown Houston along Main Street to track and monitor any criminal activity.

Chief Hurtt said, "Wherever you go in a city this size you're going to be on video camera or tape at least 12 times a day. If you just think about it, you go to a convenience store, you get gas, you go to the bank, you drive down the street in front of people's houses where motion sets off the cameras, you're already on camera. I know a lot of people are concerned about big brother. My response to that is, if you're not doing anything wrong, why should you worry about it?"

Chief Hurtt believes it would be cheaper to have the cameras than to hire enough police officers and have them at every street corner. He's even suggesting that those homeowners who have too many calls for service to their homes be forced to install the cameras as well. "

---------------------------------------------------------------

Anybody still got any questions?

Paladin wrote:I know a lot of people are concerned about big brother. My response to that is, if you're not doing anything wrong, why should you worry about it?"

Because the definition of wrong changes (ie salem witch trials)

"I know a lot of people are concerned about big brother. My response to that is, if you're not doing anything wrong, why should you worry about it?"

While his words may be technically correct - a better way of expressing that opinion may have been: 'When you are in a in a public place where the reasonable expectation of privacy does not exist, don't do anything illegal or what you don't want to be caught on camera.'

At a minimum this guy needs a public affairs spokesperson or media advisor to tell him how he is percieved.

One simple statement....Cameras can not protect anybody they can simply help the PD identify your killer.

Same as the Red Light cameras...they can only identify...they sure don't help protect anybody.