BIG Brother Has arrived--NOW
Printed From:
Category: General Forums
Forum Name: General Off Topic Forum
Forum Discription: Discuss off topic issues related to BMWs.
URL: forum_posts.asp?TID=25338
Printed Date: 21-June-2024 at 21:38
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 10.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: BIG Brother Has arrived--NOW
Posted By: B 7 VP
Subject: BIG Brother Has arrived--NOW
Date Posted: 22-December-2005 at 04:27
|
With All the assurance of Govt leading lambs to their slaughter, if you havent done anything wrong--You have nothing to fear. http://news.independent.co.uk/transport/article33 - http://news.independent.co.uk/transport/article33 The first in the World---in the land of the FREE.
------------- SAFETYFAST |
Replies:
Posted By: sleeper
Date Posted: 22-December-2005 at 04:38
|
formerly the land of the free. who the hell never does anything wrong!?! back to the rural roads then..... ------------- 
|
Posted By: Peter Fenwick
Date Posted: 22-December-2005 at 04:50
|
And here's me thinking this thread was a reference to a well known TV reality show...
------------- Entering an age of Austerity and now driving a Focus Diesel. |
Posted By: spokey
Date Posted: 22-December-2005 at 04:58
http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/transport/article334686.ece works better for me. Or not! 
------------- Ciao, Spokey 
|
Posted By: spokey
Date Posted: 22-December-2005 at 05:00
Here is something REALLY scary:
So if you just happen to be driving alongside a known criminal for a couple of miles, the police will become interested in you. Nice.  ------------- Ciao, Spokey
|
The term "associated vehicles" means analysing convoys of cars, vans or
trucks to see who is driving alongside a vehicle that is already known
to be of interest to the police. Criminals, for instance, will drive
somewhere in a lawful vehicle, steal a car and then drive back in
convoy to commit further crimes "You're not necessarily interested in
the stolen vehicle. You're interested in what's moving with the stolen
vehicle," Mr Whiteley explained.Posted By: I_MNL
Date Posted: 26-December-2005 at 11:07
|
I can't see the real logic of this. It's not going to help figth real crime, cos the crminals will know how to protect themselves. The lawful and peaceful citizens will be again the target. Shame on this ------------- Citizen of the Earth  Explorer of Life  Marie-Noëlle or nick name MNL. NOT Marie or Noëlle ALONE! Alpina D3 2007 E36 316 1998 |
Posted By: scarface
Date Posted: 26-December-2005 at 11:30
Yes, but the government looks like they're taking strong action against criminals, they probably know it won't be that effective, but it makes them look strong.  |
Posted By: livvy
Date Posted: 26-December-2005 at 15:53
What leads you to think that it won't help in fighting crime ? If we look at the Met Police, the average arrest rate for officers on ANPR intercept teams is ten times that of other officers. ------------- My views expressed are just that. Mine & mine alone. |
Posted By: spokey
Date Posted: 26-December-2005 at 16:26
Wonderful. So now if I'm quite legally and unwittingly travelling alongside a criminal, I will come to the attention of the police. Even if I don't come to the attention of the police, they still know where I've been. ------------- Ciao, Spokey
|
Posted By: livvy
Date Posted: 26-December-2005 at 17:09
Your comment is not really related to the thrust of my reply to I_MNL. I_MNL's comment & my reply were about whether this would have any effect on helping to fight crime. I believe it would & providing some reasoning why I think so. But in relation to your comment, just because your registration is logged passing an ANPR camera it doesn't necessarily mean you have "come to the attention of Police." The ANPR will highlight the registrations of cars that are already of interest to Police. The system won't highlight your registration unless the Police already have interest in it. The logged & retained registrations will be of use to Police where they wish to track the movements of vehicles that are of interest to them already also. I don't see that because your car is seen entering a petrol station is in say Norwich, it is suddenly going to make you of interest to Police. There is nothing to stop a Police officer now parking up in a road and noting the cars that drive down it without a camera being there & that would be OK. I personally really don't care if the Police want to trawl through the images that a camera recorded over the last two days & know that I was say in London today & was in Leicester yesterday. So what. When you went out in the Z1 today, you may have passed a Police car & they may have noted your car & you weren't even aware of it. Again so what, but what's the difference between that officer noting your car or the camera system doing it, other than the camera system will be more efficient in recording & retaining that information ? ------------- My views expressed are just that. Mine & mine alone. |
Posted By: spokey
Date Posted: 26-December-2005 at 17:42
As far as I can tell, what they are saying is that if you travel a certain distance in convoy with a known criminal, you will come to the attention of the police. Now, I don't know about you, but I'm not going to stop and ask every motorist I travel alongside whether or not he or she is a criminal in the process of committing a crime, so that I can ascertain whether or not it is safe for me to drive alongside them. ------------- Ciao, Spokey
|
Posted By: livvy
Date Posted: 26-December-2005 at 17:56
And how would that differ from now, where they observe a criminal travelling on our roads that they have interest in & observe you travelling alongside that criminal ? Again the only difference will be that they see it with their own eyes in one case & in another a camera sees it. Neither on it's own means you are connected with that vehicle & what it's occupants are concerned in. In both cases you would have been unaware & anything Police could have deduced from the camera images they could have equally deduced from what they saw with their own eyes. So again I don't see a problem, as how will the camera make you a criminal or look more guilty, than if a Police officer had observed the same thing for themselves ? Both will require some evidence. Look at the flipside as well, there may be times that the cameras could help you prove that you were nowhere near a stated location where false allegations are made against you. ------------- My views expressed are just that. Mine & mine alone. |
