Big_Spark said:
I know several Police officers who operate ANPR systems, and the information and other data is currently held on file by the Police so "assist with future prosecutions".
That appears to support my point, not counter it.
The argument is that they may not be aware that a vehicle has been stolen or used in the commission of a crime at the time it passes the ANPR unit, but the evidence it did would assist in prosecuting the offender.
Of course - that's an obvious use that is analagous to that of the National DNA Database.
Even the Officers accept this is a falacious argument as the information is passed to one of several other Police departments, including NCIS (National Crminial Intelligence Service), SO14, DoL, DoI and various OCU's.
You've lost me - which is the argument that you (or the police) are saying is fallacious?
Yes it is an infringement of our civil liberties...
Softus said:
How, exactly? Precisely which basic human or civil right does it prevent you from enjoying?
Hague Convention on Human Rights 1956. The UK government signed this. It states that citizens of a signatory nation have the right to travel freely within their nation without undue interference, monitoring or surveillance by representatives of the Government or Security Services unless they are under formal investigation. It is our right to move freely, without being monitored, our journeys tracked and those we speak too survielled.
The right to travel freely is not affected by ANPR. You may still hop, skip, jump, walk, run, cycle, ride on horseback, fly in a hot air balloon, or by any other mode traverse the country without using a number plate.
...but it is also a system that is so open to abuse that it should be totally illegal.
Softus said:
What are you saying should be illegal? Spying? Keeping data without permission? Those things already are illegal.
It should be illegal for the harnessing of information about people into databases linked to the ANPR and similar related systems UNLESS that person is reasonably thought to be engaged in criminal activety and the monitoring is simply to add weight to evidence in a criminal prosecution. This is also the opinion of many rank and file Police Officers.
Their opinion is simply that, and carries no more weight here than anyone else's opinion, in the same way that their vote carries no more weight at any public election.
The Police and the Government do not have the right to tack us, The Police have a legal responsibility to UPHOLD THE LAW AND PREVENT CRIME, ANPR can do this without all the other data links and monitoring. The Police are quickly becoming a tool for oppression in this country.
Softus said:
Please explain how (a) the degree of oppression has changed, and (b) why you describe that change as one that is happening quickly.
I would suggest you look up the word oppression in a dictionary then apply it to having your every movement monitored. We are already the most survielled civillian population on planet Earth.
I know what oppression means, and I don't agree that monitoring equates to it.
The argument that if you have nothing to hide you have nothing to fear is ridiculous.
Softus said:
Please explain why that belief is one that is deserving of ridicule.
The argument can be ridiculed in everyway concievable.
Just one example would do, but you've provided none.
I have nothing to hide, and do not suffer from paranoia, however I am a little uncomfortable with the idea that I am unable to live my life without it being in a b****y government sponsored fish bowl.
Softus said:
Quite so - your view is reasonable, rational, and objectively presented.
I suppose if you have no life then you do not understand.
You can suppose what you like about my life, but it has no bearing on the fact that the view you present here is both extreme and bizarre.
The Government and the Police work for US, both parties need to remember that. We task the Government with running the country on our behalf, and we task the Police with Upholding the Law and preventing crime..in niether case are they tasked with spying on us and monitoring our movements.
Softus said:
Glad we agree on something rather fundermentally important at least!
No, we don't agree on a fundamental point at all - these are simply facts. My 'agreement' was ironic.
It is a fine line, I agree, but if we do not put a stop to this monitoring now, who knows what will happen next...
Softus said:
[More monitoring, presumably. Or you are expecting some kind of Spanish Inquisition?
I think that kind of flippant remark does not do you or this discussion justice.
On the contrary, it's an illustration of a sense of humour and the ability to keep things in perspective.
Afterall, with all the information being gathered, who is to say that Tony Blair and his cronnies would not use the technology to help them rig the next election..it is possible, and where then are the high an mighty values espoused by some...
Softus said:
[This one is a beauty. And you still say that you're not paranoid?
It is not paranioa to see what
COULD happen. This is not to say it will, but it is not outside the realms of possibility.
To have a vision of something that is only just possible, i.e. is extremely unlikely, is to be paranoid.
