|
Comment on this article |
View comments |
Email this Article
|
|
Schnucks Cracks Down on Cameras |
Current rating: 0 |
by Charles Smith
Email: charlessmith702210 (nospam) sbcglobal.net (unverified!) |
16 Dec 2005
Modified: 01:21:03 PM |
Through my inferences, new fears of terrorism
and Patriot-Act-related infiltration means
strong camera restrictions at Schnucks in
the Urbana Crossing Mall in Urbana. |
Analyzing myself being very close to that dreaded terrorist train bombing wave in London on
July 7, 2005 (I was actually in Montpellier,
France at that time of the bombing, but at the time, there was a fear that a copycat-related terorrist incident could strike France, but it did not materialize), and seeing the damage
the Patriot Act has done after watching "Fahrenheit 9-11", I realized why
Schnucks at Urbana Crossing (on Vine St.
at Urbana) recently put up signs saying that no cameras (still or video) are not allowed in store premises without consent.
I strongly disclaim that I am not a security expert but I can tell you by inference and by
watching a lot of IM-related and non-IM-related news coverage after 9-11 why this
new policy happened:
1. New fears that would-be suicide bombers could roam around the store , usually without purchasing any items at all, armed with their cameras and taking pictures freely without confrontation, and search for a
very good target at the store to blow themselves up and
create maximum damage when they return to the store later. ("Fahrenheit
9-11" did document one case where
a supermarket in Saginaw, NY, could be
on the Al-Qaeda list for a suicide attack there.) The new fears are present because
you don't see metal detectors at U.S. supermarkets, and if there are any security
guards there, they usually exist to thwart
thefts from shoplifters....they may not be
aware of these new bombers.
2. The Patriot Act meant fears that the FBI
and other similar authorities like the NSA
could infiltrate supermarkets that hold
magazines and books....and that means
fears that an super-secret subpoena by the
government with an attached gag order that
threatens major fines and/or imprisonment
if the supermarkets' personnel say ANYTHING about being subpoeaned by
such authorities, especially if they are
investigated in a terrorism case even if
the supermarkets did not do any criminal
activity....could be likely. The no-cameras policy was meant
to stop the unwarranted subpoenas and
infiltrations. (This new Patriot Act tactic, as
you know, made a very big hit on Peace
Fresno in California and hit some of the
libraries here in the U.S. ) |
This work is in the public domain |
|
Re: Schnucks Cracks Down on Cameras |
by say cheese
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
21 Dec 2005
|
|
Many retailers ban cameras to make it more difficult for competitors or professional shoppers to collect price information, and to protect their "proprietary" marketing materials and display arrangements. It sounds silly, but in a highly competitive industry every little bit helps. I'm not saying security issues are not also a concern, but there are also less exciting reasons for stores to ban cameras. |
|
Charles, check out 'pronoia' |
by old sdas'r
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
15 Jan 2006
|
You are a genious with music, yet i wonder if you could use a little balance around the fear quotient. Ever heard of the 'pronoia' idea? Look it up!
This isn't to say that we shouldn't be burying our heads in the proverbial sand, but to step away from hysteria, get some breaths in (full, deep, breaths!), and clear our minds out.
Another swell source that has helped me immensely on balance issues:
_The Four Agreements_ by don Miguel Ruiz, Toltec. Very highly recommended! www.miguelruiz.com |
