LakotaDakota Posted April 10, 2020 Share Posted April 10, 2020 (edited) 22 minutes ago, bickster said: Oh look in related civil liberty news, this has raised its head as an idea... *insert many swear words* Think i am obviously one of the few but i have no issues at all with stuff like that, Chip me, track me, listen to my phone calls/alexa. Have 8k cameras & drones covering every single street i really don't care & not just as a response to anything virus related. Go back 6 months & would gladly say the same about general every day life. Edited April 10, 2020 by LakotaDakota Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted April 10, 2020 Moderator Share Posted April 10, 2020 12 minutes ago, Vive_La_Villa said: ok I take back the police criticism thing. But that aside I didn’t see anything wrong in asking for an example of where extra funding to education, courts and prisons had helped relax the police force? Because all the evidence is that underfunding education, courts, prisons, social services etc leads to...less social cohesion and a less effective police force that can't cope. Your question approaches the issue from completely the wrong direction 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bannedfromHandV Posted April 10, 2020 Share Posted April 10, 2020 1 minute ago, LakotaDakota said: Think i am obviously one of the few but i have no issues at all with stuff like that, Chip me, track me, listen to my phone calls/alexa. Have 8k cameras & drones covering every single street i really don't care. Hell no, absolutely 100% no. We’re entitled to privacy as a basic human right. Its only when you do something worthy of giving up that privacy that changes. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted April 10, 2020 Share Posted April 10, 2020 33 minutes ago, Vive_La_Villa said: Didn’t they get massively criticised for doing this? They have been criticised for a number of things but I'm not sure they've been criticised for reasonably applying the regulations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted April 10, 2020 Share Posted April 10, 2020 33 minutes ago, Enda said: Agreed. IMHO you’re getting a hard time from posters. I think that anyone proposing 'unorthodox' methods (without explicitly naming them) and claiming that we should be in fear of the police would get a hard time - and rightly so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted April 10, 2020 Share Posted April 10, 2020 20 minutes ago, bickster said: Oh look in related civil liberty news, this has raised its head as an idea... *insert many swear words* Not surprised. Not at all surprised. And then we'll have tiered rights depending on what category you fall in to. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted April 10, 2020 Share Posted April 10, 2020 (edited) 30 minutes ago, Vive_La_Villa said: If a person gets caught breaching the social distancing laws they will not always admit to it and happily take a fine. That is not how they are supposed to be dealing with it or how they, the police forces, said that they would deal with it. There are many options under the regulations and the fines are, effectively, a last resort. They are supposed to encourage people not to do it, tell them to go home, return them home, break up gatherings, &c. all before they either issue a fixed penalty notice or issue a summons (the choice, btw, is the police officer's to make, as I understand it). Edit: The info on the tweet below is from the NPCC & College of Policing's guidance: Edited April 10, 2020 by snowychap 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted April 10, 2020 Share Posted April 10, 2020 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Awol Posted April 10, 2020 Share Posted April 10, 2020 38 minutes ago, bickster said: Oh look in related civil liberty news, this has raised its head as an idea... *insert many swear words* Not a goer. Was only stopped under Blair last time when MI6 pointed out it would compromise all of their NOC agents. Nothing has changed on that front, this is just news creation services from Sky Views. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
limpid Posted April 10, 2020 Administrator Share Posted April 10, 2020 3 minutes ago, Awol said: Not a goer. Was only stopped under Blair last time when MI6 pointed out it would compromise all of their NOC agents. Nothing has changed on that front, this is just news creation services from Sky Views. Or that the contractor making the cards would only offer five year lifetimes and they needed ten years. No plastic card with an embedded chip will get a ten year warranty. Now an app on a phone.... Piece of piss to subvert if you control the networks. Off topic in this thread though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vive_La_Villa Posted April 10, 2020 Share Posted April 10, 2020 32 minutes ago, bickster said: Because all the evidence is that underfunding education, courts, prisons, social services etc leads to...less social cohesion and a less effective police force that can't cope. Your question approaches the issue from completely the wrong direction Ok but then surely you can give me at least one example of a country where adequate funding in those areas has led to more relaxed police force? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackbauer24 Posted April 10, 2020 Share Posted April 10, 2020 18 minutes ago, bannedfromHandV said: Hell no, absolutely 100% no. We’re entitled to privacy as a basic human right. Its only when you do something worthy of giving up that privacy that changes. My view is something in the middle. Privacy is somewhat of a fallacy in this world anyway, it's about how the data is used. I have zero issue with pretty much every part of my life being available to the appropriate authorities. Doesn't mean it should be publically available and there should be a good reason for that data to be accessed, but I have no issue with it being taken. Much like police might get authority to tap phones etc. I don't think people should be filmed within their own home but outside the home I'd have zero issue with CCTV on every street. I can't think why people would not want authorities to have access to this for anything other than dodgy reasons. There will be issues about who can access the information, what qualifies as being a reasonable reason to access it and to what depth data is collected (for example, who you contact but not what is said?). Obviously it wouldn't be reasonable for any ex-partner for have access to your location etc! If all this data was available, crime would plummet for a start! I'm just not sure what I'd lose other than some fake theory of privacy. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vive_La_Villa Posted April 10, 2020 Share Posted April 10, 2020 28 minutes ago, snowychap said: That is not how they are supposed to be dealing with it or how they, the police forces, said that they would deal with it. There are many options under the regulations and the fines are, effectively, a last resort. They are supposed to encourage people not to do it, tell them to go home, return them home, break up gatherings, &c. all before they either issue a fixed penalty notice or issue a summons (the choice, btw, is the police officer's to make, as I understand it). Edit: The info on the tweet below is from the NPCC & College of Policing's guidance: Fair enough but I don’t think they should be. The more people that can get away with it the more they will. In my opinion Engage, Explain, Encourage before enforce will just mean I’ve only been caught a few times so I should be ok for a while. Im not saying they’re aren’t over zealous police officers, far from it. Unfortunately I think there a lot more people that will take the piss out of the reasonable laws in place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted April 10, 2020 Moderator Share Posted April 10, 2020 3 minutes ago, Vive_La_Villa said: Ok but then surely you can give me at least one example of a country where adequate funding in those areas has led to more relaxed police force? You really aren't getting this are you? I can only refer you to the post you've quoted Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vive_La_Villa Posted April 10, 2020 Share Posted April 10, 2020 2 minutes ago, jackbauer24 said: My view is something in the middle. Privacy is somewhat of a fallacy in this world anyway, it's about how the data is used. I have zero issue with pretty much every part of my life being available to the appropriate authorities. Doesn't mean it should be publically available and there should be a good reason for that data to be accessed, but I have no issue with it being taken. Much like police might get authority to tap phones etc. I don't think people should be filmed within their own home but outside the home I'd have zero issue with CCTV on every street. I can't think why people would not want authorities to have access to this for anything other than dodgy reasons. There will be issues about who can access the information, what qualifies as being a reasonable reason to access it and to what depth data is collected (for example, who you contact but not what is said?). Obviously it wouldn't be reasonable for any ex-partner for have access to your location etc! If all this data was available, crime would plummet for a start! I'm just not sure what I'd lose other than some fake theory of privacy. I agree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted April 10, 2020 Moderator Share Posted April 10, 2020 4 minutes ago, jackbauer24 said: If all this data was available, crime would plummet for a start! I'm just not sure what I'd lose other than some fake theory of privacy. This bit is quite patent nonsense as demonstable by our very own country. We are by far the most surveiled population in Europe already and it is not dropping the crime rate, the only reason the crime rate may appear to drop is under reporting, which is happenning massively in the UK The police are already using facial recognition cameras in London to attempt to identify criminals / suspects. The failure rate is absolutely astounding. It's OK to say you have no problem with it, until its you banged up for a day, presumed guilty , then it turns out many hours later that you aren't who they though you were. Happening to a lot of black people 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vive_La_Villa Posted April 10, 2020 Share Posted April 10, 2020 1 minute ago, bickster said: You really aren't getting this are you? I can only refer you to the post you've quoted Bicks, I’m seeing it like this.... VLV - Police need more power. Maybe they need to be feared? Poster - instead of police having more power or being feared we have more funding towards education, courts and Prison? VLV - I agree but I don’t think that’s going to happen. Would love to hear of examples where more funding has lead to a more relaxed police force? Poster - why don’t you go and research it yourself and then come back to me. Nope. I don’t get it mate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted April 10, 2020 Moderator Share Posted April 10, 2020 1 minute ago, Vive_La_Villa said: Bicks, I’m seeing it like this.... VLV - Police need more power. Maybe they need to be feared? Poster - instead of police having more power or being feared we have more funding towards education, courts and Prison? VLV - I agree but I don’t think that’s going to happen. Would love to hear of examples where more funding has lead to a more relaxed police force? Poster - why don’t you go and research it yourself and then come back to me. Nope. I don’t get it mate. So you've still absolutely ignored the post you've quoted and the point I've made twice. Can't help you Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackbauer24 Posted April 10, 2020 Share Posted April 10, 2020 1 minute ago, bickster said: This bit is quite patent nonsense as demonstable by our very own country. We are by far the most surveiled population in Europe already and it is not dropping the crime rate, the only reason the crime rate may appear to drop is under reporting, which is happenning massively in the UK The police are already using facial recognition cameras in London to attempt to identify criminals / suspects. The failure rate is absolutely astounding. It's OK to say you have no problem with it, until its you banged up for a day, presumed guilty , then it turns out many hours later that you aren't who they though you were. Happening to a lot of black people You could, probably are, quite correct. But I didn't state any one means as a proof on concept. I meant in theory. For example, if the technology existed to track me personally to within 1 meter every minute of every day, I wouldn't have an issue with it. I didn't say that it was possible in practice, just that in theory losing this 'privacy' is not an issue for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vive_La_Villa Posted April 10, 2020 Share Posted April 10, 2020 2 minutes ago, bickster said: So you've still absolutely ignored the post you've quoted and the point I've made twice. Can't help you Which one? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts