The truth about 'Road Pricing'...

masona said:
Very good post Stulz, this is why I'm also against ID card for that reason.

Here we will disagree. I am wholly in favour of ID cards. They do prevent crime. If people are forced, for a finite period of time, to carry an ID card, then all the illegals in the country can be removed, saving the nation Billions every year.

The period of mandatory possession should be set in law, and the only way it could be extended beyond that would be by public referendum to prevent Government changing things later.

We all carry ID in one form or another, and having ID on you is in no way allowing the Government to interfere with your freedom of movement.
 
Sponsored Links
ellal said:
because they don't trust you, they suspect you...but it's not just the fact that you may commit a crime - it's the fact that you may disagree!
You might feel under suspicion, and that free speech is under threat, but I don't feel either of those things, and I don't find your arguments in the least bit convincing.

Tracking in this way will probably not catch a terrorist BEFORE he commits an act
I'm curious to see how you might justify the use of the "probably".

but how many times do you think this will be used to stop protesters moving about lawfully?
I don't know. How many times do you think it will be used in this way?

how many times will 'person's of interest' be detained just long enough to prevent them doing something the government objects too.
I think it's naive to think that this isn't already happening.

Even if you have nothing to hide criminal wise, everyone has something else to hide - their individuality!
This is an argument I haven't come across before, so pray tell: why would you want to hide your individuality?

Privacy, schmivacy. If you want to do something in private, go and lock yourself in a toilet. Or go to France, where there's tons of room. Otherwise, just assume that someone's watching.
That someone can think that lowly about one of their basic rights is something that should make us afraid!
Well then, you've got to ask yourself one question. Am I afraid? Well, are ya ellal?
_____________

Edit: corrected a typo
 
Using camera's to track the movement of criminals (inc' Terror suspects) will never prevent crime, and nor is it likely to stop criminal acts prior to their commission. What the camera's will do is increase the burden of proof in any prosecution by allowing the state to show a connected chain of events that led from point A to point B.

However this is insufficient to justify their use in my opinion for the very reasons I highlighted in my earlier post.
 
Stulz said:
We all carry ID in one form or another, and having ID on you is in no way allowing the Government to interfere with your freedom of movement.
A voluntary ID card is fine - mandatory carrying of it inevitably leads to identifying yourself on demand, and IMO not OK..

But then the ID card itself is not the real problem..it is the NIR database behind the card that is a system capable of tracking a person's movement's by registering every use of the card..

indeed in the latest government attempt to sell the system..

Stephen Harrison, director of policy, identity and the passport service said, "The card can only hold limited information. It does have some potential to be used for surveillance, but mobile phones and credit cards leave more of an electronic trail behind us than the cards ever will."

but the benefits outweigh the surveillance aspects, he added

So their is a surveillance element, which I can't recall having been admitted before...and the red herring IS the card. of course the card itself holds little information and in itself couldn't be really used for surveillance - but record when it is used and link it to the NIR which will hold much more info, cross link it to every government database, and you begin to get an idea of what will be possible. These 'links' have been admitted by government after the bill went through..

So they are in fact correct about the card, but have been very successful in deflecting the general public from the true nature of the scheme!
 
Sponsored Links
Softus said:
I'm curious to see how you might justify the use of the "probably".
Ah - the pedantic semantic again.. :LOL:

Quite simply- you couldn't state it definately wouldn't help in a very minor way..

But the point is, is it acceptable to allow the mass surveillance of the population (the vast majority of whom are innocent) because there is a tiny chance that one of the bad guys might be seen driving somewhere?

And where do you draw the line..point a camera down every street, or have one outside every house, or one inside?

It is the same argument with ID...the ONLY way that it might prove slightly effective if it was mandatory to own/carry/produce on demand..the police would also have to do an awful lots of stops to produce any results..the figures speak for themselves.

arrests under section 44 of the terrorism act: 167,000

number of terrorists found: 0

(plenty of lawful demonstrators though, and people who 'embarrass' the government.. ;) )

You might feel under suspicion, and that free speech is under threat, but I don't feel either of those things, and I don't find your arguments in the least bit convincing.
I don't have to convince you...but then why don't you go outside parliament (or any designated area) and hold up a placard - and then see what happens to 'free speech'!.. ;)

Or you might want to wear a (non-offensive) political t-shirt for a similar effect!

I think it's naive to think that this isn't already happening.
Where did I say it wasn't?...a bit presumptious of you! - it will make it easier though!
 
Ellal, according to government figures published last year, there are an estimated 850,000 people in the country illegally and these people cost the nation an estimated £30 Billion annually in lost taxation revenue, medical costs, insurance related costs and those associated with the investigation of the crimes they are involved in. Remember, if they are here illegally, any work they do is a crime or has a crminal element to it. Police Intelligence and other Security Service Intelligence units have estimated that up to 70% of crime in the Uk is a direct result of the illegal immigrants in the nation, and that 90% of human traffiking and drug movements are as a direct result of this section of society.

Imagine what £30 Billion could do for the NHS or even education EACH YEAR!!

David Blunket developed the idea of ID cards, but went way too far with the idea when he tried to introduce them with Biometric technology. It is costly, unproven and a bloody mine field of problems that spiralled the costs each time an estimate was made, eventually killing the whole project.

Was this the right decision for the nation? NO is the simple answer. Estimates of the Biometric cards would be £12 Billion to introduce, a massive sum of money, and the Government intended to charge the population for this, however the money was OURS in the first place?

What the Government should seriously consider is a new system of ID card that also incorporates a persons driving license, has a scanned photograph on it and personal data in a chip, including a password known only to the card and the owner of the card, perhaps a 4 digit pin as with chip and pin cards.

Yes it would cost money to introduce, and it should be issued to the nation free, as we all pay tax. Further, every Police vehicle should have a computer installed with a bar code reader and pin machine, so that they are able to check ID's against a Database that would be updated at the end of each shift, including an upload too of the checks performed by each unit each shift' thus giving the Government valuable data on whether Officers are unduly stopping certain sections of the community as it should be a requirement that every time Officers stop someone they have their ID checked.

Then we should have legislation to make it a statutory requirement that every person carry this ID card on them, this would have a built in time limit when the legislation would expire, say 5 years after all ID cards had been issued. Further this would not be able to be extended without a referendum by the entire nation.

Then the Police, Immigration, Customs and other Security service Officers should be under instructions to check ID's randomly, setup check points at train stations, coach stations, bus stations, Cinema's etc, including roadside checks.

Failure to provide your ID should be an £80 fine, those who are here illegally could then be rounded up for deportation. Any person found harbouring an Illegal immigrant should face a minimum of 5 years jail (no parole). Any person attempting to provide or actually providing a false ID should be imprisoned for a minimum of 10 years (no parole). Any person who allows another person to use their ID for any reason should be liable to a fine of not less than £5000 or face up to 5 years imprisonment at the discretion of the judge. Any person that is knowingly employing an Illegal immigrant must face a minimum of £50,000 fine and 7.5 years imprisonment.

Yes the damned liberal rights book bashers will have a fit at this action, but we have a right to defend our nation, this is a war. Those here illegally are, according to official information, almost certainly to be involved in crime, ranging from tax evation to people trafficking and terrorism. They are here illegally, so they cannot work legally, even if an employer dedcucts tax and NI from them, they will pocket it as they cannot declare it to the authorities.

Lets face facts, this would cost billions to implement, but it would also pay for itself in no time.

Further, many crimes of fraud would prove difficult or impossible to perform. Chip and Pin has helped, but if you have to show your ID everytime you use a Credit/Debit or other payment card, then this type of fraud can be knocked on the head. A unique code for the ID card could be registered with credit card companies, banks and online payment systems, without this along with payment card details would render the sale void, thus helping to reduce online fraud. This system could be part funded by the Banks, online payment organisations and interested parties as they all stand to benefit from a reduction in fraud and thus lowering costs.

Would this be easy to implement, of course not, it would be a mine field, but it should be done, the things that pay the biggest rewards are never easy, and they can be painful, but it is in the interest of every person in this country and the nation as a whole. Most foriegn nationals here legally would likely agree, most have ID cards from their mother country and do not have an issue with carrying one, and it could actually make the process of entering the country more streamlined for the genuine as more resources could be made available as less is needed to investigate the illegals.

I do not expect the liberals in this nation to be happy with this notion, but as I said, this is a war, and one that is actually costing this nation more than the conflict in Afghanistan and Iraq combined. If you want to continue paying about £500 a year for illegals in this nation then so be it, personally I would rather the money spent on health and education.
 
ellal said:
Softus said:
I'm curious to see how you might justify the use of the "probably".
Ah - the pedantic semantic again.
If you think it's pedantic to ask you to define a word that has no place in a straightforward sentence, then mea culpa.

Quite simply- you couldn't state it definately wouldn't help in a very minor way.
Well I'm thankful you didn't put in a complex way. :rolleyes:

But the point is, is it acceptable to allow the mass surveillance of the population (the vast majority of whom are innocent) because there is a tiny chance that one of the bad guys might be seen driving somewhere?
Innocent? Really? I find that there are very few people I come across, friends and family included, who aren't prepared to engage in a little light insurance fraud, or who would speak up if given too much money in their change in a shop or if something were missed off a restaurant menu, or who declare all tips and gratuities to the tax office.

Given that I've even been called "stupid" for taking the honest line in all of those things, you have a very long way to go to convince me that a net cast wide and long would catch many dolphin in amongst the tuna. Almost the whole population is corrupt in some way or other.

And where do you draw the line..point a camera down every street, or have one outside every house, or one inside?
Clearly I reserve the right to have on my property only what I actively choose to have here, but other than that I really don't give a rats ar*e.

It is the same argument with ID...the ONLY way that it might prove slightly effective if it was mandatory to own/carry/produce on demand..the police would also have to do an awful lots of stops to produce any results..the figures speak for themselves.

arrests under section 44 of the terrorism act: 167,000

number of terrorists found: 0

(plenty of lawful demonstrators though, and people who 'embarrass' the government.. ;) )
Suddenly the hard figures have disappeared again - how many is "plenty"? :rolleyes:

You might feel under suspicion, and that free speech is under threat, but I don't feel either of those things, and I don't find your arguments in the least bit convincing.
I don't have to convince you...but then why don't you go outside parliament (or any designated area) and hold up a placard - and then see what happens to 'free speech'!.
:shrug:

Or you might want to wear a (non-offensive) political t-shirt for a similar effect!
And yet, I don't.

I think it's naive to think that this isn't already happening.
Where did I say it wasn't?
ellal said:
how many times will 'person's of interest' be detained...
When you wrote "will", did you mean "does"? If so, why didn't you write "does"?
 
Stulz said:
Here we will disagree. I am wholly in favour of ID cards.
No problem, I respect people opinions
They do prevent crime.
In the UK, we have more CCTV cameras than any other counties in the world and yet we now has the worst crime rate in the world. I think the best way is more police on the beat. The ID cards in Spain didn't prevent the terrorists and suicide bombers on the train bombing.
We all carry ID in one form or another, and having ID on you is in no way allowing the Government to interfere with your freedom of movement.
We are going to lose more our privacy & freedom because of the police state and who's will have control over the ID cards?
 
Stulz said:
Ellal, according to government figures published last year, there are an estimated 850,000 people in the country illegally and these people cost the nation an estimated £30 Billion annually in lost taxation revenue, medical costs, insurance related costs and those associated with the investigation of the crimes they are involved in. Remember, if they are here illegally, any work they do is a crime or has a crminal element to it. Police Intelligence and other Security Service Intelligence units have estimated that up to 70% of crime in the Uk is a direct result of the illegal immigrants in the nation, and that 90% of human traffiking and drug movements are as a direct result of this section of society.

Sorry, not enough to convince me. The last few gas bills I received were estimated and they were well over the odds.

These estimates seem to suit the governments needs :rolleyes:

I rather not have to carry an ID card and pay the £80 if perchance they were to catch me (but how would they know who I was???)

Ilegal immigrants are here illegally, therefore why would they apply for an ID card? And if caught without one would they be deported? No. Not gonna happen, so they will be forced to get an ID card. Then they could apply for benefits/housing/legal aid etc which would cost us even more.
 
Stulz wrote:
What the Government should seriously consider is a new system of ID card that also incorporates a persons driving license, has a scanned photograph on it and personal data in a chip

Most people would have no issue with the carrying of a card with their photo on which could be used to identify that they are who they say they are when required to do so appropriately in the fight against crime or terror or anything else.

What many are concerned about (and what will stop ID cards IMO) is the personal data in a chip bit and the right of the police (and others) to legally stop lawful people going about their day to day activities for random checks (which amounts to nothing more than a police state and should never be allowed in this country IMO).

The holding of personal data, whether it be medical, financial or anything else, is open to massive abuse as the technology is far from mature and hence the concerns of groups of people who are knowledgeable in this technical area. Why does an ID card need to hold my medical and/or financial information or, indeed, anything more than that necessary to identify who I am?

The Government is using crime, terror and illegal immigrants to push through measures which far exceed the need and WILL be used for far more sinister purposes IMO.

Nothing short of a full referendum should decide this one I feel as it affects the fabric of our society and could damage what makes this country the envy of the World irreparably.
 
masona said:
They do prevent crime.
In the UK, we have more CCTV cameras than any other counties in the world and yet we now has the worst crime rate in the world. I think the best way is more police on the beat. The ID cards in Spain didn't prevent the terrorists and suicide bombers on the train bombing.
We all carry ID in one form or another, and having ID on you is in no way allowing the Government to interfere with your freedom of movement.
We are going to lose more our privacy & freedom because of the police state and who's will have control over the ID cards?

Masona, I am not sure if that first quote above is meant to imply I said it, but I have not said that camera's or ID cards prevent crime, but they are both tools in the arsenal of weapons to combat crime

Your comment about the crime rate is pure paranoia, the UK, despite what the press says, has one of the lowest, not the lowest, crime rates in the industrialised world. France and Germany have higher murder rates, and France and the Uk have similar populations. You really should not make such outlandish statements unless you have verifiable proof to support it.

I appreciate you may simply be trying to make a point, but you, thankfully, wrong.
 
Deluks said:
Sorry, not enough to convince me. The last few gas bills I received were estimated and they were well over the odds.

These estimates seem to suit the governments needs :rolleyes:

I rather not have to carry an ID card and pay the £80 if perchance they were to catch me (but how would they know who I was???)

Ilegal immigrants are here illegally, therefore why would they apply for an ID card? And if caught without one would they be deported? No. Not gonna happen, so they will be forced to get an ID card. Then they could apply for benefits/housing/legal aid etc which would cost us even more.

Considering the Government have a history of UNDERESTIMATING a given problem that they find embarrassing, see the news reports of freed sexual predators etc that occured last year, and the fact that many Immigrants groups actually feel this figure is at the lowest end of the estimates, I think your burying your head in the sand, and equating this problem to a gas bill is simply ludicrous.

Your comments about ID cards simply imply you have no grasp of the issues at hand as your comments are trivial and I simply cannot be bothered to give them the time of day.
 
Stulz said:
Masona, I am not sure if that first quote above is meant to imply I said it, but I have not said that camera's or ID cards prevent crime, but they are both tools in the arsenal of weapons to combat crime

Stulz said:
I am wholly in favour of ID cards. They do prevent crime.

Apologies if I read it wrong


England and Wales have the highest crime rate among the world’s leading economies, according to a new report by the United Nations.
The survey, which is likely to prove embarrassing to David Blunkett, the Home Secretary. shows that people are more likely to be mugged, burgled, robbed or assaulted here than in America, Germany, Russia, South Africa or any other of the world’s 20 largest nations. Only the Dominican Republic, New Zealand and Finland have higher crime rates than England and Wales.
Crime in Japan is soaring while the arrest rate of culprits is dropping, a report has shown.


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/mai...ime01.xml&sSheet=/news/2002/12/01/ixhome.html

I can't find anywhere where the UK one of the lowest crime rate? Have you got a link I can look at?

The UK is the fourth richest nation and yet we are letting prisoners out because they won't build more prison, so more crime.one of the lowest
 
Stultz

From your lengthy post, I gather that you consider most of the ills that this country suffers from can be laid at the door of illegal immigrants!..

But this...!

Stulz said:
Then the Police, Immigration, Customs and other Security service Officers should be under instructions to check ID's randomly, setup check points at train stations, coach stations, bus stations, Cinema's etc, including roadside checks.

Do you know what kind of society you are proposing here?...no doubt softus will :rolleyes: , but that IS a crucial component of a police state!

It does amaze me that many people who are so against tracking of a vehicle can't see the notion of tracking behind the NIR - I see that you don't reply regarding the NIR as opposed to ID cards!

A car appears to be a visible form of a lot of people's idea of freedom, when a far greater threat comes from the tracking of an individual!

David Blunket developed the idea of ID cards, but went way too far with the idea when he tried to introduce them with Biometric technology. It is costly, unproven and a b****y mine field of problems that spiralled the costs each time an estimate was made, eventually killing the whole project.
Do you know something others don't?...'killing the project'?
 
Sponsored Links
Back
Top