ffs, Who is the enemy?

Did they state WHY the structures are to be removed?
 
1) Agreed with BTTB's idea.
2) Take them to court yes.
3) Would you mind posting a copy (scanned / PDF) of the letter here? Would be interesting.
 
HavocXphere said:
So I'm asking myself who the enemy here is. When communities try to combat crime they get punished for it.:confused::mad::( The municipality appears to be making a concerted effort to destroy 14 low crime areas. Why?:confused:

/rant
Click to expand...

Well, look at it from their perspective. All they see is a bunch of rich white folks trying to keep the Bantu at bay.

You could also look at the situation as an offshoot of communism: Some areas of the country have a higher crime rate than others - they're less safe. But, according to the tenets of communism, everyone should - theoretically - have the SAME level of safety. So in order to balance things out, your safety level needs to be reduced.

Think of it as doing your bit for the ANC...

Viva!
 
That might be so..... but what about the rights of the indiviual to protect his or her property? I just worry that this government will think that because they can do that to a sector of the community they will also begin to do that to individuals
 
sox63 said:
Did they state WHY the structures are to be removed?
Click to expand...

I am interested in hearing what this was as well. Surely they had to give a reason whether justified or not?

Unfortunately your options are limited by the current housing market, or I would be tempted to say sell now while the security is still there and get out.
 
HavocXphere said:
So the police and government is always going about how the community must get involved to combat crime. Lies...

Today all the residents in our security village got a letter saying that the Tshwane Municipality is demanding that we and 13 other villages remove all our security structures. Well thats going to the High Court now. Citizens vs Municipality.

These villages did extensive traffic analysis and spent huge amounts to secure everything. There are literally no major roads going through the area. The *municipality* approved the entire plan.

The village has existed for 7 years and has been a huge success. Cost a fortune...but if the police isn't keeping families safe then the community must protect itself.

Now they want to take a +- crime free area and return it to the state it was beforehand. (e.g. Before it was secured my neighbor was raided by 4 dudes with AKs).

So I'm asking myself who the enemy here is. When communities try to combat crime they get punished for it.:confused::mad::( The municipality appears to be making a concerted effort to destroy 14 low crime areas. Why?:confused:

/rant
Click to expand...

Wow ... scary ... why does this sound so much like part of the same trend of disarming law-abiding citizens? There is no obvious positive motive, only the same motive of rendering ordinary people helpless and vulnerable. This is very disturbing :/
 
grayston said:
Well, look at it from their perspective. All they see is a bunch of rich white folks trying to keep the Bantu at bay.

You could also look at the situation as an offshoot of communism: Some areas of the country have a higher crime rate than others - they're less safe. But, according to the tenets of communism, everyone should - theoretically - have the SAME level of safety. So in order to balance things out, your safety level needs to be reduced.

Think of it as doing your bit for the ANC...

Viva!
Click to expand...

And when is the ANC going to do their bit? They have their own security points and body guards, and walls that cost more than most people will earn in their lives.. Eish
 
They've probably looked at the crime stats for your area and decided that they have dropped, therefore you don't need the security.

Or it could be that the crime in a neighbouring areas has risen because the security in your area is too good. Rather than combat crime it is easier to get it to migrate. Take down your barriers and the crime in the neighbouring areas will drop as it moves to your area. Overall they will have improvements in the four (say) neighbouring areas and one decline (in your area).
 
This is the sort of thing one can expect when the country is 'governed' by a bunch of aspiring car guards.
 
HavocXphere said:
Exactly. That might even be grounds for a ConCourt hearing.
Click to expand...
The ConCourt has already ruled on this once before in the case of Bernstein v Bester 1996 (4) BCLR 449, where the Constitutional Court held that
the right to privacy extends only to a person’s life or conduct to which he or she has a legitimate expectation of privacy. For there to be a legitimate expectation of privacy there must be a subjective expectation of privacy which society recognizes as objectively reasonable. When one uses public roads or public property one cannot have an expectation that activities undertaken in public will fall within the realm of privacy. Neither would it be objectively reasonable to have such an expectation.
Click to expand...

Basically this means that there are reasonable and less restrictive means to achieve the same objective (i.e. security) especially when it conflicts with the constitutional right to freedom of movement. Tshwane Municipality, when it gave it's approval for booms, must have considered that all other security efforts such as cameras and other methods, had failed. Now they are attempting to reverse their approval. It would be interesting to see how the courts view this - do they pass and say that it is the municipality's prerogative or do they view that it should wait for the next application date (in 2 years time?). My feeling is that that they would have to wait. That said - knowing that you might not get approval next time around - does the expense of legal action now justify a gained short breathing space?

I looked into applying for booms for our suburb. The major stumbling block on the application form was that we had to prove that the security measures we had already implemented, were not sufficiently effective in reducing crime. This was a problem because our security initiatives - fencing & day/night patrols, had reduced crime by 80%. We have decided to give booms a miss and are intending to install day/night cameras, at all the suburb's access points, linked to a central control station. The cameras can read and recognise licence plates and match them against a database of registered resident vehicles. Alerts of non-residential vehicles entering the suburb, will allow us to deploy a security vehicle/s to investigate.
 
The camera idea sounds pretty good. The software you are referring to is pretty amazing, but does cost a pretty penny. I did that for a project though once. Really fun...
 
froot said:
The camera idea sounds pretty good. The software you are referring to is pretty amazing, but does cost a pretty penny. I did that for a project though once. Really fun...
Click to expand...

The Licence Plate Recognition software is about R30 000 for eight cameras. Software and hardware comes to about R120 000 for eight cameras and control center. I would guess that the installation of the whole system, with fibre-optic cables, would amount to about the same.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X