November 17, 2009

They are talking about the security cameras that are being placed all over New York City. I don't understand what the is uproar about.

I'm sure they serve a purpose. Either as a deterrent to crime or eventually helping to identify whoever commits a crime.

I have absolutely no problem with this thing. I don't feel my constitutional right being taken away. I don't have anything to hide and I'm sure nobody is sitting in that control room watching me going to the gym or the store or enter into a restaurant.

And if they are watching they can learn something: I have impeccable taste and I only go to good places. Inexpensive, but good.

The civil libertarians want protection, crime prevention but oh, don't trample on my constitutional rights.

I have an E-Z Pass. We laugh at the long lines at the cash toll gates while we breeze through. Do I care if Big brother is watching? Do I care if Big Brother keeps a log of what malls we visit? No, I don't care.

I have a friend who travels, rather drives every day into Manhattan. On the way he goes through tolls. I asked him once if he had an E-Z Pass. He told me no, because he didn't want Big Brother to know what he was doing.

I think this is just a paranoia people choose to live with. If one has nothing to hide what is the big deal?

We are living in terrible times. We already had a terror attack on New York City and everybody is convinced there will be more. Prevention of such attack is more important than hurting some people's feeling. If the government chooses to trample on some people's rights in order to save millions of lives then go ahead. Don't hesitate!

It's a free country. If one wants to feel that his constitutional right is taken away by the installation of security cameras, fine. Go ahead and feel hurt. He will be the one screaming the loudest if something happens and he can not be protected. I just think this is idiotic and short sighted.

===========================

There was a car accident reported today where a driver hit someone in the dark claiming he didn't see the person.

The driver was described as an elderly man, 73 years old. Being myself 72 years of age I hate the adjective "elderly".

I take care of myself, I exercise, I'm not overweight. I think I am in better shape than many 65 year old youngster. So why use such discriminative description? We are not using the n word, we are not using the j word, we are not using the g word. So why are we using the e word? I personally take offense at such description of a person.

Old f..t is OK!