Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

French City To Use CCTV For Parking Fines

Soulskill posted about 4 years ago | from the nos-rendimos dept.

Government 297

horza writes "The city of Nice, France is rolling out 626 CCTV cameras throughout town, giving it one of the highest levels of surveillance in the world (1.8 cameras per 1000 inhabitants). The usual rhetoric was given — that they will be used solely for reducing violent crime — but the city will now begin sending out parking tickets solely based on the CCTV video evidence."

cancel ×

297 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Not so Nice (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33866562)

Not so Nice after all...

Re:Not so Nice (3, Funny)

syousef (465911) | about 4 years ago | (#33866808)

Not so Nice after all...

I hear they're thinking of renaming the city Merde.

Re:Not so Nice (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33867188)

Vous savez, je sais que cette mouton merde n'existe pas. Je sais que lorsque je l'ai mis dans ma bouche, la Matrice dit mon cerveau qu'il est juteux et délicieux. Après neuf ans, savez-vous ce que je me suis rendu compte? L'ignorance est une bénédiction. Mais le plus drôle, c'est que je ne suis même pas dans la Matrice! Il a été la réalité! J'ai vraiment mangèrent du mouton merde!

Re:Not so Nice (2, Insightful)

worx101 (1799560) | about 4 years ago | (#33866898)

Still, your violating laws... Just because you don't want to pay doesn't make this system any less useful. I know it sucks to have to follow rules right?

Re:Not so Nice (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33866942)

Simpletons like you abound...it's no wonder we have any freedoms at all... We both know the situation is more complex than that childish black and white viewpoint allows for. Quit trolling.

Re:Not so Nice (4, Insightful)

worx101 (1799560) | about 4 years ago | (#33867000)

Parking where-ever you please and hoping a traffic cop doesn't pass by isn't a privilege. Because YOU want to run around and break laws does not make CCTV evil, it just means your easier to catch. Freedom getting away with criminal behavior(no matter how small and insignificant the "crime")

Re:Not so Nice (4, Insightful)

Mr. Freeman (933986) | about 4 years ago | (#33867064)

Your argument is "well, if you're not breaking the law then why do you care?"

Let's extrapolate:
Why can't we put a camera in your house? I mean, you're not breaking the law, so why should you care? Obviously you don't want cameras in your house because you just want to break laws.

Re:Not so Nice (5, Insightful)

KDR_11k (778916) | about 4 years ago | (#33867074)

A camera in a house turns it from private space into public space where common morality demands different behaviour. CCTV in public spaces has significantly less impact.

Re:Not so Nice (1)

worx101 (1799560) | about 4 years ago | (#33867106)

+1 This is exactly my point, if they were putting cameras in peoples homes it would be a completely different matter and worth the effort to fight.

Re:Not so Nice (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33867130)

A better analogy would be to say every citizen now has to have a personal overseer follow them 24/7 and observe all their movements and actions within public spaces - any law-abiding citizens have no grounds for complaint, therefore if you do complain you must be a criminal. That's tantamount what this law plus GGP post are saying. Most people don't mind being observed in public, but they would mind their entire day being observed by one set of people - this technology enables such observation and its justification is the sledgehammer-to-crack-a-nut excuse of preventing illegal parking. Here's an idea - deputise the public to report illegal parking and give them a percentage of the fee for every ticket issued based on their information, that way you raise public awareness, make efficient use of your limited pool of wardens (since they're responding to specific information not just wandering at random) and everyone else gets to hang onto the last shreds of their privacy.

Mod up (3, Insightful)

CarpetShark (865376) | about 4 years ago | (#33867294)

A better analogy would be to say every citizen now has to have a personal overseer follow them 24/7 and observe all their movements and actions within public spaces - any law-abiding citizens have no grounds for complaint, therefore if you do complain you must be a criminal. That's tantamount what this law plus GGP post are saying. Most people don't mind being observed in public, but they would mind their entire day being observed by one set of people - this technology enables such observation and its justification is the sledgehammer-to-crack-a-nut excuse of preventing illegal parking.

Well said.

deputise the public to report illegal parking and give them a percentage of the fee for every ticket issued based on their information

That, however, is worse than cameras (which does not diminish how bad cameras are). It's well known (from the examples of WWII Germany and so on) that states which encourage citizens to report each other become very nasty places to be.

Re:Not so Nice (1)

tehcyder (746570) | about 4 years ago | (#33867180)

Why is GP a troll? You park your car in public illegally, the CCTV identifies your car and you get a fine. Big deal. Avoiding fines is nothing to do with your rights or your freedom.

You shouldn't have any expectation of any sort of privacy if you are driving your car on a public road, you do something illegal and you are caught.

Re:Not so Nice (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33867070)

Still, your violating laws...,/quote>I'm not a grammar^Wpunctuation nazi usually, but in this case this was so bad it made the sentence hard to parse. At least I lost a while trying to glean what you wanted to say.

Re:Not so Nice (5, Funny)

teh kurisu (701097) | about 4 years ago | (#33867290)

Oh the irony.