Posted By: spokey
Date Posted: 26-December-2005 at 18:30
Really? Well, I'm sure that the police already do every possible check before they randomly accuse someone, so that doesn't really do anything for me. Fact of the matter is: the ANPR blanket coverage will make lazy policing even easier. Just like scameras do. ------------- Ciao, Spokey
|
Posted By: livvy
Date Posted: 26-December-2005 at 18:46
Yes I think it will make Policing easier & I think it will lead to more criminals being arrested as it has with ANPR use in London. What as I say, I don't see it doing, is adversely affecting the law abiding public. ------------- My views expressed are just that. Mine & mine alone. |
Posted By: spokey
Date Posted: 26-December-2005 at 18:48
Yes, what does it matter if they watch you while you're doing nothing wrong? ------------- Ciao, Spokey
|
Posted By: livvy
Date Posted: 26-December-2005 at 19:06
You mean like they can now without cameras ? ------------- My views expressed are just that. Mine & mine alone. |
Posted By: spokey
Date Posted: 26-December-2005 at 19:13
They can, but because it's a lot of work, they don't. I work with really big databases for a living, trust me when I say that I'm scared of this for a very good reason. There is a big difference between police driving around at random and some spotty oik sitting behind a computer terminal trying to suss out where his girlfriend has been over the last few days. Or some copper with a grudge being able to see your every move. Or a psychopathic copper being able to monitor your every move. Or a dystopian government being able to monitor your every move. ------------- Ciao, Spokey
|
Posted By: livvy
Date Posted: 26-December-2005 at 19:22
|
Well they can stick one up outside my house, I'm all for it. Benefits outweigh any disadvantages in my book & I'll smile as I pass them all.  ------------- My views expressed are just that. Mine & mine alone. |
Posted By: spokey
Date Posted: 26-December-2005 at 19:28
The benefits IN YOUR OPINION outweigh the disadvantages. In MY opinion they do not, yet I do not have the opportunity of going around and tearing them down. Make no mistake, livvy, in 20 years, this country will be even worse than Soviet Russia was and it will all be because the benefits outweighed the disadvantages. Do remember to smile when it's happened. ------------- Ciao, Spokey
|
Posted By: livvy
Date Posted: 26-December-2005 at 19:35
I did say "in my book" so they've got my vote of confidence. You're right you don't have the option of tearing them down, unless you want a criminal conviction. But of course no government will introduce them if they think that their proposed introduction would mean them not getting elected (because it was so against public opinion that it would cause that.) Soviet Russia ??? Get that from looking at the tea leaves ? That made my laugh right now.  ------------- My views expressed are just that. Mine & mine alone. |
Posted By: spokey
Date Posted: 26-December-2005 at 19:41
Therein lies the rub. People are led so gently up the garden path, they don't realise the negative consequences of things until it's too late. It also helps if you have some terrible threat (like, say, a terrorist attack) that you can use to justify it. When the terror is over, no-one will remember to offer those freedoms back to us. You don't have the police saying things like: "with this technology we can see where every motorist has been, so that we can spy on lawful motorists." You hear them say things like: "we can use this to eliminate criminals from the road" or "we can monitor suspected terrorists much more easily" or even " Well they can stick one up outside my house, I'm all for it. Benefits outweigh any disadvantages in my book & I'll smile as I pass them all." So that's alright, then. ------------- Ciao, Spokey
|
Posted By: livvy
Date Posted: 26-December-2005 at 19:49
|
And why would the Police want to spy on lawful motorists ? What will they gain from spying on lawful motorists ? What do you think they are going to do with the information that I went to the supermarket at 3pm yesterday ? Do you really think they are putting up cameras to get that information ? No, I don't think so. The fact that if they trawl the database they will find that I went to the supermarket, is not going to be of any consequence to them unless they are looking at me because of something else, something else that means they could have already had an interest in me from more traditional means. I wouldn't have worried about them observing that before & I'm not going to start worrying about it now because of scaremongering. I don't think now, oh no there's a Police car parked outside the petrol station, I'm not going in there in case they see me. Criminals may think like that now, not me though. Instead I'll draw comfort that they will catch some criminals with the information the cameras provide. Criminals that they may not have been able to catch or prosecute at that time without it's help. They'll be too busy with the people they are really looking for to worry about my shopping habits. ------------- My views expressed are just that. Mine & mine alone. |
Posted By: spokey
Date Posted: 26-December-2005 at 20:07
I don't know why they are putting them up. It's all very conveniently being rushed through without any kind of review or debate. That, in itself, is worrying. All I know is: as a citizen of the UK, and a taxpayer, I resent people who are supposed to serve me being able to spy on me and making me pay for the privilege. Anything untoward that they do with it is even more of an insult.
It's not your shopping habits that they will be worried about. By then, Tesco will be 80% of the market, and they'll just nationalise it. Your entire loyalty card history will tell them exactly what they want to know. If Tesco doesn't share that with them already, in the name of national security. It's going to be used to check on your associations, where you travel, do you stray over the speed limit, do you stay within the lines, do you overtake? Are you a risk taker? Perhaps you need to be watched! (And if you think I'm being ridiculous about Tesco sharing your loyalty card details in the interests of national security, reflect on this: many components of home-made explosive devices are readily available in supermarkets. Just think about the government mining your shopping patterns to see if you [and any of your associates] have bought one or more components of a home-made bomb. Then just wait for the knock on the door.  )------------- Ciao, Spokey
|
Posted By: spokey
Date Posted: 26-December-2005 at 20:10
What are they going to do with the information that you went to the supermarket at the same time as a known Al-Qaeda operative? That you were both in the soap aisle at the same time? That you were just one queue away from him at checkout? ------------- Ciao, Spokey
|
Posted By: livvy
Date Posted: 27-December-2005 at 05:40
Why do you assume that the innocent are going to be targeted & not criminals ? What purpose does that serve ? Don't say look at speed cameras, because they don't target the innocent, they target those who are committing offences. If they want to spy on you (as you call it) they can already within the law, so cameras don't change that. Why don't they spy on you in particular now ? Because they aren't interested in you that's why. Why do you think that with a limited amount of time & resources you are going to become a more interesting target because of cameras ? For one , I don't have a loyalty card for Tesco's so that's put the brakes on that & if I did it would only show that I don't purchase the constituants or bomb making materials in the massive quantities that they do. Also I am rather reassured that they know where the terrorists are & the fact that I (along with many many other people) am in an aisle next to them means exactly what ? What are they going to be able to deduce from the fact I was in an aisle next to a terrorist on one day, what evidence is that going to give them ? There were people on the tube next to terrorists & on the bus next to terrorists in July & those people were victims. That's what I'd rather not be thanks & if cameras help in preventing that then good. Lets not forget that it's not all about terrorism, their main benefit will be in helping the Police catch criminals, as I've already said the average arrest rate of ANPR officers is ten times that of other officers. Most things it will highlight is to help in catching people in stolen cars, who had jumped bail etc etc. ------------- My views expressed are just that. Mine & mine alone. |
Posted By: Nostrils
Date Posted: 27-December-2005 at 06:55
|
I thought I would have a problem with these ANPR spies, but I dont (certainly not at the moment). If they prove their worth in reducing crimes, then that can only be good. If they just want to spy on the 'general' public and be contracted out to other authorites, that would worry me, especially if they are for looking for on the spot fine moments like parking!
What is more worrying is earlier in the year there was sound bites about having all cars tracked via GPS systems - But most cars dont have them I hear you cry!.....many more do now with gadgets like Tom Tom being reduced in price over the last 6 months and probably the biggest buy this christmas - more names on a database for sale! or use by the government. Anyway, I will be closely watching the results of using these ANPR cameras to see their worth! Once they are in place, they will never be removed! ------------- Phil |
Posted By: Nigel
Date Posted: 27-December-2005 at 07:49
|
I'm dubious about these cameras Livvy, if everything is so good and above board, why, with all this technology, are they still sending out incorrect nips ? ------------- Best Wishes Nigel |
Posted By: livvy
Date Posted: 27-December-2005 at 08:23
What exactly are you referring to Nigel & how will this technology affect that ? This technology is different & very simple in that it records,logs & checks indexes against a register highlighting those that are marked of interest already. There will of course be other search facilities for the past movements of vehicles that are of particular interest. ------------- My views expressed are just that. Mine & mine alone. |
Posted By: spokey
Date Posted: 27-December-2005 at 08:31
Yeah, sure. Cameras did a bang up job proving what happened with Jean de Menezes, didn't they? ------------- Ciao, Spokey
|
Posted By: spokey
Date Posted: 27-December-2005 at 08:32
Yes, that is what worries me the most. People reviewing my movements, which are NONE OF THEIR BUSINESS. ------------- Ciao, Spokey
|
Posted By: Nigel
Date Posted: 27-December-2005 at 08:41
|
What I'm referring to Livvy, is the scamera agencies lack of ability to even look at the pictures before they send them out : http://www.traffic-answers.com/forum/index.php?topic=2768.0 - http://www.traffic-answers.com/forum/index.php?topic=2768.0 To be honest, its just not good enough, and I couldn't imagine a police officer, on speed trap duty, making that mistake. ------------- Best Wishes Nigel |
Posted By: livvy
Date Posted: 27-December-2005 at 08:54
I won't argue that I agree that evidence should be checked before any prosecution undertaken (which relates to GATSO NIPs) These ANPR cameras though will be giving information only, not starting prosecutions. The camera will give details of a vehicle of interest movements & an officer will have to use that information to assist them in their enquiry. It's not prosecution on the basis of what the ANPR camera has recorded alone. ------------- My views expressed are just that. Mine & mine alone. |
Posted By: Nigel
Date Posted: 27-December-2005 at 09:04
|
I'm not sure, ( as others have also stated), that I want my movements tracked. I have absolutely no problem with rank and file police officers knowing anything about me, wonderful people that have my full support. I don't trust their bosses though, or worse still, their bosses bosses. ------------- Best Wishes Nigel |
Posted By: livvy
Date Posted: 27-December-2005 at 09:18
Do you really think the Police have the time to look at the movements of people who they are not interested in to start with ? I think they've got more than enough on their hands to be worrying about than something like you may like to Brighton beach for 6 hours every other weekend in the summer. ------------- My views expressed are just that. Mine & mine alone. |
Posted By: Nigel
Date Posted: 27-December-2005 at 09:25
|
It goes deeper than that Livvy, I remember a Russian lady who defected to the West, then went back again because she was actually more controlled in the West than the East. Apart from the liberty issues, it will also allow this scum of a government to charge us per mile ,speed limt some of our cars etc, its all the same technology
------------- Best Wishes Nigel |
Posted By: spokey
Date Posted: 27-December-2005 at 09:28
I work with, among other things, geospatial databases. The police have already said that they will be using these ANPR databases to monitor cars that travel in convoy with "dodgy" vehicles. It is the difference between SELECT * FROM movement_record WHERE registration_no = "L1VVY"; and SELECT * FROM movement_record WHERE within_distance("100 yards") AND registration_no = "L1VVY"; All of a sudden, the police are interested in you. ------------- Ciao, Spokey
|
Posted By: livvy
Date Posted: 27-December-2005 at 10:09
And what in the absence of anything else will they find ? That you on one day were travelling close to a car they were interseted in.........end of. As I say that is something that could (& may have already happened to you) without your knowledge on many days & has it caused you any problems so far ? ------------- My views expressed are just that. Mine & mine alone. |
Posted By: spokey
Date Posted: 27-December-2005 at 10:58
It hasn't caused me any trouble so far, because the police have not had any way of determining it. However, as stated above, this is one of the things that they are hoping to get out of this database. ------------- Ciao, Spokey
|
Posted By: B 7 VP
Date Posted: 27-December-2005 at 12:07
|
This has resulted in some questions on our Freedom from state interference of which the Naive answer--the govt wouldnt risk upsetting the VOTING public-would they ??.Did YOU notice any items on these subjects in a Recent manifesto.?? IF they can lie, steal and cheat about Everything else-do you think they have even thought about the freedom of choice of the People.??? Its what They THINK they can get away with--before a peasant uprising-- BUT--they can check the camera,s first ----eh!! The proposed road tolling system, using chip inbedded number plates, which is already going/is being used in Germany in lorries, and with France will be spread to cars, as soon as they can manage the greater increase in system recording.ALL encouraged by the EEC as increasing income for member states. The similar system is the one that has already been announced by Comrade darling for implementing within the next 5 years.This braindead excuse of govt slime, cannot get Anything right in whatever subject you wish to think of since election--so needing a subject to say how clever they have "Solved" the gridlock no mobility conditions-they will give the Whole organisation of "Freedom with Toll Driving" to private orgs--who will do all the collection of £££,s and the private enforcement when the drivers dont pay by Automatic DD. You can rest assured of the SECURITY of your personal details--just like Father Christmas. When do YOU the Driver----decide to accept that "YOU know it makes Sense" is a defeatest brainwash--you can say NO--BUT--time is running out.
------------- SAFETYFAST |
Posted By: livvy
Date Posted: 27-December-2005 at 12:32
How do you know they have never seen your car traveling alongside that of a criminal, but they just didn't bother with you because you weren't of interest. That may not have been of any concern to the Police then & it wouldn't necessarily be in the future under the use of cameras. If however they had seen you go from an address in London to an address in Bristol (door to door) with a stolen vehicle invloved in street robberies, then they may look into you in those circumstances. That is no different to how it would work now if they saw you do that with such a vehicle. If however you just happened to be travelling alongside that car for a short time on the same piece of motorway (now or in the future) that is not going to be of great interest to them, but if you were with them for the whole journey that would & should be of interest. They should in those circumstances look at who you were & if you had any part in the movement of that stolen vehicle. That information alone wouldn't infer guilty knowledge on your part of course, but it is never the less something that I would consider prudent & good practice for the Police to look into. Cameras will help with this. ------------- My views expressed are just that. Mine & mine alone. |
Posted By: spokey
Date Posted: 27-December-2005 at 19:35
If I am not a criminal, it is none of the police's business where I travel. Prudence and good practice be d@mned. ------------- Ciao, Spokey
|
Posted By: livvy
Date Posted: 27-December-2005 at 20:08
|
I am afraid that what the Police only need to act on is reasonable grounds.
Most legislation governing Police powers has a test of reasonableness
attached to it. Where the cameras give them information that provides that, then they could act on it. Where it didn't then they wouldn't be. Whether you are a criminal or not that is the way things stand now & like the other things I've said, cameras won't be different on that score. That is already with us for the current situation. I can't imagine many people objecting to that premise of reasonable grounds. ------------- My views expressed are just that. Mine & mine alone. |
Posted By: spokey
Date Posted: 27-December-2005 at 20:48
|
I never claimed to be reasonable. I do value my privacy. I fear that I am in a very small minority. ------------- Ciao, Spokey
|
Posted By: livvy
Date Posted: 28-December-2005 at 05:18
Privacy is in the home. Your movements can be watched on CCTV over lots of our city centres, in most shops, in the workplace, in government/council buildings, on our trains & buses etc etc. Watching cars moving around is no more intrusive than that, infact maybe less so as it tracks the car movements, it doesn't focus on the individuals. ------------- My views expressed are just that. Mine & mine alone. |
Posted By: spokey
Date Posted: 28-December-2005 at 05:55
Did I say I approve of CCTV watching me every time I set foot out of my house? And from the crime stats I see, CCTV doesn't actually prevent or reduce crime, or particularly do wonders for the arrest rate, either. Every so often, there is a major bit of PR for CCTV as someone is caught using one, but for every one of those there must be a hundred where the CCTV is less than useless. (Jean de Menezes, anyone?) So I wonder why the police are so keen on keeping an eye on all of us, when it doesn't seem to work on crims or on the police. ------------- Ciao, Spokey
|
Posted By: livvy
Date Posted: 28-December-2005 at 06:12
I disagree CCTV is used to great effect with prevention & detection of crime. Many arrests & successful prosecutions can be attributed to the evidence it provides. From shoplifters, to assaults & public order on friday/saturday nights in city centres, criminal damage to cars, vandalism to public property, armed robbery, even murders. The numbers & differing types of offences that it has been instrumental in contributing to seeing justice done & those breaking it brought to count are huge. As with any measure it's success can't be judged solely on if it totally erradicates a problem, but whether it helps in dealing with it. ------------- My views expressed are just that. Mine & mine alone. |
Posted By: spokey
Date Posted: 28-December-2005 at 06:26
Really? Please prove this assertion.
Huge, eh? Don't suppose you have any numbers? I have had a car broken into within view of a CCTV and all the police did was issue me with a crime report number so that I could claim from my insurance. So the CCTV didn't prevent the crime and clearly wasn't much use in bringing anyone to justice. In fact, the only real use for CCTV seems to be to provide the Daily Mail with articles "retracing the last tragic steps" of some innocent who snuffed it. In the mean time, if facial recognition software ever does get to work properly, one of these days they'll be able to keep track of us all in a fully automated way with CCTV in the same way that ANPR does. ------------- Ciao, Spokey
|
Posted By: livvy
Date Posted: 28-December-2005 at 06:36
|
I've already said that it isn't going to erradicate the problem &
solve every case, but yes the numbers of offences that use CCTV
evidence are huge. Just look at the Police type TV programs that rely on CCTV & camera footage footage where you see offenders being arrested on them. That is all evidence to assist in the prosecution of offenders. Listen to a few cases in court & you'll see how cameras are playing a valueable part. ------------- My views expressed are just that. Mine & mine alone. |
Posted By: Peter Fenwick
Date Posted: 28-December-2005 at 06:42
|
You really should stop reading that paper spokey! What this comes down to is how bad you percieve the threat of crime including terrorism. Is is better to reduce individual freedom in order to help prevent another terrorist attack or should we maintain our freedom and accept that terrorism is a part of life? I have heard arguiements for both sides and am currently undecided. I don't think that cameras themselves pose a great threat to our freedom at the moment but it only takes a change of government to make it a different matter entirely. ------------- Entering an age of Austerity and now driving a Focus Diesel. |
Posted By: livvy
Date Posted: 28-December-2005 at 07:22
Exactly My viewpoint is that I don't care if the Police have access to where my car is moving at all times. I'd rather have some of the protection that the cameras offer in helping the Police catch criminals. ------------- My views expressed are just that. Mine & mine alone. |
Posted By: spokey
Date Posted: 28-December-2005 at 09:31
And I do care if the police have access to where my car is moving at all times. It's none of their business. I also disagree strongly with the erosion of all our freedoms to catch criminals. Crime pays far too bl00dy well, and if you're caught, you get six months of cushy life with a Playstation and internet access. I'd start with that, before I advocated a state where the police can watch our every move effortlessly. I don't think the ANPR system will do anything to stop another 7/7, and yet, just like ID cards, that is the threat that is being used to justify this fascist rubbish. The Soviets were rank amateurs, the SS was a mere bagatelle. For a truly invasive, all-seeing state, come to Britain in the 21st century. It's what your parents and your grand-parents died for in two World Wars! ------------- Ciao, Spokey
|
Posted By: Nigel
Date Posted: 28-December-2005 at 10:04
|
This is alongside my own thougts Spokey. I'm undecided at best, coming down on your side at worst....not that I think we actually have much of a say in it, I'm of the opinion its just going to happen. ------------- Best Wishes Nigel |
Posted By: thepits
Date Posted: 28-December-2005 at 10:44
Welcome Nigel to the Realist/Fatalist's world! ------------- Cats know your every thought. But don't care. |
Posted By: livvy
Date Posted: 28-December-2005 at 11:28
Mine didn't die they were POWs . They're for the cameras incidently. ------------- My views expressed are just that. Mine & mine alone. |
Posted By: Nigel
Date Posted: 28-December-2005 at 11:34
|
I'm against Livvy...I think, not that I want to frustrate the police, although I think they use the media to over egg the terrorist stuff, I'm thinking against this as I'm afraid the government will missuse it for other purposes. ------------- Best Wishes Nigel |
Posted By: livvy
Date Posted: 28-December-2005 at 11:42
I think the terrorist part is the thin end of the wedge. It is help with regards to other crimes that it will play a greater part. ------------- My views expressed are just that. Mine & mine alone. |
Posted By: Nigel
Date Posted: 28-December-2005 at 11:46
|
I'd be happier if it was just for police tracking purposes, and couldn't be used to convict for speeding or gathering of data for charging us to use the roads. ------------- Best Wishes Nigel |
Posted By: livvy
Date Posted: 28-December-2005 at 11:53
I understand what you are saying & the government needs to be pressed hard for answers to what exactly they will be used for so that people can make an informed decision. If they are to go up, they'll need the public onside & for that the public will need to be convinced that the cameras will be used for positive gains in fighting crime. ------------- My views expressed are just that. Mine & mine alone. |
Posted By: Rhys
Date Posted: 28-December-2005 at 12:13
..and I'm another member. There's no point arguing about whether you like it or not, the government (Bliar) does what it (he) wants anyway. Plod are going to stop you anyway if they want to - I've been followed before and I've made it known that I knew, the difference is you won't know when you're being watched and I guess you will get used to it.. eventualy. One plus point, if plod are harrasing you in the way that they drive they too will be on cctv (ie tailgating/following), the only thing is they seam to have the power to make footage dissapear.. ------------- V reg Rustbucket Merc C220 Cdi estate J Reg Saab 900i 16v '63 Ford Anglia 105e deluxe R reg Honda PC50 moped.. No BMW as yet... |
Posted By: Nigel
Date Posted: 28-December-2005 at 13:13
|
Don't bet on it Rhys, there will be an exemption somewhere
------------- Best Wishes Nigel |
Posted By: spokey
Date Posted: 28-December-2005 at 13:48
Yeah, like thoughtcrimes. ------------- Ciao, Spokey
|
Posted By: livvy
Date Posted: 28-December-2005 at 13:55
Software for that is still about 14 days away from successful development isn't it ? ------------- My views expressed are just that. Mine & mine alone. |
Posted By: scarface
Date Posted: 28-December-2005 at 15:43
|
I don't see why no one thinks about the fatal flaw in this, change the number plate and you go undetected. Worse still the finger of suspicion could be pointed someone elses way. Identity/number plate theft is on the rise.. Try and identify a criminal and he will find a way to go undetected, eventually the only thing ANPRs will be used for is keeping tabs on normal citizens. The government can always change their mind on the use of a piece of technology once it's in place, people shouldn't be so trusting. |
Posted By: livvy
Date Posted: 28-December-2005 at 15:59
You think the anomaly of two cars running around on the same plates at different ends of the country won't sound an alarm on the system quickly ? The vehicles will then be stopped & the one in the "rung" car dealt with. I for one would be glad that the camera would show the Police that someone else is running around on my plate number & help them catch them. that's one of the benefits of the system not one of the problems. ------------- My views expressed are just that. Mine & mine alone. |
Posted By: spokey
Date Posted: 28-December-2005 at 16:06
And time of the driver of the "un-rung" car will be wasted.
I for one would prefer my privacy and also not encourage the habit of "ringing" cars. This kind of fascist monitoring of the unwashed masses is going to create an awful lot of this kind of behaviour. I can see entire divisions of bureaucracy gone mad, where law-abiding citizens spend days every year proving that their car is their car, because Crapita have made a pig's ear of yet another government contract, and accused every motor vehicle driver of something nefarious. This whole thing has so many bad things going for it, I can't believe people are still standing up for it. ------------- Ciao, Spokey
|
Posted By: Nigel
Date Posted: 28-December-2005 at 16:22
|
He does have a valid point here Livvy, the press was full of stories regarding the congestion charging zone down your way, people from all over the country were getting grief, and the ownus seemed to be on the part of the plate owner, the authorities were behaving very badly. ------------- Best Wishes Nigel |
Posted By: livvy
Date Posted: 28-December-2005 at 16:51
But that is my point, ringing is here with us already & it is causing a lot of problems & wasted time for both the Police & the innocent victims of it. Far more of the innocent victims time is currently wasted with sorting out that mess than it will be in the future. With a network of cameras the authorities are likely to be aware of the fact that there are two cars running around on the your plate number before you start receiving all the fines. The system will also be providing supporting evidence for you of that fact (if it isn't picked up immeadiately) through search facilities on the movements of cars. Which will mean the authorities will have far less of a "they all say that there's another car running around with my reg number" attitude, because there will be evidence to support that. If there is a bank robber running around on your plate, is the first you want to know of it when the Police turn up to deal with you for armed robbery at your house ? Rudely awakened by an armed team perhaps ? Do you want to phone the office from the Police station & say you won't be in today because the Police are questioning you about a few armed robberies ? Or would you rather the Police already be aware that there are two cars running on that plate at opposing ends of the country & the offences aren't happening where the registered keepers (your) car is ? ------------- My views expressed are just that. Mine & mine alone. |
Posted By: spokey
Date Posted: 28-December-2005 at 17:35
It's a great pity that your idealistic perspective is greatly undermined by the recent case of a scamera partnership sending out a fine without checking the photo beforehand. Or all the cases where policemen were involved and CCTV footage mysteriously disappeared. Precisely because of this ANPR system, I predict the following: 1. "Ringing" will become far more prevalent. 2. Policing standards will remain at their current levels. 3. More innocent people than ever before will be woken up by armed police bashing down their front door looking for Slasher McGurk and his cohorts. More innocent people than ever before will be making that call to the office, because the police will not bother to check things out. ------------- Ciao, Spokey
|
Posted By: thepits
Date Posted: 28-December-2005 at 17:44
Spokey - stop rising to their bait - just join our club ------------- Cats know your every thought. But don't care. |
Posted By: spokey
Date Posted: 28-December-2005 at 17:52
|
Edmund Burke wrote: "All that is necessary for evil to succeed is that good men do nothing."
------------- Ciao, Spokey
|
Posted By: thepits
Date Posted: 28-December-2005 at 17:57
|
very profound!
------------- Cats know your every thought. But don't care. |
Posted By: livvy
Date Posted: 28-December-2005 at 18:05
How does that equate to this ? One is a fairly automated process for SCPs for the absolute offence of speeding. One which I agree with you though, photos should be manually checked before sending out. The other will flag up information for action by Police officers, or provide them with information in current investigations. Not absolute offences. I doubt whether a Police officer has anything to do with the production & sending out of NIPs in SCPs.
What are the cases that you know for a fact that has happened in ? Or are we talking tabloid allegations ?  The same tabloids who "in the absence of official revelations" surrounding the "de Menzies" shooting introduced their own lurid version of events that changed daily ?
It's already widespread, ANPR offers a good opportunity to provide evidence of it & locate offenders.
ANPR will incresae detections & arrests as they have for officers arrest rates in London.
As I've said ANPR will make this less likely because of the increased intelligence on vehicles. Not having that info makes what you describe more likely because Police will not be aware initially of the rung vehicles. ------------- My views expressed are just that. Mine & mine alone. |
Posted By: livvy
Date Posted: 28-December-2005 at 18:06
Exactly.........if good men don't introduce ANPR evil will succeed. ------------- My views expressed are just that. Mine & mine alone. |
Posted By: thepits
Date Posted: 28-December-2005 at 18:09
|
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz http://www.spy.org.uk/1984.htm - http://www.spy.org.uk/1984.htm zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz ------------- Cats know your every thought. But don't care. |
Posted By: spokey
Date Posted: 28-December-2005 at 19:03
Livvy, please don't insult my intelligence. This lazy policing of the masses by ubiquitous cameras IS the evil. I don't for one minute feel safer because of the large numbers of CCTV cameras out there, by the time someone has taken a cursory glance at their imagery, I'll be dead. I don't for one minute believe that scameras improve road safety. And based on a lifetime in IT, I don't believe for even a second that there will not be enormous, life-destroying c0ck-ups as a consequence of this blanket ANPR coverage and increased police reliance on it. It frightens me that people just accept, unquestioningly, the official line "trust us, this will be good for you." These things that are being taken from us are what the terrorists want to take away from us. And even if we killed every single terrorist of every kind in the world tomorrow, those freedoms would not come back. They are gone forever, and their removal has not won us anything. ------------- Ciao, Spokey
|
Posted By: livvy
Date Posted: 28-December-2005 at 19:11
|
I really don't see what is being taken away from you. Your freedom ? Can you still not move around freely ? Who is going to be stopping you moving around less freely than you are now ? The system is monitoring vehicle movements to identify the criminal element. It sorts the wheat from the chaff. Why oh why do you really think that suddenly the Police will be after you if you are doing no wrong ? Are there not enough people breaking the law already for them to deal with ? ------------- My views expressed are just that. Mine & mine alone. |
Posted By: Nigel
Date Posted: 28-December-2005 at 19:24
|
But they don't Livvy, they spend far too much time playing the governments target games. ------------- Best Wishes Nigel |
Posted By: spokey
Date Posted: 28-December-2005 at 19:28
The freedom that they are taking is the following: they are removing my
freedom to drive around the country without being spied on.
They may not feel the urge to do anything with it today, but what could
happen tomorrow? And it's all there on a plate for the taking.
Because they said so. In the article in the Independent, they clearly expressed the view that they would be interested in vehicles merely travelling in the same direction, at the same time as known "dodgy" vehicles. Can you swear, hand on heart, that you've never heard of a copper shipping information out to the criminal element? Here's a MASSIVE amount of information about people's movements that could be extremely valuable to organised crime. One CD later, and vast quantities of people who live routine lives will be at the mercy of who knows what? And in any event: the police have no business recording my movements. The police are recording the movements of ALL vehicles for a period of two years. The system hasn't even gone live yet, and they're already increasing that to FIVE years. Why would they want to keep so much information for so long? ------------- Ciao, Spokey
|
Posted By: livvy
Date Posted: 28-December-2005 at 19:38
What target games are they ? ------------- My views expressed are just that. Mine & mine alone. |
Posted By: livvy
Date Posted: 28-December-2005 at 19:50
But as I've said that is nothing new, they can follow you around now there is nothing to stop them. It could even be on a camera in the car.
We've covered that one already. We aren't talking a car that just happened to be on the same bit of motorway for 10 mins. We are talking cars actually travelling together, door to door journey type together where one is know to be concerned in crime. If the Police saw that now I would expect they would stop both cars & investigate (again pre cameras).
Yes I have to admit that bad apples selling information to criminals is not beyond the realms of possibility & has happened. But I doubt the cameras would give much new information of value to the criminal fraternity over what the bad apples could sell. The info would be of far more value to the Police. Anyone caught selling such information would of course be dealt with very severely & the instances that I have heard with it are extremely rare.
It's probably in line with their retention of information policies on a lot of other things & for the value in depth of search it offers. ------------- My views expressed are just that. Mine & mine alone. |
Posted By: Nigel
Date Posted: 28-December-2005 at 19:50
|
Whatever the latest government fad is, it was the so called "speed kills", at the moment it seems everyone is a terrorist, and they need to put us under unprecidented amounts of surveilance to make us safe. ------------- Best Wishes Nigel |
Posted By: Rhys
Date Posted: 28-December-2005 at 20:24
|
Who puts them under surveilance? ------------- V reg Rustbucket Merc C220 Cdi estate J Reg Saab 900i 16v '63 Ford Anglia 105e deluxe R reg Honda PC50 moped.. No BMW as yet... |
Posted By: Nigel
Date Posted: 28-December-2005 at 20:32
|
They would be under the same system as us, only it would be details witheld on the pnc. ------------- Best Wishes Nigel |
Posted By: Nigel
Date Posted: 28-December-2005 at 20:39
|
I'm not sure the security issue on all this data has been answered. ------------- Best Wishes Nigel |
Posted By: livvy
Date Posted: 28-December-2005 at 20:56
|
It's not surveillance, surveillance would be targeted & observing
identified individuals etc, not noting all car movements past a point. Officers will of course be monitored in how they handle any sensitive data as they are now with other databases. ------------- My views expressed are just that. Mine & mine alone. |
Posted By: Rhys
Date Posted: 28-December-2005 at 20:58
|
OK, but who monitors the police? ------------- V reg Rustbucket Merc C220 Cdi estate J Reg Saab 900i 16v '63 Ford Anglia 105e deluxe R reg Honda PC50 moped.. No BMW as yet... |
Posted By: livvy
Date Posted: 28-December-2005 at 21:02
|
Depends on what aspect. Data Protection Commissioners etc ------------- My views expressed are just that. Mine & mine alone. |
Posted By: spokey
Date Posted: 29-December-2005 at 04:37
You're being a bit disingenuous here, livvy, it's not noting all car movements past a point: it's the ability to monitor every cars movements across nearly every square mile of the UK, with the ability to see where a car started, where it went, where it ended its journey. In essence, it is the ability to surveil every motorist from a computer screen. Not just when they make the journey, but FIVE years later. If they kicked down your door at 4AM and accused you of involvement in a crime five years ago, would you be able to even remember what you did on the day in question? ------------- Ciao, Spokey
|
Posted By: spokey
Date Posted: 29-December-2005 at 05:03
We may have covered it, but your blandishments do NOT reassure me. Sooner or later, someone is going to have their life ruined and be put in jail because of this. Remember the Guildford Four, Judith Ward, the Darvell brothers, the Cardiff Three, Danny McNamee, the M25 Three and the Bridgewater Four? That all happened without the easy access to lazy policing that this offers. ------------- Ciao, Spokey
|
Posted By: spokey
Date Posted: 29-December-2005 at 05:04
"Newspeak, doublethink, thoughtcrime--in 1984, George Orwell created a whole vocabulary of words concerning totalitarian control that have since passed into our common vocabulary. More importantly, he has portrayed a chillingly credible dystopia. In our deeply anxious world, the seeds of unthinking conformity are everywhere in evidence; and Big Brother is always looking for his chance." ------------- Ciao, Spokey
|
Posted By: livvy
Date Posted: 29-December-2005 at 05:37
That's not how the ANPR cameras work though. They will not cover every inch of the road & vehicles are not "monitored" between cameras. What they do is record the reg plate of every car that passes the camera & check it against Police interest markers on databases. If found they flag it up to the operator. The car isn't then monitored until it passess another camera whatever distance that is away (the cameras won't necessarily be in sight of each other). It is the passing of fixed points that registers movement, not you being watched all the time. Like a Police officer at every junction noting cars that go by. Software of course will exist to throw up anomalies such as dual movements of vehicles (rung cars) & to search for the movements of vehicles that are of interest to Police for investigative purposes, but this is likley to be limited in access as are large scale searches on the PNC. Why would they wait for 5 years ? If you say "because they can" well they could of course wait for 5 years now then, so what difference again have cameras made there ? ------------- My views expressed are just that. Mine & mine alone. |
Posted By: livvy
Date Posted: 29-December-2005 at 05:40
Which of those were jailed because of ANPR cameras ? Why is ANPR going to make that more likely not less ? Why are today's Police responsible for the behaviour of yester years ? Are you to blame for the past crimes of British colonialism ? Is current Germany responsible for Hitler's actions ? Come come now. ------------- My views expressed are just that. Mine & mine alone. |
Posted By: spokey
Date Posted: 29-December-2005 at 05:52
Because they might have a lot more "crime" to process. ------------- Ciao, Spokey
|
Posted By: spokey
Date Posted: 29-December-2005 at 05:57
http://www.spy.org.uk/spyblog/2005/11/centralised_anpr_database_to_r.html - That's not the point: the point is that the British police do not have an unblemished record and substantial miscarriages of justice have taken place. The laziness and completeness of the coverage are of great concern. My basic concern is this: the police have no business recording the movements of law-abiding citizens. What is your defence of that? ------------- Ciao, Spokey
|
Posted By: livvy
Date Posted: 29-December-2005 at 06:20
As was eluded earlier. There is no such thing as total security, there is no such thing as total freedom. It is a balancing act to provide safety & security whilst not impacting on our freedoms where possible. It is not a static thing, it has to be reviewed continually & adjusted to need. Our security needs addressing & our Police need to be more effective in combating both terrorism & crime. ANPR will help in that & improve efficiency/effectiveness. The benfefits to security & crime detection outweigh the impact on freedoms. In my view, we the public will feel the benefit of that security & more effective crime detection, far more than the negative, as you put it, of having our vehicles movements monitored. That monitoring will in my opinion have very little effect on the daily lives of the vast majority of the population. ------------- My views expressed are just that. Mine & mine alone. |
Posted By: spokey
Date Posted: 29-December-2005 at 06:28
I supposed http://www.roadtraffic-technology.com/projects/m42/ - this is just a coincidence, then?
Yeah, like that happens. ------------- Ciao, Spokey
|
Posted By: spokey
Date Posted: 29-December-2005 at 06:31
Jawohl, mein herr. These benefits and impacts have been assessed by whom, exactly? Oh, the police? Well, that's alright then! Why ARE the police keeping these records of law-abiding motorists for five years? ------------- Ciao, Spokey
|
Posted By: spokey
Date Posted: 29-December-2005 at 06:34
REALLY? What is http://www.spy.org.uk/spyblog/2005/11/centralised_anpr_database_to_r.html - this , then? Relevant quote:
Every 400 yards? ------------- Ciao, Spokey
|
Posted By: livvy
Date Posted: 29-December-2005 at 06:52
No mention of ANPR in your link.
But that's the benefit it offers without the cost. It can't physically be done with officers, but can with cameras. ------------- My views expressed are just that. Mine & mine alone. |
Posted By: livvy
Date Posted: 29-December-2005 at 06:55
Big difference between 400yds & 1 inch. 400yds isn't necessarily in sight of & is only talked about for motorways. At 400yds apart vehicles will not be in sight at all times, but they record reg plates as they pass the fixed points. The same with petrol stations etc, they would only record them there, not move with the vehicle. ------------- My views expressed are just that. Mine & mine alone. |