On Sean Hannity’s radio show on Wednesday, conservative columnist and author Ann Coulter revisited a long-standing argument over surveillance cameras and whether they infringe upon individual rights.
Coulter, author of “Mugged: Racial Demagoguery from the Seventies to Obama,” counted herself on the side of the surveillance cameras. She argued that, in public places, they are more appropriate than other solutions such as creating a police state. She also noted that the cameras haven proven useful after events such as Monday’s Boston Marathon bombing.
“You know I was just thinking about that today and I’m glad you asked me that,” Coulter said. “This is a long-standing argument Matt Drudge and I have had. He is against these surveillance cameras. I am for them. I think they are the least restrictive method. I mean, we can’t prevent all violence, as we see. We can do some things, like lock up schizophrenics to cut down on mass public shootings. But leaving that aside, people can commit violence — you can’t stop everything.”
“Are we going to have, you know, armed military guards, turn half the country into a police force and be on every street corner?” she continued. “And could that have even stopped this? With the surveillance cameras in a public place — they shouldn’t be in the ladies’ bathroom — but in a public place where a cop could be. There are so many surveillance cameras going. It’s not like police watching you at all times. Otherwise you would have to have half the country watching the other half. But after something like this happens, you can go back and look at the tape. And this seems like the least freedom-infringing way to keep America as safe as you can make any free country.”