Revenue Collection (2, Interesting)

Ethanol-fueled (1125189) | about 4 years ago | (#33866564)

Here we go again, one of my greatest fears and the next logical step for law enforcement: Shifting focus from public safety to revenue collection. Fixed DHS checkpoints are running random searches for petty drug possesion and proper vehicle paperwork, in the name of "keeping $HOME_COUNTRY safe." Random police "DUI" checkpoints [californiawatch.org] are impounding far more sober than drunk drivers, not even making a dent in drunk driving statistics.

The solution to the problem lies with a past state of a red-light camera in San Diego, near the Aero drive exit right off the 8 freeway - One of the cameras was dangling from its support post, literally hanging by a few threads. Some brave hero must have seen the tell-tale flash of a $400 citation, got out of his or her vehicle, and decapitated the fucking camera with a baseball bat.

And now, we must do the same. With fake license plates, motorized, retractable license plate covers for the red-light cameras, and heapin' helpins of baseball bat.

Re:Revenue Collection (1)

psergiu (67614) | about 4 years ago | (#33866612)

The people in the UK have other methods:
- http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/18/1863.asp [thenewspaper.com]
- http://www.speedcam.co.uk/gatso2c.htm [speedcam.co.uk]

Re:Revenue Collection (5, Informative)

Ponyegg (866243) | about 4 years ago | (#33866978)

I'm part of a the NTBPT (No to Bike Parking Tax) demo group in London which protests at having to pay parking fees in Central London. The UK law stipulates that councils are not allowed to simply charge for parking as a revenue stream, there has to be some benefit to the local population/businesses such as relieveing congestion, and as bikes don't cause congestion we're currently fighting Westminster Counsil in the European Courts of the legality of the charges. http://www.notobikeparkingtax.com/ [notobikeparkingtax.com]

Westminster Council also employs CCTV cars that roam the streets of London spying on the populace & catching any "traffic violations", but we've caught on to that and now we follow the CCTV cars and we film them & alert motorists about them and occasionally post evidence of them committing their own traffic violations to Youtube :-)
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23883049-bikers-blow-cover-of-cctv-cars-snooping-on-drivers.do [thisislondon.co.uk]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GHOazGC7alk [youtube.com]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-QNfeL71ojg [youtube.com]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cztfKB8SGCI [youtube.com]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EsZb9jIfGv0 [youtube.com]

If you don't like what your elected memebers are doing then 1] try and vote them out, 2] organise, protest & demonstrate 3] take direct action to hinder their effectiveness (all legal and above board direct action mind.

Re:Revenue Collection (1)

dave420 (699308) | about 4 years ago | (#33867054)

It's not spying if you are in public, and unless those cars are causing incomprehensible damage by driving into people's private residences, it seems your choice of word was a bit sensationalist.

Re:Revenue Collection (1)

pspahn (1175617) | about 4 years ago | (#33866698)

Random police "DUI" checkpoints [californiawatch.org] are impounding far more sober than drunk drivers, not even making a dent in drunk driving statistics.

I had always thought that at random DUI checkpoints, the police were not allowed to investigate anything else, and not even supposed to see your license (unless, of course, you were wasted).

Re:Revenue Collection (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33866754)

No, in California you are always asked for your ID, Registration, where your going etc.

Re:Revenue Collection (1)

pspahn (1175617) | about 4 years ago | (#33866774)

You may be asked, but does that mean you are required to comply? This seems to me to be a violation of the Fifth Amendment.

Re:Revenue Collection (1)

pspahn (1175617) | about 4 years ago | (#33866784)

and yeah, I meant the Fourth.

Re:Revenue Collection (1)

KDR_11k (778916) | about 4 years ago | (#33866840)

"DUI exception". The courts will just let them get away with it.

Re:Revenue Collection (2, Informative)

sumdumass (711423) | about 4 years ago | (#33866972)

The courts do not just let them get away with it. The supreme court ruled in a case concerning DUI checkpoints in Indiana that they are legal as long as the public has both sufficient notice and a reasonable route around them. They can't wait until the last minute and publish the info in some obscure newspaper that probably won't be distributed until after the check points and they can't close the roads around it down to force traffic through it. They has also outlaws drug checkpoints too.

The DHS gets away with it not because it's "in the name of keeping the country safe" but because it's traditionally handled by border agents (yes, even 100 miles inland from the border) which are now under the DHS. Furthermore, the supreme court has ruled on border searches in the past and declared that right of sovereignty (the right of a nation to exist relies on the ability to control what enters it's borders) surpasses the constitution as long as the search isn't overly invasive. It continues to define overly invasive- giving and taking from the constitution.

Apparently our founding fathers was ok with them too as they passed the very first warrantless search law concerning searches of ships entering US ports in the very first session of the US congress under the same principle.

Re:Revenue Collection (0, Flamebait)

grimdawg (954902) | about 4 years ago | (#33866710)

Or you could stop running red lights.

Re:Revenue Collection (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33866844)

and you could stop assuming that everyone who has a problem with this runs red lights.

Re:Revenue Collection (1)

RyanFenton (230700) | about 4 years ago | (#33866928)

Agreed in spirit - but you can only go so far with that logic. Enforce ALL vehicle rules, completely enough, and no one can afford to drive.

You'd get home, and you'd find a letter in your mail, rather thick. You open it, and there's a rather remarkable list:

"4 way stop at 3rd and A. St. - rolling stop, $200" (you went ahead, when the oncoming car waved you ahead, and you didn't want to delay them with a lengthy stop)
"BP Oil, 3rd and B. St - Illegal toxic substance disposal, second violation, $350" (The gasoline ended up dripping once after carefully pulling the nozzle from the tank)

These would go on for hundreds of entries - dozens for each time you drove, each time gotchas, clever in their technicalities - and each time increasing in fine. Every merge, every speed change, every time you blinked or looked in the wrong direction could be counted as a violation. You would owe millions of dollars (if not more) by the end of the statement.

It wouldn't be so bad if there were a more computer automated method of driving that meant you could avoid the human error with cars in a place like the US - but there aren't, so human leeway has to be a part of the system, rather than a blind technical snap judgment.

Ryan Fenton

Re:Revenue Collection (1)

worx101 (1799560) | about 4 years ago | (#33867048)

Not going to happen, its to much of a leap. Doing so would lock up the economy, almost no one could drive. And in more remote areas that would mean not go to work/go to malls/etc basically you would be a hermit. hmm a world without cars... at least polution wouldn't be as bad in some areas :P

Re:Revenue Collection (1)

captainpanic (1173915) | about 4 years ago | (#33867052)

Agreed completely - but not only for driving and traffic. Imagine the list of offenses that people could get fined / arrested for in general.
The main problem is that we have many (many!) laws. Most people don't know all the laws. And to abide every law at every moment, people have to turn into frickin' robots... People who say they never break any law are liars. Everybody does, if only by accident.

A fine is meant as a "lesson", so that you don't do it again. And sometimes, it is not necessary to learn the lesson - it's vital that we remember that. If you start punishing people at even the slightest mistake, then it won't take long for the people to lose their confidence in the system...

Terrorism was never the biggest threat to society... but with systems like these, the security industry rapidly is.

Re:Revenue Collection (1)

seeker_1us (1203072) | about 4 years ago | (#33866998)

You do know that cities frequently shorten the yellow light time in order to increase revenue? And trying to ALWAYS avoid running red lights may cause a wreck: you may end up in that time where you are not sure if its safe to continue on (without the light going red and you getting a ticket) or if it's safe to stop (without getting rear ended).

Or you could stop running red lights.

Re:Revenue Collection (1)

KDR_11k (778916) | about 4 years ago | (#33867094)

Then maybe you should pressure your representative to legislate that yellow light times MUST be significantly longer than the expected time to brake/pass.

Re:Revenue Collection (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33867176)

The person behind is meant to leave sufficient space between your car and their's that, should you have to execute an emergency stop, they have time to react and brake. As far as I'm aware, the law doesn't state that you have to drive in such a way that you make up for the incompetencies of other drivers, the only onus is on you and your own driving, therefore if it's a choice between running the red (where you are at fault) or braking and being hit (where the other guy is at fault) you should naturally go for the latter. In fact, the law demands it.

Re:Revenue Collection (2, Insightful)

srussia (884021) | about 4 years ago | (#33867132)

Or you could stop running red lights.

Citation needed?

Re:Revenue Collection (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33866718)

Nah people deserve all of this. Use to be that you had to put up with the government because they would have your head if you didn't put up with it. Now they just don't give a rats ass and then tell you its somebody else's fault the world seems to be against you.

The PD in Nice may as well run the whole, "We either do this or we raise beer tax .5% or we close down our beloved library that's been around since roman times..." When in reality the government is just looking for an easy out on that stupid contract they signed with the Police union on pay increases for the next five years or because they need to cover up the treasurer's trip with some hookers and some blackjack in Nepal, or insert some really incredibly ridiculous idea, at this point they're all valid.

Nah people in the world need to do themselves a favor and look right into the mirror and start owning up to the problems that they have allowed to happen. Grab a fucking hammer and take the damn camera's down. Get the rest of the town in on it with you. I'll place a safe bet that there is more of you then there are of them. The civilized world has cultivated cowards.

Re:Revenue Collection (1)

pspahn (1175617) | about 4 years ago | (#33866744)

the treasurer's trip with some hookers and some blackjack in Nepal,

You're telling me that French people go to Nepal for hookers and gambling? That's....

I recall Jon Krakauer describing the hookers in "Into Thin Air", and it sounded as if Tijuana would be a better place to find a date.

Re:Revenue Collection (2, Insightful)

Zoxed (676559) | about 4 years ago | (#33866736)

> Shifting focus from public safety to revenue collection.

As a cyclist, father, neighbour of wheelchairs users and part time pedestrian I can attest to the problems caused by poor parking (and speeding, red light jumping etc.). If CCTV can help reduce this then I am *all for it*.
(If, however, it is only used to catch someone who overstays their meter by a few minutes then it is not so useful.)

Re:Revenue Collection (0, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33866954)

As a cyclist, father, neighbour of wheelchairs users and part time pedestrian ...

Ah the good upstanding citizen. How nice for you; completely ignoring that in the beginning these cameras were introduced with the excuse of violent crimes and the usual rhetoric.

But hey, it's the police. Nothing they do can possible be wrong. What's a little lieing, a little more ubiquitous surveillance and a little more pressure on citizens every day. You've got nothing to hide, right?

Re:Revenue Collection (1)

ZeroExistenZ (721849) | about 4 years ago | (#33866982)

(If, however, it is only used to catch someone who overstays their meter by a few minutes then it is not so useful.)

I believe this would be more the case. In Belgium parking-ticket revenue is per city in the millions. Even sometimes where it's unclear where you have to pay or not: cities invest alot in placing meters and have people check it (they are now run by private organisations instead of police.)

Seeing that parking for a day in a city like Brussels would cost you 15 euro (or 20usd) this is a nice cashcow and it gets milked.

Imagine you work in Brussels, you pay your gas and your 15 euro / day. If you go by train you pay in the town you park your car between 5-10 euro a day to park, about 100 euro a month for a train-subscription.

No wonder people play the "cat and mouse game" with metermaids; if parking without ticket results in a fine of 20 euros up to 50 euros, and the frequency of checks are randomized alot of people take the bet and cities cry because they projected some extra millions in revenue.

Re:Revenue Collection (2, Insightful)

value_added (719364) | about 4 years ago | (#33867034)

As a cyclist, father, neighbour of wheelchairs users and part time pedestrian I can attest to the problems caused by poor parking (and speeding, red light jumping etc.).

Hell, you don't need to be any of those. Going for a walk (with or without missus, the girfriend, or the dog) should provide ample evidence that most all drivers behave like complete assholes[1].

Not sure that CCTV cameras would help. To the extent they could, however, the focus would be on the most egregious and obviously illegal behaviour, leaving things like terrifying pedestrians unaddressed.

---------------
1. Yes, gentle Slashdot reader, that probably means you. Driving 35 in a 25, for example, may not seem like a big deal, but it's a huge frigging difference to everybody living in the neighbourhood, walking on the street, or simply not in your car. If you think that's an exaggeration, try running a few laps through your office and see how long it is before someone wants to knock your block off, or calls security.

Re:Revenue Collection (2, Insightful)

malkavian (9512) | about 4 years ago | (#33867228)

As a cyclist, pedestrian, runner, and car user, I can attest to the problems caused by pedestrians not bothering to look at traffic and blithely stepping into the road, and a host of cyclist who will happily cut up drivers, cycle from one pavement to the other causing cars to have to emergency stop, jump red lights and a host of other things. I've even had cyclists swerve between cars, not looking, and collide with me on my own bike! Oh, and a couple of the guys I dive with and regularly hang out with are wheelchair users (they think people who advocate CCTV on the grounds you've just stated are completely oblivious to the real world and don't really think about solving problems or present real solutions).
CCTV doesn't really fix things. Having a presence on the street is a far more effective ploy.

Re:Revenue Collection (3, Insightful)

phantomfive (622387) | about 4 years ago | (#33866856)

hehe you're going to hate me, but......

I used to dislike red-light cameras because they are used as revenue machines for the city, etc. Then I realized, wow, if they weren't using them as revenue machines, then I would have to pay higher taxes. So hey, I don't mind having my taxes subsidized by those people who are too stupid to figure out how to navigate a red light. If that's you, sorry about that, and thanks. And I think there must be a lot of people who feel like me, otherwise there would be no red-light cameras.

Now if they are catching people when they aren't actually breaking laws, that's another story. I'm against that. But that's not what you're complaining about.

Re:Revenue Collection (4, Insightful)

MPAB (1074440) | about 4 years ago | (#33866958)

There was a recent scandal here in Spain because the picture that comes with the fine showed the car passing in yellow, not red. Nobody was found responsible and nothing happened.
There's also been known cases of shortened yellow lights in the US that give the victims no time to stop before getting caught in camera.

Speed cameras are easier to use as bait, though, because as soon as the revenue goes down the "authorities" just set a lower speed limit, even far below the safe limit.

Re:Revenue Collection (0, Flamebait)

epyT-R (613989) | about 4 years ago | (#33866992)

This selfish, insecure desire to join a posse and stick it to someone is one of the factors causing society's slow descent into an orwellian nightmare. How about facing the elephant in the room, an overreaching government that taxes too much (your excuse to justify the cams), instead of cowardly flapping your hands while saying it's someone elses fault? Cam victims aren't the ones taxing you.

And I think there must be a lot of people who feel like me, otherwise there would be no red-light cameras.

Fallacious reasoning. This does nothing to support your viewpoint.

Re:Revenue Collection (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33867226)

...slow descent into an orwellian nightmare..

You may want to brush up on the last few 100 years of history. Its never been so good and is so far from an orwellian nightmare that you clearly haven't read the book.

I mean sheesh... getting ticked for speeding or running a red is NOT a orwellian nightmare by any stretch of the imagination. Not the mention that you can go to court and challenge it if you want.

Re:Revenue Collection (4, Informative)

sumdumass (711423) | about 4 years ago | (#33867024)

You are suffering from the failed logic that government actually acts rational.

In fact, the revenue streams won't decrease your tax burden, instead they just give raises to employees, elected officials, find a way to work bonuses or more/better benefits into the public sector, and end up spending more. Government is funny that way, they think once the money is in their hands, they have to spend it. Of course that's true to an extent, most jurisdictions (at least in the US) can only keep a certain percentage of revenue collected until a certain point is reached, the excess has to be spent or returned to the tax payer.

This is what has sparked most of the major budget problems we are seeing right now. You can't un-raise employees, so when the economy tanks and revenue drops, it's deficit hell or unpopular cuts in programs, or somehow raising taxes. None of which politicians want to do because it makes it hard to get reelected. Most governments went from "we need this to run" to how much can I spend. The later marks a shift in the deterioration of government and brings about favoritism, cronyism and the general environment of waste that seems embedded in the ineffective government we see today on most levels.

No, red light camera are not subsidizing your taxes, they are enabling government expansion.

Re:Revenue Collection (2, Insightful)

lewko (195646) | about 4 years ago | (#33867216)

That sounds nice in theory. However what really happens, is incompetent, bloated bureaucracies get used to all this new money and find new and innovative ways to piss it all away. It's a very slippery slope and pretty soon, even the most god-fearing, law-abiding citizens are getting gouged for the most victimless of offences.

Governments usually end up addicted to fines revenue like heroin.

Any excuse serves a tyrant. (1)

ChipMonk (711367) | about 4 years ago | (#33866566)

The excuse in this case will probably be how many fist-fights break out over parking spaces.

Even so... (2, Interesting)

Gordonjcp (186804) | about 4 years ago | (#33866708)

... I'd rather live in a city with CCTV cameras than a city with poorly-trained armed police ready to start shooting at any moment, privately-run prisons that require a constant stream of new inmates to keep the workshops running and the profits up, and drug and alcohol laws that even the Taliban think are a tad excessive.

Re:Even so... (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33866752)

... I'd rather live in a city with CCTV cameras than a city with poorly-trained armed police ready to start shooting at any moment, privately-run prisons that require a constant stream of new inmates to keep the workshops running and the profits up, and drug and alcohol laws that even the Taliban think are a tad excessive.

This sounds like a false dilemma. [wikipedia.org]

Re:Even so... (1)

gmhowell (26755) | about 4 years ago | (#33866792)

Sounds like a false duality to me.

Re:Even so... (2, Insightful)

ChipMonk (711367) | about 4 years ago | (#33866834)

You speak as if these are mutually exclusive.

Re:Even so... (1)

Gordonjcp (186804) | about 4 years ago | (#33867102)

You speak as if these are mutually exclusive.

Yeah, that's the really hilarious part - American cities have just as much CCTV as European cities.

Re:Any excuse serves a tyrant. (1)

KDR_11k (778916) | about 4 years ago | (#33866854)

This IS France we're talking about.

Re:Any excuse serves a tyrant. (1)

sourcerror (1718066) | about 4 years ago | (#33867162)

Whoosh.

Fill in the blanks (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33866572)

What they say it's about ________

(a) Terrorism
(b) Violent Crime
(c) Child Pornography

What it's really about.
(a) Power
(b) Money
(c) Control

prevention (2, Interesting)

MrBrainport (1637275) | about 4 years ago | (#33866604)

We could use CCTV surveillance to prevent corruption :)

Laser Pointers! (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33866606)

Two words: Laser Pointers.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J0TgaGePhJA

Once enough people get tired of their governments setting up privacy-invading surveillance networks, all it takes is a dedicated few people who run around and aim laser pointers at all the CCD cameras. Eventually the governments would get tired of replacing them.

Re:Laser Pointers! (2, Interesting)

KDR_11k (778916) | about 4 years ago | (#33866874)

Mess with the police's equipment and see how long it'll take them to care. Do you want to be thrown into prison for that?

Nice ... Estrosi (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33866656)

Nice's mayor is C. Estrosi, a member of the government that, if I remember correctly, used to be close to the "Front National" (far right party) at some point. No real surprise there.

Re:Nice ... Estrosi (0)

PatPending (953482) | about 4 years ago | (#33866786)

Citation needed.

Anyway Christian Estrosi [wikipedia.org] was a member of the French Parliament (National Assembly of France [wikipedia.org] ) which is made of these parties (577 total members):

  • Union for a Popular Movement (317)
  • Socialist, Radical, and Citizen (204)
  • Democratic and republican left (25)
  • New Centre (23)
  • Non-Attached Members (7)

Which, pray tell, is the far right party?

I for one am not aware of a far right party playing any noteworthy role in French politics.

As for here in the USA, must I remind you which party wants total control over our lives? From how much water I can have in my toilet, which light bulbs I can use, which foods I may eat, how much energy I can use, and soon, which health care I may receive, along with higher taxes.

Re:Nice ... Estrosi (2, Informative)

mxolisi06 (1009567) | about 4 years ago | (#33866926)

not that French politics are any easier to summarize than anywhere else, but to be fair with the GP, we have seen lately that the current governement has more and more of a tendency to use far-right (or what we call far-right here in France anyway) rethorics, such as blaming immigrants for economical and crime problems, for instance.

Re:Nice ... Estrosi (1)

golden age villain (1607173) | about 4 years ago | (#33867066)

There is a far right party in France, the so-called "Front National", to the right of the UMP. They did play an important role in the past decades with votes reaching in the 15-20% but are now plagued by internal dispute (not that I am unhappy about it). The UMP also did a "good" job at pushing a security agenda which took over a large share of their votes.

Facial Recognition (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33866678)

Fun times will be had.

Videoprotection (5, Informative)

bedonnant (958404) | about 4 years ago | (#33866748)

This is the doing of Christian Estrosi, mayor of Nice and minister of Industry, whose education consisted in winning motorcycle races. He's at the forefront of applying repression at the city level, and actually wanted to fine mayors of other cities where crime is not sufficiantly fought in his eyes. Funny coming from the guy in charge of the city where the Russian Mafia is rampant... anyway the summary has is wrong, in terms of politically correct French. The French government wants everyone to stop using the ugly word 'videosurveillance' and instead opt for the friendly, wonderfully orwellian 'videoprotection'.

Re:Videoprotection (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33867008)

C'est de la merde!!!

Re:Videoprotection (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33867038)

This is the doing of Christian Estrosi, mayor of Nice and minister of Industry, whose education consisted in winning motorcycle races.

This is what we get when voters elect stupid actors and celebrities into political offices.

Re:Videoprotection (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33867212)

The summary is wrong in other ways: it's not for parking tickets, but only for double-parking. I don't know many people who think that double-parking in a crowded city without many multi-lane avenues is a Good Thing. One double-parked car on a two-lane road blocks half the traffic.

not the first time... (3, Interesting)

mayberry42 (1604077) | about 4 years ago | (#33866760)

This is not the first time I've heard "this is for your own safety" arguments only to have them turn out as thinly veiled guises of trying to make money at your expense. Details escape me, but not too long ago, somewhere in the US, a town added red light cameras which took a snapshot of your car and sent you the fine for running a red light. In a matter of months, it was so successful that very few, if anybody, ran red lights anymore. You think they'd be happy - after all, they probably DID save lives. So why did they take them down? Because the revenue from tickets (those types anyway) was reduced to a big, fat 0

This also makes you wonder what else is being done "for our safety", when in reality it's just a way to take your money. Surely at least speeding enforcement must be exempt from this. Oh wait... [motorists.org]

Rothbard was right when he said that governments only have destructive ways of making money (of course, he was referring to taxation at the time, but a valid point non the less)

Re:not the first time... (1)

Thanshin (1188877) | about 4 years ago | (#33867182)

This also makes you wonder what else is being done "for our safety", when in reality it's just a way to take your money.

It doesn't make me wonder. Everything is being done to take your money.

This is capitalism. Profit is the objective of every single thing.

Re:not the first time... (1)

mayberry42 (1604077) | about 4 years ago | (#33867280)

The government's deception in order to take money is not capitalism, it's robbery.

Re:not the first time... (1)

Thanshin (1188877) | about 4 years ago | (#33867326)

The government's deception in order to take money is not capitalism, it's robbery.

That's precisely the point I was disagreeing with.

I don't think there's such a thing as "non money-driven government capitalism".

It has to be said.... (1)

Dieppe (668614) | about 4 years ago | (#33866768)

...but that isn't very Nice.

London (5, Informative)

Anne Thwacks (531696) | about 4 years ago | (#33866772)

We have this in London, and I personally have had ticekets while asking for directions, waiting to do a U-turn and while waiting to reverse into a parking bay.

You do not want this ... It is worse than living in East Germany under the Stazi. (or similar to the "great Terror" after the French revolution)

Re:London (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33866802)

It is worse than living in East Germany under the Stazi.

Rule of thumb: if parking tickets are a big grievance for you then your life isn't as bad as living in East Germany under the Stasi.

Would that I could moderate this (1)

ChipMonk (711367) | about 4 years ago | (#33866896)

Except I've already commented (twice) on this thread. Parent isn't just Funny, but also Insightful.

Re:London (5, Insightful)

Galvatron (115029) | about 4 years ago | (#33867084)

Rule of thumb: if parking tickets are a big grievance for you then your life isn't as bad as living in East Germany under the Stasi.

This is obviously true. No one will be executed, tortured, or held in secret prisons in Nice for parking violations. However, the GP's point isn't totally trivial either. Certainly a surveillance apparatus is being implemented that is vastly greater than anything envisioned by the totalitarian regimes of the 20th century, and it is being aimed at punishing citizens who generally are trying to live their lives without harming others. Yes, people are breaking laws (usually, though there's plenty of stories of systems implemented in such a way that they catch even law abiders), but we all have occasions where we need to stop in a bus zone for a minute to drop something off, or realize that we left our change in our other pants and can't pay the meter. The notion of having eyes on us at all times, watching for us to make the smallest mistake and pouncing on it, does contribute to a sense of alienation, a feeling that government is working against us, rather than for us. Working for the citizens, rather than against them, is supposed to be the very essence of what separates liberal democracies from totalitarian autocracies. Just because a government demonstrates its hostility through annoyance, rather than brutality, doesn't mean it's not a disturbing attitude.

Re:London (1)

God Of Atheism (1003892) | about 4 years ago | (#33867138)

Rule of thumb: if parking tickets are a big grievance for you then your life isn't as bad as living in East Germany under the Stasi.

This is obviously true. No one will yet be executed, tortured, or held in secret prisons in Nice for parking violations.

Fixed that for you.

However, the GP's point isn't totally trivial either. Certainly a surveillance apparatus is being implemented that is vastly greater than anything envisioned by the totalitarian regimes of the 20th century, and it is being aimed at punishing citizens who generally are trying to live their lives without harming others. Yes, people are breaking laws (usually, though there's plenty of stories of systems implemented in such a way that they catch even law abiders), but we all have occasions where we need to stop in a bus zone for a minute to drop something off, or realize that we left our change in our other pants and can't pay the meter. The notion of having eyes on us at all times, watching for us to make the smallest mistake and pouncing on it, does contribute to a sense of alienation, a feeling that government is working against us, rather than for us. Working for the citizens, rather than against them, is supposed to be the very essence of what separates liberal democracies from totalitarian autocracies. Just because a government demonstrates its hostility through annoyance, rather than brutality, doesn't mean it's not a disturbing attitude.

It's a slippery slope and the average voter doesn't seem to care about the slide to fascism (note that this is regardless of country, maybe it has something to do with the growth of the world population).

Re:London (3, Insightful)

Thanshin (1188877) | about 4 years ago | (#33867198)

but we all have occasions where we need to stop in a bus zone for a minute to drop something off

No, we don't. Unless you live in a village, your "one minute" stop is influencing hundreds of cars, creating a collective loss much greater than "one minute" that you're imposing on the society for egotistic reasons.

The one and only effect I'd enjoy of camera traffic control (being completely against it) is that it would reduce the dozens of "one minute quick stops just to drop something" that make me lose hours per year.

Re:London (2, Insightful)

airfoobar (1853132) | about 4 years ago | (#33867088)

I don't think the parking tickets are the problem, but the all seeing eye in the sky that smites you from a distance the moment it thinks you've broken its rules. As soon as people are fully acclimated to this sort of regime, and that may be generations from now, who knows what sort of new laws such a system will be used to enforce -- and people won't even know any better.

Let's make it illegal to walk around the city without smiling! France is the happiest place on earth -- just look at how happy everyone is here!

Re:London (-1, Troll)

tygerstripes (832644) | about 4 years ago | (#33866836)

I'll tell you what else is worse than living in East Germany under the Stazi: queue-jumpers. If you've ever been buggered by an elephant, you'll know just how bad queue-jumping is. Man, I would rebuild the Wall *myself*, hand the gate-keys to Mugabe and go live on the other side if I knew for sure that the queue-jumpers would be kept out.

Of course, they'll probably be there before me. Motherfucking queue-jumpers.

Re:London (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33866950)

I smiled.

Re:London (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33867244)

Not sure why this was marked troll - parent was obviously using humour to highlight the ridiculous nature of GP's claim by taking it to a silly extreme. Unless you're a queue jumper or assume he's trying to get a reaction from people who queue jump, whoever marked this troll is clearly either missing the point, or needs their morning coffee before they execture mod points, someone cancel this out with an interesting mod or something!

Re:London (1)

RMH101 (636144) | about 4 years ago | (#33867312)

I had a £60 fine for driving in a bus lane in Manchester, UK, based on CCTV footage. What the single still image they posted to me *didn't* show was that I'd had to make an emergency swerve around a bike in front of me that wasn't looking where it was going. Total time in bus lane? Approx 2 seconds. Nice.

Jobs Jobs Jobs! (1)

phantomcircuit (938963) | about 4 years ago | (#33866868)

Sounds like a jobs program more than anything else.

Re:Jobs Jobs Jobs! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33866918)

Yeah but we all know Keynesian economics is rubbish.

Source? (1)

imthesponge (621107) | about 4 years ago | (#33866872)

Are there any sources for this besides a blog post?

Re:Source? (2, Informative)

mxolisi06 (1009567) | about 4 years ago | (#33866912)

Here [nicematin.com] is an article in the main local news paper. Although I wouldn't be too sure it's better than a blog...

