Tuesday, June 05, 2007

Film Follies

I recently read two separate articles in the JT. One of the articles described a proposal to require liquor license holders to pay for and operate a surveillance system at their establishments. The other article involved a proposal to fine liquor license holders for infractions that occur on their premises.

Well how do you like that? The defendant will be required to pay large sums of money to install a surveillance system which will provide evidence to be used against them in court by the prosecution. Now if we could only get the corner drug dealer to film his transactions...

4 comments:

Jennafer said...

exactly, more big govt taking over

Anonymous said...

So, how would you prefer to legislate accountability?

Denis Navratil said...

Anon, I don't have the right answer but I know the wrong answer when I see it. How would you like it if the government required you to install cameras in your home, at your expense of course, only to use the film to prove your guilt in a court of law? Sounds scarily big brotherish to me. Where are all the folks who are screaming that the Bush administration is evesdropping on foriegn terrorists when they place calls to cohorts in the US? Are civil liberties only for worth protecting for terrorists?

Anonymous said...

looks like both ordinances are written and ready for licensing committee on the 11th. ALL the owners could stomp in there and voice their opinions and it wont matter. The aldermen think they know whats best for all...big brother is...and doesnt helding work for a company that sells and maintains these kinds of systems??