Police chief's 'Orwellian' fears
Discussion
Here: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6673579
I wonder what motive he has for speaking out on this? Does he think there is really an apetite in government and the senior ranks of the police to reversee what's happening?
BBC website said:
A senior police officer has said he fears the spread of CCTV cameras is leading to "an Orwellian situation".
Deputy chief constable of Hampshire Ian Readhead said Britain could become a surveillance society with cameras on every street corner.
He told the BBC's Politics Show that CCTV was being used in small towns and villages where crime rates were low.
Mr Readhead also called for the retention of some DNA evidence and the use of speed cameras to be reviewed.
His force area includes the small town of Stockbridge, where parish councillors have spent £10,000 installing CCTV.
Mr Readhead questioned whether the relatively low crime levels justified the expense and intrusion.
'Every street corner?'
"I'm really concerned about what happens to the product of these cameras, and what comes next?" he said.
"If it's in our villages, are we really moving towards an Orwellian situation where cameras are at every street corner?
"And I really don't think that's the kind of country that I want to live in."
There are up to 4.2 million CCTV cameras in Britain - about one for every 14 people.
The UK also has the world's biggest DNA database, with 3.6 million DNA samples on file.
Deputy chief constable of Hampshire Ian Readhead said Britain could become a surveillance society with cameras on every street corner.
He told the BBC's Politics Show that CCTV was being used in small towns and villages where crime rates were low.
Mr Readhead also called for the retention of some DNA evidence and the use of speed cameras to be reviewed.
His force area includes the small town of Stockbridge, where parish councillors have spent £10,000 installing CCTV.
Mr Readhead questioned whether the relatively low crime levels justified the expense and intrusion.
'Every street corner?'
"I'm really concerned about what happens to the product of these cameras, and what comes next?" he said.
"If it's in our villages, are we really moving towards an Orwellian situation where cameras are at every street corner?
"And I really don't think that's the kind of country that I want to live in."
There are up to 4.2 million CCTV cameras in Britain - about one for every 14 people.
The UK also has the world's biggest DNA database, with 3.6 million DNA samples on file.
I wonder what motive he has for speaking out on this? Does he think there is really an apetite in government and the senior ranks of the police to reversee what's happening?
Some town centres are now using a camera system in which a 'person' sits in a control room and can talk to people via a microphone and speaker system.
So if for example, you drop a piece of litter they can tell you to pick it up and put it in the bin, or if you have been mugged and stabbed they can tell you to wait patiently while someone comes to your assistence.
Brilliant......
So if for example, you drop a piece of litter they can tell you to pick it up and put it in the bin, or if you have been mugged and stabbed they can tell you to wait patiently while someone comes to your assistence.
Brilliant......
FishFace said:
I love the way people dilute Orwell's writings. What garbage. CCTV is subject to strict data protection and solves immeasurable amounts of crime each year.
Constantly more honoured in the breach that the observance ... except when used to avoid giving information that is not covered by the Act - Streaky Edited by streaky on Sunday 20th May 21:29
sheets tabuer said:
About bloody time someone spoke up.
Sorry abut the promotion though
Sorry abut the promotion though
Mr Readhead has his 30 years in, all in Hampshire (started as a cadet aged 16) and therefore isn't looking for a Chief's job.
He has always been one to speak his mind, and is possibly the most straighforward, no-nonsense, forthright officers of ACPO rank I have ever met.
And by and large I think he's right on these issues.
So interesting that the artists, utilising their imaginations, seem to foresee future trends.
From elsewhere on the internet.
"Mr. Blair, ( I add, both of you ), 1984 was meant to be ironic, not an instruction manual".
Make no mistake, today's technology is but the beginning of that which the Politicians have been told will be available to them.
To further enchance a compliant Population.
Politician's wetdream.
Funny how the Senior Police Officers have qualms as they retire. Not in Office.
CC of Suffolk recently wasn't it who also expressed not on message views, upon retiring.