Obligatory (-1, Offtopic)

masterwit (1800118) | about 4 years ago | (#33866880)

Good evening, London. Allow me first to apologize for this interruption. I do, like many of you, appreciate the comforts of every day routine- the security of the familiar, the tranquility of repetition. I enjoy them as much as any bloke. But in the spirit of commemoration, thereby those important events of the past usually associated with someone's death or the end of some awful bloody struggle, a celebration of a nice holiday, I thought we could mark this November the 5th, a day that is sadly no longer remembered, by taking some time out of our daily lives to sit down and have a little chat. There are of course those who do not want us to speak. I suspect even now, orders are being shouted into telephones, and men with guns will soon be on their way. Why? Because while the truncheon may be used in lieu of conversation, words will always retain their power. Words offer the means to meaning, and for those who will listen, the enunciation of truth. And the truth is, there is something terribly wrong with this country, isn't there? Cruelty and injustice, intolerance and oppression. And where once you had the freedom to object, to think and speak as you saw fit, you now have censors and systems of surveillance coercing your conformity and soliciting your submission. How did this happen? Who's to blame? Well certainly there are those more responsible than others, and they will be held accountable, but again truth be told, if you're looking for the guilty, you need only look into a mirror. I know why you did it. I know you were afraid. Who wouldn't be? War, terror, disease. There were a myriad of problems which conspired to corrupt your reason and rob you of your common sense. Fear got the best of you, and in your panic you turned to the now high chancellor, Adam Sutler. He promised you order, he promised you peace, and all he demanded in return was your silent, obedient consent. Last night I sought to end that silence. Last night I destroyed the Old Bailey, to remind this country of what it has forgotten. More than four hundred years ago a great citizen wished to embed the fifth of November forever in our memory. His hope was to remind the world that fairness, justice, and freedom are more than words, they are perspectives. So if you've seen nothing, if the crimes of this government remain unknown to you then I would suggest you allow the fifth of November to pass unmarked. But if you see what I see, if you feel as I feel, and if you would seek as I seek, then I ask you to stand beside me one year from tonight, outside the gates of Parliament, and together we shall give them a fifth of November that shall never, ever be forgot.

Oh wait.
Crap.
Misplaced cliche quote...
Wrong country, this is France!

cheers!

Re:Obligatory (1)

sempir (1916194) | about 4 years ago | (#33866916)

Feel better now?

This just in from Norway... (1)

jmoen (169557) | about 4 years ago | (#33866938)

Just read about this in the paper today, a Norwegian parking company just started with this practice and the guy caught was quite surprised as he was not notified about his wrongdoings until the ticket came in the mail (he parked there several times thus getting several tickets). The Norwegian Data Inspectorate is looking into this practice.

(Google translate of article)
http://translate.google.com/translate?js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&layout=2&eotf=1&sl=no&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.aftenposten.no%2Fnyheter%2Foslo%2Farticle3851620.ece [google.com]

Spirit of the thing... (1)

Securityemo (1407943) | about 4 years ago | (#33866974)

I think the core of the reaction to this is, the traffic system isn't and has never been built around everyone keeping every speed limit and rule all the time, implicitly?

First they came... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33866986)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_they_came...

Re:First they came... (1)

lewko (195646) | about 4 years ago | (#33867200)

Is that the screenplay for a porno?

The problem is not the parking tickets... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33867104)

The problem is the direction this is headed, it seems fairly harmless when it is all introduced one step at a time. First they use it to reduce crime, then to catch parking offenders, sure we protest a bit now but we will all come to accept it in the end. But then what will be next, once we accepted that surveying parking is acceptable perhaps looking for petty offenses or indecent behavior should also be acceptable?

Not to mention that these new systems usually undermines the basic principle of innocent until proven guilty, because most of the processing is done by a machine. To maximize profits most if it is automated and as few operators as possible will be used to skim through the recorded offenses and send out tickets. "It looks like this person is guilty of a crime so they probably are, send out a ticket".

I am usually not one for fear mongering or totalitarian conspiracy theories, however things are rapidly moving in a direction I don't like.

I think this will result in fewer tickets (2, Interesting)

George_Ou (849225) | about 4 years ago | (#33867124)

Parking tickets are like Vegas Casinos. If they make the table odds too high, then they lose a lot of customers. Installing cameras will just mean that people won't be willing to take risks any more since there's a certainty that they will be caught. Cities catch people because people can actually get away with a lot of red meters, but they end up getting caught more in the long run.

already running in other cities nearby (2, Informative)

Scotch42 (1120577) | about 4 years ago | (#33867150)

This system is already in use for awhile in Cannes (the film festival city) and for sure in other cities in south of France... And the enforcement is drastic. You stop in front of a shop to pick up some ordered goods, you've got a ticket coming home...

Heal the World (1)

lewko (195646) | about 4 years ago | (#33867202)

With all that's going on in the World today, isn't about time we got back to hating the French?

Re:Heal the World (1)

Errol backfiring (1280012) | about 4 years ago | (#33867262)

Why do you hate the French? France is the USA of Europe. Americans think they are the world, the French think they are Europe. And both are known for their foul international politics.

In Paris, this is a good thing (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33867250)

So, travelling through the French cities on public transport can be a pain. The streets are "littered" by double parked cars. When there's no parking space available in a two lane road (that is, two lanes in one direction) one of the two lanes is often used as parking as well. Add in the fact that the streets are only as wide as needed for the buses this cause major traffic jams daily.

Fine the misparked vehicles by any means possible please as it will be good short term. Paris in particular needs some serious underground parkings to be able to solve this issue long term.

Finally (1)

w00tsauce (1482311) | about 4 years ago | (#33867276)

With all those cameras, maybe we'll get to see what's in the case.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?