How did the UK end up with so much surveillance?...
Discussion
RDMcG said:
NY Times article:http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/25/world/europe/25surveillance.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=britain%20surveillance&st=cse
Looking at it from the outside, it seems inconceivable to me how quickly all this happened. I lived in the UK years ago and such a thing would have been unimaginable in a liberal democratic country. What was it that caused such a significant change?. I have been wondering about this for a while.
Maybe everyone should realise this Labour government is far more fascist than they would have you believe. We are all so apathetic when it comes to standing up for what we believe in we let them get away with small victories or they are succesful in drawing our attention to "missing canoe husband" when they reel out unfavourable changes right under our nose. We let them win the battles and in the end they have won the war. Looking at it from the outside, it seems inconceivable to me how quickly all this happened. I lived in the UK years ago and such a thing would have been unimaginable in a liberal democratic country. What was it that caused such a significant change?. I have been wondering about this for a while.
Things do move on, but its very sad when we live in an Orwelian state where more and more of the things that make life nice are being taken away, money, freedom and privacy to live how we want to live.
Edited by bakerjuk on Monday 26th October 18:07
B Oeuf said:
Britians never ending quest to 'do it on the cheap' far easier to have some untrained, low paid fat bloke staring at a bunch of monitors rather than a few cops. It's why we have speed cameras, and we all know what a success they turned out to be
This is my take on it too. Cameras are cheaper than Coppers on the beat.
mybrainhurts said:
My son was kicked unconscious in front of a CCTV camera.
The assailant was known to many witnesses.
He wasn't prosected because of insufficient evidence.
Presumably the decision not to prosecute was down to the wonderful CPS.The assailant was known to many witnesses.
He wasn't prosected because of insufficient evidence.
New Labour in a nutshell - assume everybody is a criminal and keep them under surveillance, but routinely fail to prosecute genuine criminals even when their deeds have been recorded.
El Guapo said:
mybrainhurts said:
My son was kicked unconscious in front of a CCTV camera.
The assailant was known to many witnesses.
He wasn't prosected because of insufficient evidence.
Presumably the decision not to prosecute was down to the wonderful CPS.The assailant was known to many witnesses.
He wasn't prosected because of insufficient evidence.
New Labour in a nutshell - assume everybody is a criminal and keep them under surveillance, but routinely fail to prosecute genuine criminals even when their deeds have been recorded.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1223172/Po...
Because the UK deserve it. Honestly I am glad I left when I did, I knew that Labour were the worst thing to happen to the UK for a long time and I wasn't going to stick around to be proved right. I feel sorry for the good and honest people who have to endure Albion in its current state, but in reality you deserve the government you get.
Wings said:
El Guapo said:
mybrainhurts said:
My son was kicked unconscious in front of a CCTV camera.
The assailant was known to many witnesses.
He wasn't prosected because of insufficient evidence.
Presumably the decision not to prosecute was down to the wonderful CPS.The assailant was known to many witnesses.
He wasn't prosected because of insufficient evidence.
New Labour in a nutshell - assume everybody is a criminal and keep them under surveillance, but routinely fail to prosecute genuine criminals even when their deeds have been recorded.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1223172/Po...
Criminal offences tend to be.. well crimes actually.
What a badly written article full of inflammatory and misleading information to support its stated headline.
Lots of 'facts' but no actual facts. Like what are the cautions or convictions for that result in criminal records?
How about that age group are a larger proportion of the population than before?
I have no problems people getting annoyed about things but It for once would be nice to actually have the facts rather than lots of throw away inaccurate remarks that mis-represent the situation.
I was talking to a chap I work with who quoted that he heard on question time someone claiming the police could at the road side check on a thousand databases and that it was a massive infringement of human rights.
We struggled to think of even 10 and they were some random databases.
I just wish people would be full of righteous indignation based on the actual issues on not on inflammatory articles that contain half truths and wrong information. When police officers and those in the 'know' see that sort of crap it undermines any validity people may have with their actual argument.
Edited by Mr_annie_vxr on Tuesday 27th October 12:16
Mr_annie_vxr said:
Except a motoring conviction is not a criminal offence.....
Well what is it then? It doesn't appear to be a civil tort and is AFAICT prosecuted using the mechanisms of criminal law. It may not be a recordable offence ( or whatever you call it ) but nonetheless would appear to be a breach of criminal law.Mr_annie_vxr said:
Wings said:
El Guapo said:
mybrainhurts said:
My son was kicked unconscious in front of a CCTV camera.
The assailant was known to many witnesses.
He wasn't prosected because of insufficient evidence.
Presumably the decision not to prosecute was down to the wonderful CPS.The assailant was known to many witnesses.
He wasn't prosected because of insufficient evidence.
New Labour in a nutshell - assume everybody is a criminal and keep them under surveillance, but routinely fail to prosecute genuine criminals even when their deeds have been recorded.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1223172/Po...
Criminal offences tend to be.. well crimes actually.
What a badly written article full of inflammatory and misleading information to support its stated headline.
Lots of 'facts' but no actual facts. Like what are the cautions or convictions for that result in criminal records?
How about that age group are a larger proportion of the population than before?
I have no problems people getting annoyed about things but It for once would be nice to actually have the facts rather than lots of throw away inaccurate remarks that mis-represent the situation.
I was talking to a chap I work with who quoted that he heard on question time someone claiming the police could at the road side check on a thousand databases and that it was a massive infringement of human rights.
We struggled to think of even 10 and they were some random databases.
I just wish people would be full of righteous indignation based on the actual issues on not on inflammatory articles that contain half truths and wrong information. When police officers and those in the 'know' see that sort of crap it undermines any validity people may have with their actual argument.
Edited by Mr_annie_vxr on Tuesday 27th October 12:16
I think you will find the police do indeed class Traffic offences as Crimes here in the UK. The USA doesnt unless its an imprisonable offence. Oh dont you love blighty.
Mr_annie_vxr said:
Wrong. They don't.
Dangerous driving is a crime. Speeding is not a crime.
Burglary is a crime.
Bald tyre is not.
Assault is a crime.
Failing to maintain headlights is not.
You really do need to do a little research, Speeding IS a crime. Anything that gets you points is a CRIME. Just because it is not stored on the CRB doesnt mean it is a civil matter. Dangerous driving is a crime. Speeding is not a crime.
Burglary is a crime.
Bald tyre is not.
Assault is a crime.
Failing to maintain headlights is not.
It has become socially accepted that speeding is not a crime, but technically it still is, just because you and most people dont think it is doesnt mean it isnt.
Put simply, any action which is prosecuted by the state is
a criminal offence. Any action which leads to an individual being sued
by another individual is a civil dispute.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff