Do you think law enforcement cameras anywhere are an invasion of privacy? ( Archived) (4)

Once upon a time, a long long time ago, even before the USA existed as a federation there was a general principle that

'The Law existed for the sole purpose of setting right a tort '

CnP for ease : " A tort is an act or omission that gives rise to injury or harm to another and amounts to a civil wrong for which courts impose liability. In the context of torts, "injury" describes the invasion of any legal right, whereas "harm" describes a loss or detriment in fact that an individual suffers."

The general idea was that this would solve problems where big people could do 'whatever' to the little people and get away with it.

Say "Big Farmer" Jones' cows got loose and trampled Smallholder Sam's vegetable plot destroying his crop, well Sam could turn to the law and seek proper restitution for the damage.

And that was it ... 'to set right harm, so far as could be done'

But then some Smart Alec in a Govt somewhere decided they could make some money out of this by taking fines from people even though no 'actual' or 'real' injury or harm had taken place ...

This was done by the use of the word 'offence' and, as anyone knows in these heavily PC limited days ... pretty much anyone can claim to be 'offended' by pretty much anything that anyone else might say or do and the REAL beauty is that NO PROOF is required!

If I were so minded then all I really need to do (in the UK) is make a complaint and claim 'I'm offended by that' and ( referring to the recent thread on hate crimes and the Metropolitan Police's 176 page manual on 'hate Crimes' here ) and I have a better than middling chance that I can cause you to be arrested. Of course 'arrested' is not the same as 'charged' but, it's a nice little slur as you now have 'an arrest record' and of course that's something that a police officer looks at when dealing with you and assessing their next move in dealing with you ...

But given that The Law is not a person or thing, the reality is that it cannot be harmed or injured in anyway!

Right. so there's a posted speed limit of 50 mph ... you pass it at 72mph and get a ticket with a $200 fine

OK, so who was harmed or injured ?

That $200 fine ... it's demanded of you, supposedly, in order to make reparation ... but to what person? And, for what injury or harm ?

It's a racket !

So, cameras being used to 'catch people who did no harm' are an affront to privacy and a weapon of robbery ...

No matter where they are !