‘Virtual Deputy’ Surveillance Cameras To Be Deployed In Southern Florida

High-definition ‘virtual deputy’ surveillance cameras are expected to be deployed by the end of the year to record traffic and street crime in Southern Florida, Broward County officials said Friday.

Already being utilized in Miami, the wireless devices are scheduled to come to the city of Fort Lauderdale along Sistrunk Boulevard, at the beach, and in Flagler Village. They are also planned to come to Hollywood, FL.

The cameras are planned in the Central Broward unincorporated zone sites of Franklin Park, Roosevelt Gardens, Washington Park and Boulevard Gardens, stretching from Broward Boulevard to 16 blocks north of Sunrise Boulevard, and from Northwest 24th Avenue to Northwest 31st.

The area, plagued by poverty, has seen unemployment rates as high as 44 percent but Broward Sheriff Scott Israel says crime is down.

“It’s great to say crime is down,” he said, “but you say that to the victims of crimes today, they’re happy crime is down, but they were the victims of a crime.”

Farther west, another unincorporated neighborhood, Broadview Park, also is expected to be fitted with surveillance cameras.

BSO Capt. Andrew Dunbar purposed the cameras at a county meeting citing their ‘success’ in other areas like Lauderdale Lakes where 12 cameras along the C-13 spy on Vincent Torres Memorial Park, the Hawaiian Gardens residential complex and other areas.

Dunbar has proposed 13 WildFire brand high-definition, wireless cameras in the central unincorporated area, and eight in Broadview, placed at entry and exit points to the neighborhoods.

“It’s a force multiplier,” he said. “It means I have more eyes on the area so we can respond effectively. We can deter people from coming in that have illicit ideas of committing crime.”

Officials say Deputies can tune in to the pictures from their patrol car laptops and even zoom in, pan left or right, or tilt the camera angle. If a crime were reported, a deputy could rewind footage and grab a car’s tag number.

Not surprisingly, privacy advocates have voiced some concern but for the most part the proposal has met little resistance.

Lifelong resident and member of an advisory board for the area, Marquis Curry, says he raised questions about whether “the Big Brother type thing,” as he called it, would be used against homeowners and taxpayers.

Officials assured him they would not, he said.

Privacy advocates allege the ‘virtual deputies’ are being deployed to increase revenue for local departments who primarily use the devices to prosecute traffic violations.

Since there is no traditional accuser for motorists to confront when charged with a moving violation, the cameras are unconstitutional, they say.

Also, there is no way of legitimately knowing whether or not a police officer witnesses a violation in real time which means no one can personally testify to the circumstances of the alleged violation.

Furthermore, opponents of the proposal say that just because a camera unit was operating properly when it was set up does not mean it was operating properly when a picture is taken of any given incident.

Since the early 1990s, traffic and surveillance cameras of all sorts have been used by state and local law enforcement agencies in at least 26 states around the country.

In Florida, a law went into effect in July 2010, which allows all municipalities in the state to use cameras on all state-owned right-of-ways.

No cost estimate for the ‘virtual deputies’ has been determined yet by Broward County officials but County Commissioners are expected to legitimize their purchase, by vote, in the coming weeks.


Scarce Original Authentic Supernumerary Palestine Police Ghaffir Cap Hat Badge picture
Scarce Original Authentic Supernumerary Palestine Police Ghaffir Cap Hat Badge

Ww I Uruguayan Police Officer Full Dress Kepi Hat Cap With Red Pom Pom Very Rare picture
Ww I Uruguayan Police Officer Full Dress Kepi Hat Cap With Red Pom Pom Very Rare

Vintage Antique Policemans Cap Hat With Police Buttons picture
Vintage Antique Policemans Cap Hat With Police Buttons

Vintage  Nypd Police Riot Helmet, Cap, Shoulder Holster And More picture
Vintage Nypd Police Riot Helmet, Cap, Shoulder Holster And More

Chilean Carabineros Police General Highest Rank Embroidery Hat Cap Scarce  picture
Chilean Carabineros Police General Highest Rank Embroidery Hat Cap Scarce

Asa J

works primarily as an independent advertising consultant employing grass roots strategies to raise awareness about businesses in their local communities. He has an Associates of Arts Degree and is currently pursuing a Bachelors of Communications/Advertising Degree at Appalachian State University. He is Founder of Police State Daily. His work has been referenced in places like The Washington Post and Esquire Magazine.
If you enjoy Asa’s work at CopBlock.org, please consider tipping him Via PayPal or donating $1/month to the CopBlock Network. You can also purchase awesome CopBlock.org Gear from the store.

