US / UK Security Differences

[helicopper 1,050]

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2011/04/21/royal-wedding-security-measures-fly-experts-say/

Americans impressed by security preparations for the upcoming royal wedding may be surprised to know it would be difficult to implement many of those precautions here in the U.S.

Baker said Americans might be more security-sensitive “right after an incident like 9/11,” but it’s not too long before people start to complain “about having to take their shoes off at the airport.”

British authorities prepping for the nuptials of Prince William and Kate Middleton say they will likely use random stop-and-searches, closely monitored closed-circuit cameras spread throughout London and “pre-emptive policing,” which means police can arrest someone for a terror charge -- even planning or inciting a terror act -- before they have all the evidence related to it, to enforce order and maintain safety. Those “pre-charge” detentions can be based on a range of spying methods including phone taps, electronic surveillance and old-fashioned snooping.

Even the uploading of photos to a new iPhone app is being restricted within the vicinity Westminster Abbey and Buckingham Palace on the wedding day. The application, which automatically uploads photos to the web and groups them according to where they were taken, has been labeled a “threat to security” by London police, who have banned its use in the vicinity of the wedding. The police say they will be monitoring use of the application on the wedding day and arrest anyone caught uploading unauthorized images.

Baker said that wouldn’t fly in the U.S. “You’re going to tell them what they can and can’t do with their iPhone? That would drive people nuts.”

Interesting article.

[SRS131EMTFF 471]

It was an interesting article and there were some interesting points, especially about cameras in the UK. If you go to the UK just about every inch has at least one camera trained on it, they say you are on camera for 95% of your day to day activities in major metropolitan centers.

I am reminded of a quote mentioned here a lot that I was surprised wasn't mentioned in the article:

"They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."

Benjamin Franklin, 1775

[helicopper 1,050]

It was an interesting article and there were some interesting points, especially about cameras in the UK. If you go to the UK just about every inch has at least one camera trained on it, they say you are on camera for 95% of your day to day activities in major metropolitan centers.

I am reminded of a quote mentioned here a lot that I was surprised wasn't mentioned in the article:

"They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."

Benjamin Franklin, 1775

A great quote by a great man but out of context in this case. It is well established that you have no expectation of privacy while in a public place so the use of cameras and the ability to track a person while in those public places is neither a sacrifice of essential liberty or temporary safety.

To deny that the use of technology such as this can improve our safety is simply wrong. It has been well demonstrated in the UK and other places.

[SRS131EMTFF 471]

Im not arguing any point of that. When in public anything is up for grabs, all I was saying is that it is correct that it would be a much different experience in the US.

I obviously have no knowledge of the logistics or security behind the Clinton Wedding this summer in Rhinebeck but I do imagine that very similar measures were taken there as well, however, because of the some what isolated location and lack of major international royalty it was not nearly as noticed.