Piper, payment and tune calling.
From elsewhere on the internet.
"Mr. Blair, ( I add, both of you ), 1984 was meant to be ironic, not an instruction manual".
Make no mistake, today's technology is but the beginning of that which the Politicians have been told will be available to them.
To further enchance a compliant Population.
Politician's wetdream.
Funny how the Senior Police Officers have qualms as they retire. Not in Office.
CC of Suffolk recently wasn't it who also expressed not on message views, upon retiring.
Piper, payment and tune calling.
The BBC report "balanced" the CCTV debate using the example of being able to identify the July 7th bombers.....
So what...How exactly have cameras helped in this case.....identified 3-4 suicide bombers AFTER they kill 50-60 innocent people??.....If thats the best CCTV can do,get rid of the lot of them.
So what...How exactly have cameras helped in this case.....identified 3-4 suicide bombers AFTER they kill 50-60 innocent people??.....If thats the best CCTV can do,get rid of the lot of them.
BBC website said:
A senior police officer has said he fears the spread of CCTV cameras is leading to "an Orwellian situation".
Deputy chief constable of Hampshire Ian Readhead said Britain could become a surveillance society with cameras on every street corner.
There are up to 4.2 million CCTV cameras in Britain - about one for every 14 people.
The UK also has the world's biggest DNA database, with 3.6 million DNA samples on file.
Deputy chief constable of Hampshire Ian Readhead said Britain could become a surveillance society with cameras on every street corner.
There are up to 4.2 million CCTV cameras in Britain - about one for every 14 people.
The UK also has the world's biggest DNA database, with 3.6 million DNA samples on file.
yup....and the largest crime-rate in Europe...doesn't take a genius to work out it isnt working.
But then the fatal-accident rate on the roads has gone up since the introduction of Speed cameras....and their answer is to install more...
huge said:
The BBC report "balanced" the CCTV debate using the example of being able to identify the July 7th bombers.....
So what...How exactly have cameras helped in this case.....identified 3-4 suicide bombers AFTER they kill 50-60 innocent people??.....If thats the best CCTV can do,get rid of the lot of them.
As with the train announcements that "CCTV is installed for your safety and security". How is that achieved? - Streaky So what...How exactly have cameras helped in this case.....identified 3-4 suicide bombers AFTER they kill 50-60 innocent people??.....If thats the best CCTV can do,get rid of the lot of them.
adam11 said:
Some town centres are now using a camera system in which a 'person' sits in a control room and can talk to people via a microphone and speaker system.
So if for example, you drop a piece of litter they can tell you to pick it up and put it in the bin, ...
Littering is avery serious crime. The penalty (typically £75 fine) often exceeds that for assault (£50)* - Streaky So if for example, you drop a piece of litter they can tell you to pick it up and put it in the bin, ...
* Headline in London newspaper last week.
FishFace said:
I love the way people dilute Orwell's writings. What garbage. CCTV is subject to strict data protection and solves immeasurable amounts of crime each year.
Ja - we watch Crimewatch episode. CCTV caught man attacking a girl. No emergency service came to rescue this girl und even after broadcast on National News und Crimewatch - I do not recall reading or hearing that violent man was caught.
Robbery at the petrol station? Or in corner shoppe? Police take the tapes und do not find the person who did that.
Cousin had installed CCTV at her home following one break-in. She had one alarm sounding alert at police station und had the whole theft of her lawn mover und neighbour's car on tape (He mower ist tractor type
which she had "jazzed up a bit und it mow her lawn in speedy mattery terms 
) ) But police did not come until two day later und still have not found person, tractor or car
(even though car pinged a scamera und they did badger for the £60 even though they had record of this car theft ) But she live in .. North Wales.. News just in
" Staff asked to 'snoop' for police
Council staff, charity workers and doctors could be required by law to tip off police about anyone they believe could commit a violent crime. The Home Office proposals, leaked to the Times newspaper, insist public bodies have "valuable information" that could identify potential offenders. Possible warning signs could include heavy drinking, mental health problems or a violent family background. The Tories say the plans would require staff to "snoop on their customers".
Civil liberties campaigners are concerned that people could be put under police surveillance despite having committed no crime. The proposals for "multi-agency information sharing" were circulated in Whitehall by Simon King, head of the Home Office violent crime unit. They are being viewed as an attempt to close a loophole which allowed Soham murderer Ian Huntley to get a job in a school, despite previous accusations of violence.
'Worrying profile'
The leaked document states: "Public bodies will have access to valuable information about people at risk of becoming either perpetrators or victims of serious violence." It says when staff become "sufficiently concerned" about an individual, that person should be should "risk assessed" and, if necessary, referred for further attention. Mr King suggests two new agencies be created - one to collate reports on potential offenders, the other on potential victims.
New laws would also be needed to place staff under a statutory obligation to report any concerns, he adds. Supporters say the plans build on existing local arrangements used to try to prevent domestic violence by identifying those at risk. But Jago Russell, policy officer at campaign group Liberty, said the proposals left many "unanswered questions" about what should be done about someone with a "worrying profile". "How far are we willing to go in pursuit of the unrealistic promise of a risk-free society?" The Conservatives claim the policy would simply increase bureaucracy.
Shadow Home Secretary David Davis said police already had a considerable "administrative burden" without having to "wade through file after file of speculation and guess work". A spokesman for the Home Office said the proposals were at an early stage and no decision had been made. "However, the Home Office has its duty of public protection as its top priority," he added.
" Staff asked to 'snoop' for police
Council staff, charity workers and doctors could be required by law to tip off police about anyone they believe could commit a violent crime. The Home Office proposals, leaked to the Times newspaper, insist public bodies have "valuable information" that could identify potential offenders. Possible warning signs could include heavy drinking, mental health problems or a violent family background. The Tories say the plans would require staff to "snoop on their customers".
Civil liberties campaigners are concerned that people could be put under police surveillance despite having committed no crime. The proposals for "multi-agency information sharing" were circulated in Whitehall by Simon King, head of the Home Office violent crime unit. They are being viewed as an attempt to close a loophole which allowed Soham murderer Ian Huntley to get a job in a school, despite previous accusations of violence.
'Worrying profile'
The leaked document states: "Public bodies will have access to valuable information about people at risk of becoming either perpetrators or victims of serious violence." It says when staff become "sufficiently concerned" about an individual, that person should be should "risk assessed" and, if necessary, referred for further attention. Mr King suggests two new agencies be created - one to collate reports on potential offenders, the other on potential victims.
New laws would also be needed to place staff under a statutory obligation to report any concerns, he adds. Supporters say the plans build on existing local arrangements used to try to prevent domestic violence by identifying those at risk. But Jago Russell, policy officer at campaign group Liberty, said the proposals left many "unanswered questions" about what should be done about someone with a "worrying profile". "How far are we willing to go in pursuit of the unrealistic promise of a risk-free society?" The Conservatives claim the policy would simply increase bureaucracy.
Shadow Home Secretary David Davis said police already had a considerable "administrative burden" without having to "wade through file after file of speculation and guess work". A spokesman for the Home Office said the proposals were at an early stage and no decision had been made. "However, the Home Office has its duty of public protection as its top priority," he added.
FishFace said:
I love the way people dilute Orwell's writings. What garbage. CCTV is subject to strict data protection and solves immeasurable amounts of crime each year.
Got any numbers on that?
Crimes solved via CCTV evidence would be far from immeasurable; they'd be very measurable indeed.
FishFace said:
I didn't mention reduction. I mentioned solving crime. It's "immeasurable" (probably not the best word) as there aren't any statistics, basically.
So if there aren't any statistics, basically, how can you say it's solving crime?
I believe this is known, amongst scientists, as "making it up".
Todays political policing is not so much about the prevention and the detection of crime, but more about identifying both a type of crime and the individual/s that might commit such a crime before the crime takes place. With that in mind, together with the changing world we live in, and the protection of the UK economy being top of the government's agenda, new legislation is being loosely drafted to cover all future eventualities, and what the government of the day might consider a crime.
Since New Labour came to power many new Acts of Parliament have been legislated not only against terrorism and crime, but also to protect the economy of the UK. With the protection of the economy in mind, new legislation will give greater powers to the Courts, Police and HMR&C, in the case of HMR&C greater investigative powers as covered in part by PACE. These new powers will not just take affect when a crime has been committed, or against the suspect/s of the committed crime, there needs to be no evidence, merely a suspicion of intended wrong doing, and does not have to be proved, so therefore these powers will be under the civil balance of probabilities, with criminal sanctions being imposed.
So what might these powers include, well they will be similar to those of the Prevention of Terrorism Act, prevention/CONTROL orders will be put in place via the Courts under the civil head (Balance of Probalities), preventing that person/s from either travelling, leaving his home, who they should meet, where they should live, what they can do for a living, and if that is not enough, the court can authorise further restrictions to be thought up.
And what might the crime be, well certainly any type of fraud will be considered a crime, so tax credits, benefit fraud, excise fraud thereby including smuggling, VAT fraud etc. etc., but any type of issue might/can creep into new types of crime, so environmental issues could be included, in fact the government are already talking about including fishing as a crime.
It very much concerns me on the direction the UK is creaping into, sleep walking into an authoritarian police state, where laws, crimes and stealth taxes can be changed/ammended without referal to the Members of Parliament, and to that end, let us not forget that non of us know what type of Government we have in the UK in the future.
Taking these new legislations and the powers contained within the same, the new data collecting powers, civil servants, neighbours snooping on their fellow citizens, together with the introduction of ID cards, I find it difficult to believe that this is the same UK I was born into.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Since New Labour came to power many new Acts of Parliament have been legislated not only against terrorism and crime, but also to protect the economy of the UK. With the protection of the economy in mind, new legislation will give greater powers to the Courts, Police and HMR&C, in the case of HMR&C greater investigative powers as covered in part by PACE. These new powers will not just take affect when a crime has been committed, or against the suspect/s of the committed crime, there needs to be no evidence, merely a suspicion of intended wrong doing, and does not have to be proved, so therefore these powers will be under the civil balance of probabilities, with criminal sanctions being imposed.
So what might these powers include, well they will be similar to those of the Prevention of Terrorism Act, prevention/CONTROL orders will be put in place via the Courts under the civil head (Balance of Probalities), preventing that person/s from either travelling, leaving his home, who they should meet, where they should live, what they can do for a living, and if that is not enough, the court can authorise further restrictions to be thought up.
And what might the crime be, well certainly any type of fraud will be considered a crime, so tax credits, benefit fraud, excise fraud thereby including smuggling, VAT fraud etc. etc., but any type of issue might/can creep into new types of crime, so environmental issues could be included, in fact the government are already talking about including fishing as a crime.
It very much concerns me on the direction the UK is creaping into, sleep walking into an authoritarian police state, where laws, crimes and stealth taxes can be changed/ammended without referal to the Members of Parliament, and to that end, let us not forget that non of us know what type of Government we have in the UK in the future.
Taking these new legislations and the powers contained within the same, the new data collecting powers, civil servants, neighbours snooping on their fellow citizens, together with the introduction of ID cards, I find it difficult to believe that this is the same UK I was born into.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FishFace said:
I love the way people dilute Orwell's writings. What garbage. CCTV is subject to strict data protection and solves immeasurable amounts of crime each year.
The commonest offence "solved" by CCTV is public urination. That's worth giving up one's civil liberties for, isn't it?
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff