20 years on

Just keep repeating: "It's all for my own good. It's all for my own good. It's all...."

Chicago (Chicago Tribune, Sept. 10) - Mayor Richard Daley on Thursday announced a major expansion of the city's video surveillance system, adding 250 cameras and tying more than 2,000 existing cameras used by the city, Chicago Transit Authority, Chicago Housing Authority and other local governmental agencies to the city's 911 center.

Private-sector companies also will be able to opt into the system, linking their security devices to the center as well. ...

And special software will flag suspicious activity, calling up the scene on video monitors when packages are left in public places, for example, or when a person falls to the ground. ...

Because the cameras owned by the city and sister agencies are focused on public places, there will be no invasion of privacy, Daley said.

"We own the sidewalk," the mayor told reporters at a news conference at the 911 center. "We own the street, and we own the alley. ... You could photograph me going down the street. You do it every day. You have that right."

A representative of the ACLU agreed that there are no constitutional issues if the areas covered are in fact public ones and consenting private ones, but mentioned a 2003 report by the group that found a "dark potential" in such systems.

For a "dark" potential, it's pretty brightly lit in Chicago. Who owns the street, Mr. Mayor? Who owns the sidewalks and alleyways? Who is the "we" you refer to? Who is the "we" who so gleefully anticipates the process of being able to use computerized surveillance to monitor software-determined "suspicious activity?" Who is the "you" whose every public moment is going to be monitored?

You do not "own the streets," Mr. Mayor. You do not "own" the sidewalks. You merely administer them on behalf of the true owners. The city owns them. And who is the city? Why, "you" is the city, Mr. Mayor, the very "you" that you propose to treat like fish in a tank or ants in an ant farm, living their lives behind glass.

I have just one question: Since there is no evidence beyond the anecdotal that such surveillance systems reduce crime (as opposed to simply moving it around), what is the real purpose of the system? Is it really to make 911 system more efficient? Or is it really just because you can?