  • keepitreal

    On average, you’re on somebody or others video system 87% of the time you are not in your house. It’s nothing new. A bit more advanced, perhaps, but not new. And if the area is subject to as much crime as this article mentions, most of the residents and business owners in the area probably not only don’t object, but actually welcome the technology. And yet once again, here’s a story Copblock should not be concerned with. Unless there’s a problem with making it easier to catch crooks.

  • keepitreal

    And as for the concern that they’ll be used as “revenue generators” for traffic violations, drive responsibly.

  • John

    Spoken like a true government bootlicker

  • Chicago Style

    What, you never heard of (VLC) Visible Light Communication, (V2V) Vehicle-to-Vehicle or (V2I) Vehicle-to-Infrastructure communication with the use of LED lights? There is all kinds of information on Li-Fi technology.


  • DeekS

    no… the sheriff said crime is DOWN in the area…

  • keepitreal

    Spoken like a fucking moron, who is too fucking stupid to look at more than one posting before spewing moronic comments. And driving responsibly is not being a bootlicker, you freaking waste of human life. Fucking douchebag idiot. And even if I was a bootlicker, it’s better that what your mom licks to get her crack addiction filled. Nasty ass crack whore that she is.

  • Meredith76

    Yep, bootlicker for sure

  • Patriot

    You are completely right, Meredith. You can tell by his low IQ name calling, he’s the perfect candidate for FEMA camp USA

  • Anonymous

    I smeeeeeelllllll aaaaaa boooootttliiiiiicker!

  • Sovereign Saal

    Guys, I’ve seen keepitreal post before. He’s the typical sheep that likes to willingly give away his rights, so the government can keep him safe. Guys like this are what got us into this police state in the first place

  • Matt

    I’m sure keep it real is giving the whole police department a good boot shine with his tongue right now

  • keep@gmail.com

    He just wanted to spew his undying love for the police state

  • Common Sense

    Eat it up. Bask in the new world.

  • keepitreal

    Yep, that’s all I do here, supporting the police state. Just ask anybody. LOL. Stupid fucking crack head.

  • keepitreal

    Really? So 90% of my posts aren’t against the shit cops tend to pull? Stupid asshole.

  • keepitreal

    Yep. And just above me is your mother, giving them all a sack shine.

  • keepitreal

    Not a bootlicker, but even if I was, at least I’m not a fucking ignorant crack whore. Like you. I had to add the like you part because thinking that I’m a bootlicker here points out that you have some serious issues with comprehension. Idiot. Like I have repeatedly said, go back and read my posts. Some of you are letting fanaticism interfere with your thinking processes.

  • keepitreal

    Low IQ? No, that would be you and the rest of the fucking morons who accuse me of being a bootlicker. When 90% of my posts would be calling the cops out on abuses. But hey, it’s not my job to educate the morons of the world. Probably not possible anyway. Some people are just that stupid, you know?

  • keepitreal

    Fuck off, moron. You have no idea what you’re talking about.

  • JC

    So the city put up crime cameras. They do help.

  • keepitreal

    Especially around Winter Park. Helps to keep the livestock safe from serial predators like you.

  • RAD

    The thing is it won’t be used to catch crooks, it’ll be used to help the government crooks catch more prey.

  • WD!

    keepitreal is not a bootlicker. People can have a different opinion without being “us” or “them”. Name calling and pointless arguing gets us nowhere. I’m not a fan of cameras in public, but have 7 on my property, so who am I to judge? I wish people wouldn’t try to polarize every arguement, this isn’t Fox “news” people!!

