NationStates Jolt Archive

There are no signs yet that we've reached the bottom of the slippery slope to a Big Brother society. Small steps build upon small steps, so you never realise quite how much our privacy is being violated on a daily basis.

Now the Home Office is considering giving the Police the right to access traffic cameras in real time, in order to prevent the big bad terrorism monster. Had it been suggested 20 years ago that the Police had access to such technology on every street there would have been an outcry; as it is, we've become so used to these intrusions that it's just another extension of something we expect.

Why don't they just microchip the lot of us and get it over with, rather than continue to pretend that they're not interested in tracking us all day, every day?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6903902.stm

Just imagine this: How much worst would it be if 9/11 happened under Conservative government, (shivers).

Just imagine this: How much worst would it be if 9/11 happened under Conservative government, (shivers).

It did. :)

In all seriousness, I would have preferred either of the last two Tory PM's in that situation to our Glorious Tony. It's impossible to say, of course, exactly how they would have reacted, but while I think foreign policy would have been pretty similar, I don't think that the domestic changes would have been so draconian.

It did. :)

In all seriousness, I would have preferred either of the last two Tory PM's in that situation to our Glorious Tony. It's impossible to say, of course, exactly how they would have reacted, but while I think foreign policy would have been pretty similar, I don't think that the domestic changes would have been so draconian.
Nah, I don't see Howard or IDS as particularly interested in the civil liberties issue - they all support ID cards at least. It would have been the same, probably, albeit with Labour denouncing it as a violation of our civil liberties.

I don't understand this ID cards business. You already need official photographic ID to drive a car, buy cigarettes or booze, get into clubs, travel abroad etc. What's the problem? Come to that, what do we need them for?

Nah, I don't see Howard or IDS as particularly interested in the civil liberties issue - they all support ID cards at least. It would have been the same, probably, albeit with Labour denouncing it as a violation of our civil liberties.

IDS is not exactly a shining beacon of moderate Conservatism.

Ken Clarke always jokes that he was the last liberal Home Secretary, and I happen to agree with him. Again, we can never know how they would have reacted, but I certainly couldn't see the Major government bringing in some of the 'anti-terrorism' measures we've had, and, believe it or not, I couldn't see Thatcher doing it either.

Still, it's not all bad - apparently big brother is sometimes a little short of minions

http://www.ananova.com/news/story/sm_2421851.html?menu=

'You're not being watched'

CCTV cameras in a city centre were not monitored at night because of a lack of staff - for nine months.

The 60 cameras in York, operated by the city council, were left unmanned after 9pm, reports the Daily Mirror.

Labour councillor David Scott said: "The safety of people in York was being put at risk. We don't want people to be worried."

A spokesman said the problem was due to staff shortages but the cameras were now viewed at night

"I can see your car from up here!"

I don't see why people would moan about this; if you're driving around outside, Ninjas can track your every move, and when you get to your destination they can KILL YOU WITH SHURIKEN! Compared to that, having every car journey in central London tracked and stored is really rather innocuous, and it means in the event of an attack the police can track the movements of the terrorists back to where they got caught in a traffic jam, or stopped for lunch. I think this is definitely a price worth paying!


*Sighs*

I don't understand this ID cards business. You already need official photographic ID to drive a car, buy cigarettes or booze, get into clubs, travel abroad etc. What's the problem? Come to that, what do we need them for?

It's a waste of billions of pounds on something we don't need and will do precisely nothing to prevent terrorism. Everyone admits that they would have done nothing to stop recent attacks, and it's more likely than not that they would be forged within six months anyway.

Well while I don't support CCTV everywhere etc, I do support ID cards, I think their a good card, like a 'Citizens Card' which could identify you as a citizen and entitled to robust legal, economic and political rights, it could ID you for suffrage, universal health care without cost, etc etc. I think if anything ID cards could be an enabler of rights.

Well while I don't support CCTV everywhere etc, I do support ID cards, I think their a good card, like a 'Citizens Card' which could identify you as a citizen and entitled to robust legal, economic and political rights, it could ID you for suffrage, universal health care without cost, etc etc. I think if anything ID cards could be an enabler of rights.

But we have all those things without a card at the moment...

IDS is not exactly a shining beacon of moderate Conservatism.

