People don't have a right to privacy in public (at least in the US). Do people not realize anyone can photograph or film them in public at any time. Heck, photographers can even then around and sell the without the subject's consent. Case in point: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nussenzweig_v._DiCorcia

I'm really struggling to see the parallel between being filmed in public and committing revenge murder.

▲

hmry 2 days ago | parent [-]

Sorry if I was unclear. My point was just that "if you were a victim, wouldn't you want this?" is not a very strong argument. What victims want does matter. But when it affects other people, their needs matter too.

Especially with mass-surveillance, which affects everyone. It's not possible to mass-surveil only people who would commit crimes, you need to surveil all innocent people too.

	▲	Manuel_D 2 days ago \| parent [-]
		> My point was just that "if you were a victim, wouldn't you want this?" is not a very strong argument. What victims want does matter. But when it affects other people, their needs matter too. Right and you used murder as an example. Do you think murder is even remotely comparable to putting up a security camera in a public space? Yes, a victim might want some sort of response that is socially unacceptable, sure. But if you want to make a convincing argument you have to explain why the proposed response is unacceptable. Not some different, extreme, response of your own invention. I'm really not sure how "committing vigilante murder is wrong" is supposed to be a good argument against putting up security cameras in a public space.