"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."  -- Benjamin Franklin

More local governments across the state of Michigan have latched on to a new and disturbing trend, a mandatory expense (i.e. tax; more on this later) for certain businesses to pay, in order to promulgate the ever-increasing police state.  The trend started in other states before last year, such as Iowa and Mississippi, where cities required businesses to install a minimum number of security cameras on their premises (and often requisite lighting), but the first experiment into this field in Michigan happened in it's largest township on April 1, 2017.  

The Clinton Township Board in Macomb County enacted an ordinance that required the installation of security cameras — at the owner’s expense — at businesses deemed vulnerable to crime (banks, gas stations, hotels and motels, pharmacies, pawnbrokers, coin dealers and party stores selling alcohol) both inside and outside of the premises.

With a population of 100,000 and with a majority of businesses already at least partially compliant, the ordinance gave all township business owners a six month grace period in order to comply with the ordinance fully. Those who were not compliant could face a $150 fine for each day they weren't.

The ordinance looked to make the businesses and their customers safer but it wasn't without controversy.  State Rep. Klint Kesto (R-Wixom), chair of the House Justice Committee, said in a TV interview that mandating private businesses to pay for surveillance cameras is an improper “Big Brother” approach to government.  A local security provider noted that the cost for each needed camera would likely be around $1000 with about $140 each month for service fees.

This week saw another well populated Michigan city, Saginaw, enact a similar but stricter ordinance.  City leaders required most businesses to install video cameras and to turn over footage to the police on demand.  Saginaw City Council voted unanimously yesterday to pass an ordinance requiring certain types of businesses (including those covered by Clinton Twp and more) to install a minimum of three surveillance recording cameras. These must be in operation whenever the business is open, and one camera must be positioned to record the face of each person entering or leaving.

Subject to the approval and inspection (at any time) by the Saginaw police (led by Benny Hill doppelganger, Robert Ruth, pictured above), businesses not in compliance have a year to make themselves so.  Then, if "a crime occurs" involving the business (the ordinance is written very vaguely), the establishment will provide the recording of the incident to the police. If the business resists, police will attempt to get a search warrant-- or maybe conduct an 'inspection'. Businesses are required to retain all recordings for at least 30 days; if the police contact them about a crime, they have to retain their recordings of the incident for at least 60 days (the ordinance is on p. 31).

The Saginaw law is a bit far reaching in its demands and its crimping of the business owner's, their employee's and their customer's basic rights including the creation of a new tax.  Remember the individual mandate in Obamacare?   For the first time in American history, Obamacare forced all Americans to purchase a product or face sanction from the Internal Revenue Service acting under federal power, and yet President Obama claimed it was not a tax, until it went before the Supreme Court, when he and his allies insisted it was.

In similar manner, Saginaw and to a lesser extent Clinton Township, the local government forces some businesses to purchase surveillance cameras and have them in service or face sanctions under the name of security, much as Obamacare was marketed.  The Michigan Constitution especially Article IX, Section 31 being part of our rather unique Headlee Amendments, says:  "Units of Local Government are hereby prohibited from levying any tax not authorized by law or charter... without the approval of a majority of the qualified electors of that unit of Local Government voting thereon." 

These Draconian measures that require a large initial cost and modest monthly upkeep by select businesses need to be challenged as the taxes they are, otherwise five or seven people serving on a council or commission can thwart the will and rights of the electorate.

Views: 561

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

This is bad news. These Government agencies are crossing a line that may lead to totalitarianism. I can see a business wanting surveillance cameras if that is what they want but for the Government to mandate cameras is way out of bounds. Next will be facial recognition cameras and software. Where does this end? Dangerous challenge to freedom.

"Oceanians live in a constant state of being monitored by the Party, through the use of advanced, invasive technology." 1984 Orwell.

Not only is Big Brother watching you, Big Brother is insisting that you pay them for watching you and you set aside your Constitutional rights for the privilege of doing so.

Maybe the proprietors in Saginaw who are required to install this equipment can use the same outfit that installs cameras in the Michigan State Police cars. Since they always seem to malfunction at the most inopportune times, never recording anything untoward or showing the operators in a bad light, perhaps they would be worthwhile to install.

"Ignorance is Strength." 1984

“Until they became conscious they will never rebel, and until after they have rebelled they cannot become conscious.”1984

“If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face—forever.” 1984

These businesses should ban all officials from their stores. Make them buy their goods in another county.

RSS

© 2024   Created by XLFD.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service