Baltimore Announces City-Wide Surveillance Roll Out That Records Passenger Conversations on City Buses

J.D. Heyes, Infowars, November 5, 2012

The surveillance society continues to grow unabated, as the city of Baltimore becomes the latest governmental entity to trample civil rights in the name of “public safety.”

According to the Baltimore Sun, city officials have now authorized the recording of private conversations on public buses “to investigate crimes, accidents and poor customer service.”

Marked with signs to alert passengers that open mics are picking up every word they say, the first 10 buses with the new surveillance equipment began operation towards the end of October. Eventually, officials say they will expand the program to 340 buses, or about half the fleet, by next summer.


The paper said the audio surveillance will be incorporated into the video surveillance systems already on board the buses (no plausible explanations on how an audio capability is supposed to enhance video surveillance, either).

“We want to make sure people feel safe, and this builds up our arsenal of tools to keep our patrons safe,” said Ralign Wells, the Maryland Transit Administration chief. “The audio completes the information package for investigators and responders.”


David Rocah, a staff attorney with the Maryland chapter of the ACLU, said he was “flabbergasted” by the plan, which he says is being implemented under the guise of a pilot program after a similar proposal was rejected by the state’s highest-ranking transportation official and the General Assembly three times in 2009.

“People don’t want or need to have their private conversations recorded by MTA as a condition of riding a bus,” Rocah told the paper. “A significant number of people have no viable alternative to riding a bus, and they should not be forced to give up their privacy rights.”

MTA police dispatchers say they receive anywhere from 45 to 100 calls daily from bus drivers reporting everything from unruly passengers to criminal activity. Capt. Burna McCollum, commander of the MTA police technical services division, said that while video is a very useful tool in helping to solve crimes, the audio is needed because, essentially, he wants to take away a witnesses’ choice not to get involved.



Share This

We welcome comments that add information or perspective, and we encourage polite debate. If you log in with a social media account, your comment should appear immediately. If you prefer to remain anonymous, you may comment as a guest, using a name and an e-mail address of convenience. Your comment will be moderated.
  • IstvanIN

    In a white nation this would be unacceptable.  Whites generally have a sense of civility, justice, fair play, and the ability to work towards the common good.  Blacks do not.  The crime rate in Baltimore is astronomical.  Whites are beaten and terrorized simply because they are white.  If nothing else we need to hear what the blacks are saying when they attack, rob, beat, rape and murder whites.  This is not the Maryland of our founding fathers. 

    • The__Bobster

      Ah, the state that voted for Obongo by a wide margin. And their governor is an invader-loving moron.

  • youhavetherighttoremainsilent

    on friday a 32 yr old white man at a bus stop 130 pm broad daylight near the inner harbor was attacked for sport by 8 blacks one held his feet another kicked his 15 times in the head even after he was out. hes in a med induced coma at shock trauma with 4 skull fractures. BROAD DAYLIGHT…… IN CENTER CITY… if you enter baltimore  CARRY A CONCEALED HANDGUN IF YOU WANT TO SURVIVE THE EXPERIENCE.

    • The__Bobster

      And make sure you have enough bullets in the clip.

      • Michael_C_Scott

        Magazine.  A “clip” is something entirely different.

      • Nicholai Hel

         A folding knife of any size is legal to pocket in Maryland.

        • Michael_C_Scott

          Get a melon knife in that case.

          • Nicholai Hel

            You meat a fruit tester?

            The flip-side in MD is that any concealed fixed blade, even if it is of the two inch neck-knife variety can get you busted. But a 17 inch folder is okay.

            If you are not black you are potential prey in Baltimore. So act accordingly. Don’t draw attention to yourself. Keep your stinger sharp.

  • This is too much crazy.  Who exactly is going to listen to all this conversation?  And who exactly talks on a bus?  Except for the crazy fools talking to themselves? (that probably includes you too if you like to talk to yourself in public places and think that it’s OK as long as you hold a little plastic box to your ear.  Doesn’t matter, you’re still obnoxious and probably crazy…)

      What we do need is MUCH higher resolution on the millions of video surveillance cameras.  Every time that a crime video appears, it’s almost impossible to tell image who the criminal actually is.  They have to be identified by clothing and approx height/weight and race.  These clues lead detectives to question the usual suspects until they get enough information (usually from the criminal’s friends informing on them) to identify the perp.

    Video surveillance cameras can tell that a crime has happened , at what time, and by number and type of people involved, but they are rarely of clear enough image to be admissible in court.

    Another idea to develop would be to use cell phone video cameras to send a continuous stream of video (or one high-resolution photo per second) to an external recording service when the phone owner feels that they are in a dangerous situation.  A small camera that attaches to the shoulders of a person’s clothing would be a good idea, as it could ‘watch your back’ and either warn you when a person is making a sneak attack /sucker punch or, photograph the attacker in high resolution for making a legal case (either criminal or civil to recover medical expenses) against them later in court.

    • IstvanIN

       I always wondered why, in this day of massive flash memory, surveillance videos are so jerky and grainy, as if they are stop motion video tape.  My phone give scarily sharp pictures and it is a basic 3 year old LG.  And they have auto focus these days.

  • I have a white  friend who is an electrical contractor who just won a Federal contract to install video cameras on the grounds of public housing projects with the ostensible objective of curbing drug dealing and other criminal activity in that koomoonity.

    He confirmed my suspicion that the local homies will trash the entire system with a few days of it going on line. Why bother with any of this nonsense anyway? There simply aren’t enought willing prosecutors, willing judges, and prison assets to do much of anything abount any of this BRA disfuntionality,

    • Howard_W_Campbell

      Once it is commonplace to install cameras in Section 8 housing, it is not much of a leap to mandate it in new home construction. Soon after that, you will be required to have big brother cameras in every room of your house. After Hurricane Katrina, the Chief of Police in Houston actually floated a similar plan. As with “gun control” laws, these will be used against whites.

      What would it cost taxpayers (from the state and the federal government) to sift through all of the conversations that are recorded daily on buses?

      • Michael_C_Scott

        In my home?  I would simply dismantle the security cameras.  Cutting power at the breaker box and disabling the cameras by spray-painting the lenses black before restoring the power would be another option.  Someone good with electronics and computers could probably disable the cameras and have his home computer provide whatever video and audio feed he wanted, straight to the original camera cable, including footage of the same rooms and the same furniture in them, but no people.  In fact, since nearly everything is digital today, instead of analog, it would be easier to do that now than say, 20 years ago.

        It’s irrelevant; mandatory police in-home surveillance would never get past a Fourth Amendment challenge, unless the individual involved was a felon on parole for whom that had been made a special parole condition  Really, though; anyone they’re THAT worried about simply doesn’t get parole.

  • EndTimesComing

    What’s the big deal.  Nobody but blacks ride the bus there anyway.  And THEY don’t care if they are filmed or recorded.  Heck, they attack, then post it on youtube and worldstarhiphop.  They aren’t going to care if the bus is now recording their words.  They will probably act up even more and talk MORE trash for the recorder.  

  • This is great, we will have a bunch of new black-on-white beatdown videos to enjoy

  • Tim_in_Indiana

    Another reason they’ll get me onto a bus as soon as they pry my cold, dead fingers off the steering wheel of my car.

  • The__Bobster

    When will the first White person be brought up on charges for uttering something “racist”? Now that’s a real crime.

  • youhavetherighttoremainsilent

    diverse blacks attacking pizza drivers and raping joggers in baltimore

  • Michael_C_Scott

    The police were here this morning wanting me to come out of my home.  I refused, saying “No, of course I’m not coming out.” 

    The four of them then ran away after I said I didn’t understand anything about why they had come to the door.  I wanted to ask them, and did go out, but by that time they were gone.

    Perhaps we need police microphones in our homes now as well, just to make the bed-wetting classess of rabbit-people “feel safer”.

  • 1Forced_Registration

    The cost of this system is probably less than the fraud of bogus lawsuits when an MTA bus has an accident. You have a bus with 40 riders, and 100 people file lawsuits claiming to have been injured while on it… How do you prove who was and wasn’t there?  The occasional sting operation reveals the same results in nearly every black community it is tried in. 


  • sorry, but if ANY of you had taken a  big-city bus, you’d know this is a GOOD idea…   when the loud/crazy types start up, it would be NICE  to have Un-assailable evidence to counter their inevitable
      “I din’t  do nuffins” in court!

    • Michael_C_Scott

      I hadn’t thought about it; lots of people ride the bus who are too crazy or drugged up to drive a car.  A bus driver would want to have ironclad documentation as to why he called the police and stopped the bus.

      The city buses here in Colorado Springs already have video cameras above the driver’s area, aimed straight back into the bus.  I don’t know whether there are also microphones, and we don’t have nearly as many crazed homeless or drugged-up junkies as Baltimore.

  • Frank

    If any place needs a system like this it is Baltimore.  This is perfectly legal because no one has an expectation of privacy on a public bus.  The ACLU be dammed!

  • Michael_C_Scott

    Britain has already largely done this; it is probably the most surveillance-intensive nation on earth.  What has been accomplished?

    The police there actively covered up the rapes of young white British girls by Pakistani Muslim men.  Free speech is a dead letter, and public safety has been “improved” with escalating rates of shootings and stabbings while the bed-wetting classes fret themselves into a frenzy over fox-hunting.