Ken Clarke always jokes that he was the last liberal Home Secretary, and I happen to agree with him. Again, we can never know how they would have reacted, but I certainly couldn't see the Major government bringing in some of the 'anti-terrorism' measures we've had, and, believe it or not, I couldn't see Thatcher doing it either.
Major and Clarke, perhaps not. But, I haven't seen enough Conservative opposition (indeed, I've seen, in cases of ID cards and 90 day detention, support - the two projects I object most to) to Labour's erosion of our civil liberties to convince me that they would do much different, and what opposition I have seen is to do with poor management than opposition on civil liberties grounds. I have an innate suspicion that they would be quite similar, although they would never admit it.

Well while I don't support CCTV everywhere etc, I do support ID cards, I think their a good card, like a 'Citizens Card' which could identify you as a citizen and entitled to robust legal, economic and political rights, it could ID you for suffrage, universal health care without cost, etc etc. I think if anything ID cards could be an enabler of rights.
I can already vote and access both NHS and private (if I fancy the resultant bureaucratic mess) healthcare, without an ID card. It's really a waste of money when all the 'rights' it would give me I can already access without the £300 poll tax and government waste in the billions.

Well while I don't support CCTV everywhere etc, I do support ID cards, I think their a good card, like a 'Citizens Card' which could identify you as a citizen and entitled to robust legal, economic and political rights, it could ID you for suffrage, universal health care without cost, etc etc. I think if anything ID cards could be an enabler of rights.
Yeah, exactly, see Vichy France for a perfect example of the use of such cards.

"It appears you're Jewish. Get ye to the ghettos."

Yeah, exactly, see Vichy France for a perfect example of the use of such cards.

"It appears you're Jewish. Get ye to the ghettos."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_Law

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_Law

www.why-quoting-stupid-geeky-internet-phrases-doesn't-actually-answer-the-point-made.com

www.why-quoting-stupid-geeky-internet-phrases-doesn't-actually-answer-the-point-made.com

I am sorry but your link is broken.

I am sorry but your link is broken.

So is your argument.

So is your argument.

I think the person who resorts to invoking Godwin and calling Nazi on those they don't agree with are those with broken arguments.

I think the person who resorts to invoking Godwin and calling Nazi on those they don't agree with are those with broken arguments.

And I think that anyone who goes 'hehe, I can ignore one of the most important lessons in history because of some stupid geeky catchphrase' is somewhat lacking in the debating department.

Why not actually answer what they said, rather than just quoting a Wiki link at them as if that goes in any way towards addressing the point made?

I think the person who resorts to invoking Godwin and calling Nazi on those they don't agree with are those with broken arguments.

Godwin's law has such a bad rap. Kindly read your own link.

Godwin's Law does not question whether any particular reference or comparison to Hitler or the Nazis might be appropriate, but only asserts that one arising is increasingly probable.

That's it. I'm voting Lib Dems next election. Who fancies going on a spree of destruction against CCTV cameras?

That's it. I'm voting Lib Dems next election. Who fancies going on a spree of destruction against CCTV cameras?

Alas, CCTV is here to stay, regardless of who is in power. Can you really imagine any party actually getting rid of them?

Alas, CCTV is here to stay, regardless of who is in power. Can you really imagine any party actually getting rid of them?

Are you sure it would be a good idea in all cases, even if you could?

Well while I don't support CCTV everywhere etc, I do support ID cards, I think their a good card, like a 'Citizens Card' which could identify you as a citizen and entitled to robust legal, economic and political rights, it could ID you for suffrage, universal health care without cost, etc etc. I think if anything ID cards could be an enabler of rights.

I agree, if they where on a voluntary basis, but nope, 'they' want to force it on all of us. Ohhh nooo, I aint 'avin' that!

Are you sure it would be a good idea in all cases, even if you could?

Not all cases, no. The question is whether there is a genuine reason for their presence. For one thing, there needs to be a proper study into whether or not they actually make a difference. We all automatically assume that a camera will reduce crime, but they certainly don't seem to have made a difference to crime figures.

I had an interesting discussion about them with a police detective a couple of weeks ago, who was complaining about how useless they are. He said that whenever they want to see some footage, the camera was inevitably pointing the wrong way, or broken, or the tapes have been recorded over etc. So if they're not even catching the criminals, what are they doing, except watching us going about our daily lives?

It did. :)

In all seriousness, I would have preferred either of the last two Tory PM's in that situation to our Glorious Tony. It's impossible to say, of course, exactly how they would have reacted, but while I think foreign policy would have been pretty similar, I don't think that the domestic changes would have been so draconian.

Indeed. Though Cameron appears to be Blair in al but name, both Hague and Howard hold quite enlightened, liberal views regarding Blair's Orwellian experiment.

Not all cases, no. The question is whether there is a genuine reason for their presence. For one thing, there needs to be a proper study into whether or not they actually make a difference. We all automatically assume that a camera will reduce crime, but they certainly don't seem to have made a difference to crime figures.

I had an interesting discussion about them with a police detective a couple of weeks ago, who was complaining about how useless they are. He said that whenever they want to see some footage, the camera was inevitably pointing the wrong way, or broken, or the tapes have been recorded over etc. So if they're not even catching the criminals, what are they doing, except watching us going about our daily lives?

That sounds like it could do with being looked at, if they're really that useless. You'd also have to look at any deterrant effect.
Ho hum.

At least if they're that useless they can't be being used to spy on us effectively... But then what if they were made non-useless?

www.why-quoting-stupid-geeky-internet-phrases-doesn't-actually-answer-the-point-made.com
*resists urge to register that domain name a put a 403/404 - access to rationality forbidden/no rationality was found in your argument, please check you have a good argument and try again.

That's it. I'm voting Lib Dems next election. Who fancies going on a spree of destruction against CCTV cameras?Why destroy them? Then you can get done for criminal damage. *gets out cans of spraypaint* By painting over their lens all you can be done for is vandalism. :D
"I can see your car from up here!"

I don't see why people would moan about this; if you're driving around outside, Ninjas can track your every move, and when you get to your destination they can KILL YOU WITH SHURIKEN! Compared to that, having every car journey in central London tracked and stored is really rather innocuous, and it means in the event of an attack the police can track the movements of the terrorists back to where they got caught in a traffic jam, or stopped for lunch. I think this is definitely a price worth paying!


*Sighs*Yeah, but that would be retroactive. This car was involved in a crime - where did it come from and where did it go?

What the police would get is - this car is here, that car is there, and this other car over here has just run a red light.

Though I guess there could be an argument for giving police real time access. I believe it there has been a trial going on in Bradford. One of the examples they give is that a car drove off from a petrol station forecourt without paying for petrol. The owners look at their own CCTV footage and report the number plate to the police, whom automatically begin tracking where that car is and send patrol cars to intercept it.

Not all cases, no. The question is whether there is a genuine reason for their presence. For one thing, there needs to be a proper study into whether or not they actually make a difference. We all automatically assume that a camera will reduce crime, but they certainly don't seem to have made a difference to crime figures.

I had an interesting discussion about them with a police detective a couple of weeks ago, who was complaining about how useless they are. He said that whenever they want to see some footage, the camera was inevitably pointing the wrong way, or broken, or the tapes have been recorded over etc. So if they're not even catching the criminals, what are they doing, except watching us going about our daily lives?

Also there is soooo much of the stuff to trawl through. The amount of crime that has been stopped as it was being commited is negligable, even the amount of vidoe tape evidance for crimes that have already been commited is slight.

We are being watched, but the overall effect this has on crime, or the solving of crime is sooo small I don't understand why we allow it.

I agree, if they where on a voluntary basis, but nope, 'they' want to force it on all of us. Ohhh nooo, I aint 'avin' that!
I even oppose a voluntary scheme: I think it wouldn't be long before it became the norm (and necessary) for showing ID for from buying drinks to opening up a bank account. I don't think such an encompassing system could stay de facto voluntary for more than a generation.

Indeed. Though Cameron appears to be Blair in al but name, both Hague and Howard hold quite enlightened, liberal views regarding Blair's Orwellian experiment.
Even when official Tory party policy is supportive of, say, ID Cards and 90 day detention? Both parties are just as bad as each other in that regard.

I even oppose a voluntary scheme: I think it wouldn't be long before it became the norm (and necessary) for showing ID for from buying drinks to opening up a bank account. I don't think such an encompassing system could stay de facto voluntary for more than a generation.

That may well be a worry, but you need ID nowadays to do these things.

Take opening a bank account, instead of taking down your birth certificate, and a letter with your address, and a driving licence, it would be much easyer to have a photo ID card.

Even when official Tory party policy is supportive of, say, ID Cards and 90 day detention? Both parties are just as bad as each other in that regard.

So vote for the third option. Go on, you know you want to.:)

So vote for the third option. Go on, you know you want to.:)

The Lib Dems are only a third option in that they say whatever the other two parties aren't saying. They have no beliefs.

So vote for the third option. Go on, you know you want to.:)

Umm you're not suggsting Veritas? or the BNP now are ya!

Ahh! ID cards are the absolute WORST thing you could possibly do! Why, in your own country, would you need a card to LIVE? Not to mention ID's are the absolute biggest step towards dystopian Britain in the first place! Things like this are almost sickening to me. The government exists to serve the people, so why should it be able to make me carry an id?