To the editor:

Regarding the ACLU Op-Ed by Steven Brown and Hannah Stern in the September 8 edition of the Phoenix, I have to ask, what part of privacy do they feel is being violated in a public space? Do they suspect that citizens will be conducting themselves in such a manner, in public space, that it should not be filmed? The Bristol Police Department is not requesting to invade our homes they simply requested to monitor a public road and bridge.

And what a dreadful thought that the ACLU believes the cameras “would become tools for routine law enforcement purposes,” and “access to information gathered by the cameras would also be available to every other police department in the state.” Most would call that protecting the public interest and not “truly Orwellian,” as they allude too. Is it the ACLU objective to protect our rights, as they claim, or to aid and abet the criminal elements? Please stop with the Orwellian scare tactics, there’s enough craziness in our country right now.

If cameras can be used to deter crime, help solve a case, perhaps prevent a suicide in the case of the Mount Hope bridge or just enhance public safety then I say, “strike a pose." Perhaps the privacy the ACLU feels is being violated is something they should be doing in the comfort of their homes and not in front of public cameras to begin with.

Any support or technology we can provide to our police departments should be considered a win for the law abiding citizens throughout our state.

May I suggest that Mr. Brown and Ms. Stern take off their rose colored glasses and get in touch with reality.

As a sidebar, I would be curious about the ACLU legal view on body cams now being required by many police departments. After all, our police are public servants serving in public space. I leave that question for a rainy day, I suspect the ACLU has enough on their plate right now dodging Mr. Orwell.

Paul J. Salesi
249 Hope Street