  • t

    “Spy on”

    Last I checked…..its call PUBLIC and there’s is no right to privacy there right? That is how it goes there CBers right?

  • t

    “87%” of the time.

  • whoopsydoodoo

    This is not about an expectation of privacy in a public space, but about governments tracking and monitoring people real-time without any authority.

    As you often express reverence for the law, lets talk about the law. The constitution places restraints on government authority. Please point to the place in the constitution that grants government the authority to purchase and use this technology to police the activities of members of the public

  • whoopsydoodoo

    As the surveillance grid expands, so too increases the reach of the police state to rob, kidnap, and cage people for petty, victimless offenses.

    The people operating those 87% of private video systems do not make a career out of throwing peaceful people in cages. They are not manning control booths watching real-time footage or sending out armed gang members to commit acts of violence

  • keepitreal

    LOL. There you are again, spewing off about things you know nothing of. Yes, moron, 87%. Look it up, it’s easily verifiable. And that study is actually a couple of years old. It might even be higher now. Virtually every store, gas station, restaurant. Traffic cams. Schools. Hospitals. The list goes on and on.

  • t

    Since you seem to want to think yourself a Constitutional expert….tell me douche…what does the 4th Amendment talk about?

    Farther below the idiot @keepit real /liar guy trotted out some of his normal crap about people being recorded 87% of the time in public. While that is a ridiculous number…..let’s use it and allow me to ask, who,do,you think it is recording you? The government? Laughable. It’s private enties. Who do you think tracks you online!? The governmnet? Try Google. Drones? It again isn’t the governemt. Almost all private parties.

    I’ll,try to remeber to check back to,this to see if you answer. About the 4th Amendment and privacy. I’m betting you won’t get it though.

  • whoopsydoodoo

    Repeating the same nonsense isn’t an argument. The question is simple: Does the constitution grant a specific power to government to video-surveil members of the public? No? Then they lack the authority to do it.

    As for keepitreal’s comment below, I will quote the comment of an astute Guest: “The people operating those 87% of private video systems do not make a
    career out of throwing peaceful people in cages. They are not manning
    control booths watching real-time footage or sending out armed gang
    members to commit acts of violence”

  • t

    Does the Constitution say that they can’t?

    One of the things clearly outlined in the Constitution for the GOVERNMNET to do is to,protect its citizens.

    So again…..does the Constitution sat that they can’t observe you in a public place or from a public place?

    I’ll help you out some…..the answer is clearly “no”.
    There no difference here than if an officer was standing there in person.

    I’d say nice try. But it really wasn’t. It was really weak and not well thought out.

  • t

    Geez idiot.

    Your not in those places all the time idiot. PUBLIC is REALLY R E A L L Y BIG.
    Really big. Really….it’s big. As in…there’s is a lot of it. Parks, and fields and woods and lakes and rivers. Sidewalks and streets and highways. Almost everyplace you mentioned….PRIVATE.


  • whoopsydoodoo

    “Does the Constitution say that they can’t?”

    It’s well established that outside of a list of enumerated powers granted to it by the constitution, the government has no authority to act. The Tenth Amendment is quite clear: “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

  • t

    So let’s walk through it maybe you’ll catch on.

    What are those powers?
    What is the governmnet supposed to do? Why was it formed?

    If your bright you’ll see that I made reference to it already. But I bet you aren’t bright.

  • whoopsydoodoo

    “What are those powers?”

    You can examine that document on your own. Depending on who you talk to, there are between 18 and 30 enumerated powers. Maybe you should consult a constitutional attorney like Obama for guidance. If he ever read the constitution, he would tell you that none of the enumerated powers give the government the authority to construct a mass surveillance prison state.

    “What is the government supposed to do? Why was it formed?”

    For the same reason as all governments – to serve and enrich a powerful few and exert control over the masses

  • t

    Nice dodge.

    Now….YOU say the Costitution prohibits any governmnet agents from viewing activity in public.
    YOU say that the Constitution only allows the governmnet to do just a few things….and according to,you….watching things in public ISNT one of them.

    So again….what are those powers?
    Why was the governmnet established?

    I already told you….but come on smart guy. Don’t puss out now. You think your super duper smart and that you know the constitution…..teach me. What are those powers?

  • whoopsydoodoo

    Here ya go:

    —Article I, Section 8 of the United States Constitution

    The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defense and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

    To borrow on the credit of the United States;

    To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;

    To establish a uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;

    To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;

    To provide for the Punishment of counterfeiting the Securities and current Coin of the United States;

    To establish Post Offices and Post Roads;

    To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for
    limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their
    respective Writings and Discoveries;

    To constitute Tribunals inferior to the supreme Court;

    To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offenses against the Law of Nations;

    To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;

    To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;

    To provide and maintain a Navy;

    To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;

    To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;

    To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and
    for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of
    the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment
    of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to
    the discipline prescribed by Congress;

    To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such
    District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of
    particular States, and the acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of
    the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over
    all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in
    which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings; And

    To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into
    Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this
    Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any
    Department or Officer thereof

    See, I was right. Nothing there about building a police state surveillance system

  • t

    Lots and lots of typing…,
    And you missed it

    Go back to that part about defending the citizens….

    You could learn a lot from just reading the preamble
    All of that is in there in a very short form.

    Look at all of that about being allowed to pass the laws in furtherance of that government mandate.

    Did you ever pause your dumb just long enough to think about the 4th Amendment I pointed you to?
    While just a political concession to get the Constitution ratified….the writers were really pretty clear about “privacy”. How they hold sacrosanct the concept of the home. The GOVERNMNET is absolutely barred from you home without a warrant. Notice that they didn’t mention town square? How they didn’t express a privacy right for citizens “in public”.

    See how easy it is to get if you aren’t retarded when you look at it?

  • whoopsydoodoo

    I finally see the problem here. You believe that the people who call themselves “the government” can do whatever they want, as long as they don’t do those things that the constitution specifically says they cannot do.

    The constitution doesn’t specially prohibit them from blowing up the moon, so perhaps you think they have the authority to do so. And that is why you statist loons believe that the people who call themselves “the US government” have the authority to police the world.

    Defending citizens? Article 1, Section 8 spells out the government’s power. The preamble doesn’t grant the government the authority to do anything.

    Or did you mean the phrase “provide for the common Defense”? As ambiguous as that phrase is, do you really think the Framers intended it to mean transforming the public square into an Orwellian surveillance and grid?

  • t

    Did I say the preamble grants authority?
    Umm…..no. No I did not.

    But the preamble…..does, as it is intended to….it spells out what the rest of the documents s about.
    Did I really have to explain that to you? Really?

    “Transforming the public square into an Orwellian surveillance and grid”.

    Wow. Every time you make a small step,forward…..you then leap backwards off a cliff of reason.

    Let’s try again:
    – The “Framers” wrote a document called the Constitution…..why?
    – The “Framers” then added some amendments to,that Constitution. One of them, specifically the 4th one…..those “Framers” discuss “privacy”

    Now….true. They didn’t think about surveillance cameras in the late 1700’s. But they also didn’t think about airplanes. Or cars. Or cameras. Or assault rifles. Or meth and heroin addicts Or socialized medicine and welfare.
    But they did think about defend the people from the threats of the day. Nearby foreign armies. Natives attacking and killing settlers.

    And that’s just on the Fedral level.

    You completely missed….even though you listed it…that the “Framers” reserved all kinda of things for the state’s to do. All of that passing the laws they needed to have and stuff. You completely missed it all.

    Dude listen. You have had your ass completely handed to you on this subject. The reason for that is that you just don’t have any idea what you are talking about. You quote stuff that you clearly didn’t read otherwise you would never have posted it.
    The 4th amendment spells it out about privacy. And like you goofy CBer like to say…you can record the police when we are in public…because there is no expectation of privacy. At goes both ways.