Snooping

[Dominic M]

They are also zooming in on womens breasts, and any young mum bending over the pram in a shopping centre will have her arse on widescreen.

Evidence, please!

 

Certainly a hung murderer doesnt become a repeat offender but then someone stoned to death for adultery doesnt do it again either.

Not entirely sure about this. I know of people who've been repeatedly stoned and they still listen to Pink Floyd albums.

[carlt]

They are also zooming in on womens breasts, and any young mum bending over the pram in a shopping centre will have her arse on widescreen.

 

Evidence, please!

Anecdotal evidence only, I'm afraid, but:

 

Where I worked, in Paris, had state of the art security systems, in place.

 

One day I was mooching about and one of the Security officers called me into their office to show me a zoomed cctv image of a girl, undressing, through one of the apartment windows, across the road.

 

I reported the guy and the head of personnel thought it highly amusing and said I was making a fuss over nothing.

 

These blokes have a pretty mind-numbing job so, if a complete imbecile, like this guy was, is put at the controls of remotely controlled cameras, they'll entertain themselves.

[Sir Nibble]

Evidence, please!

Love to be able to show you! This is something the femenists are very uptight about, and who can blame them!

Not entirely sure about this. I know of people who've been repeatedly stoned and they still listen to Pink Floyd albums.

Here I am

[Roger Gunkel]

not really, have a look at National Vehicle Tracking Database. the UK Government, (THEY or THEM) use this - have done since March 2006, to keep track of all vehicle movement on major roads. Use of CCTV's and Number plate recognition system, these journeys will be kept for up to 2 years.

 

Granted, it can be used to aid in fighting crime, but it can also be used in other sinister activities.

 

I hear a conspiracy theory looming!! Just remind me, next time I drive down the motorway, and the number plate recognition system shows that my car is taxed, insured and MOTd and the face identification shows its not been nicked, which sinister other activity precisely should I prepare myself for?

 

Roger

[grahoom]

I hear a conspiracy theory looming!! Just remind me, next time I drive down the motorway, and the number plate recognition system shows that my car is taxed, insured and MOTd and the face identification shows its not been nicked, which sinister other activity precisely should I prepare myself for?

 

Roger

 

 

no conspiracy, no theory, just highlighting the current trend of this Government and its desire for a surveillance society.

Edited July 10, 2008 by grahoom

[carlt]

I hear a conspiracy theory looming!! Just remind me, next time I drive down the motorway, and the number plate recognition system shows that my car is taxed, insured and MOTd and the face identification shows its not been nicked, which sinister other activity precisely should I prepare myself for?

 

Roger

I've never really held with the"I've nothing to hide, so what's the problem?" argument.

 

I do have something to hide........................my privacy!

[grahoom]

I do have something to hide........................my privacy!

 

people don't have things to hide - that's why they always send all documents on postcards.... (oh hang on, they use envelopes and draw their curtains at night too).

[Roger Gunkel]

What it all boils down to, is that we all have differing points of view on how we live, how we want to live and how everybody else ought to live. If we all agreed we'd never have anything to discuss and life would get really boring.

 

I'm gonna crack open a beer!!

 

Roger

[Big Steve]

No, it proves that we've got better at detecting crimes; the crime rate is just the number of detected crimes, not the number of crimes committed, and hence as police forces have become more modern, crime has been detected more and crime rates have apparently risen.

 

If you believe that, well words fail me.

 

I should have added Guardian readers to my pinko liberal rant. Just try searching for historical statistics on violent crime, there's nothing.

 

I never said that there was a golden crime free age. I maintain that there was a lot less violent crime caused by youngsters when they were given a slap by the local PC, or, even better, birched. Same in school. there was much more discipline when a good thrashing would follow any bad behaviour.

 

Here's something I found, from the Telegraph

 

Sir Ian was born in 1953 when the crime total was at least 10 times less than it is now. Those who committed an offence were more likely to be caught and punished: the police cleared up 51 per cent of robberies, compared with about 24 per cent today, and clear-up rates for burglary and theft were twice what they are now.

 

But by 1981 crime had risen remorselessly: 3.2 million crimes were recorded that year, compared with 434,000 in the year Sir Ian was born, and there were 400,000 recorded burglaries - more than there were last year. Burglary has fallen markedly in recent years, largely because more householders have fitted alarms and better locks, often under pressure from insurance companies after break-ins.

 

Link to the full article http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/1526911/Th...-years-ago.html

Edited July 10, 2008 by Big Steve

[fuzzyduck]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mods_and_rockers

[grahoom]

I never said that there was a golden crime free age. I maintain that there was a lot less violent crime caused by youngsters when they were given a slap by the local PC, or, even better, birched. Same in school. there was much more discipline when a good thrashing would follow any bad behaviour.

 

so does a good thrashing, when it is legal, not equate to violence? I suppose a good bit of domestic violence is ok too?

 

Some of the countries in the middle east still have public hanging, flogging.

[carlt]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mods_and_rockers

In 532AD, of course sporting hooliganism was at its peak, with the infamous "Nika riots", at a Byzantine chariot race.

Edited July 11, 2008 by carlt

[Chris Pink]

I never said that there was a golden crime free age. I maintain that there was a lot less violent crime caused by youngsters when they were given a slap by the local PC, or, even better, birched. Same in school. there was much more discipline when a good thrashing would follow any bad behaviour.

 

Please do not demean this forum with your sexual fantasies.

[Bones]

my sage old great Aunt used to say that roads, playgrounds and life are just as dangerous now as it was when she was a wee lass. The difference between the two eras is the reporting of events.

[Sir Nibble]

If you believe that, well words fail me.

 

I maintain that there was a lot less violent crime caused by youngsters when they were given a slap by the local PC,

The problem with advocating casual violence on the part of police officers is that you have to put it in a legal framework.

Supposing, you are driving along and get stopped by the police because you were driving erratically, he asks you to take a breath test and you pass, nonetheless your driving was less than the best, so he slams a fist into your face and tells you not to do it again.

Unacceptable, so what do you do? Age limit, police are only allowed to brutalise under 18s? Limit on the strength of blow? in joules? who measures it?

The traditional bobbies cuff round the back of the head is a violent assault and the recipient of the blow is legally entitled to use reasonable force to defend themselves.

[magpie patrick]

This post started on snooping, so I'll just add I wouldn't be that impressed if someone was watching my nmovements all the time. CCTV is different because it collects to much data it isn't really practical for someone to say "ah, just spotted Patrick walking down Milsom Street". I dont particulary want someone at Saul Marina actually noting down "4:54pm, Patrick arrives alone in Blue Micra, boards Ripple". There are so many innocent reasons for doing so that it really is none of their business, and if I felt it was recorded every time...? (I've done this as I have meetings in Gloucester and can drop in on the boat on the way home, but with laptop in hand and suited I'm sure it looks like I've just finished work)

 

I'm all for the non-violent approach to crime and punishment and for sensible adminstration of justice, rather than mob law or vigilantes. BUT some people seem to assume that everyone in the world is as reasonable as they are. I know one person's experience is not the be all and end all but in seven years working on an estate in south wales that topped every deprivation index going we had a real problem with what I can only describe as hard core criminal and anti-social behaviour where the attitude these individuals expressed was basically "yeah, what you gonna do about it?". The only thing they were scared of was unpleasant punishment, and there was none we could mete out.

 

I'm bitterley opposed to the death penalty and do not approve of state sponsored violence, but the only message that would get through to some of these people would be a long and miseable stay in prison. The comment from one of them about going over to Turkey, when asked whether he'd be "having fun" (i.e. a bit of vandalism, thievery and fighting) while there was "nah, they lock you up and throw away the key". Speaks volumes...

[StoneHenge]

Snooping taken to a new level - invasion of privacy?

 

Google Clicky

[fuzzyduck]

Snooping taken to a new level - invasion of privacy?

 

Google Clicky

 

Not my house they won't, no vehicle access, and can't be seen from a public space.

[Valonia]

Snooping taken to a new level - invasion of privacy?

 

Google Clicky

 

I really hope my local council miss this new opportunity to snoop. If Google try that near me, I may have to borrow Bones' mac and flash them. I can't imagine them wanting an image of that!

[Roger Gunkel]

The problem with advocating casual violence on the part of police officers is that you have to put it in a legal framework.

 

I think this highlights, for me, one of the almost insurmountable problems we face. The criminal, at any level, makes their own choice on the amount of violence and intimidation they use. They are not contrained by guidlines, reccommendations or areas of juristiction, neither are they concerned with following correct procedures and keeping within the law. If a thug chooses to knife you in the chest to steal your mobile phone, he does not issue a warning using the correct wording or give you a chance to explain your circumstances. It is down to his own concience and morality. In the unlikely event that he gets caught, there are a million excuses and reasons to assist him getting a minimal sentence and legions of paid councillors and advisers to plead his case. Every one of these reasons, circumstances and plain lying, has to be discounted to get a conviction. Even then, the punishment is quite likely to be minimal compared with the loss, hurt and trauma caused by the crime.

 

In the face of extreme violence, real and potential, the policeman is expected to follow all the correct procedures and only apply appropiate force to the situation. This means little or no room for anticipation, only reaction, which is often too late. The police need also to be aware that every move will we carefully observed and analysed from CCTV by the criminal's support team, to look for non-procedural escape routes.

 

It is not enough to know who the criminals are and what they have done, they need to be caught in the act, not only with the 'smoking gun' in their hand, but actually pulling the trigger and preferably on CCTV incase they are being 'stitched up' by the police. What makes all of this even more sickening, is that all the criminals and thugs know exactly how easy it is to get away scott free and how to pull every string to get off, while we all pay the bill. Unfortunately we have all contributed to it by making all of this information public and easily available, making the the criminals the victims and taking away any fear of the police and authority.

 

I am quite aware that force can be abused and innocent people get wrongly punished, but far more innocent people are becoming ever increasing victims of crime and the only thing the local bobby can gain by being tough, is a suspension and court appearance.

 

As an earlier poster quite rightly (IMHO) said, the only thing a great number of lawless people respect, is something much harder and tougher than they are.

Unfortunately IT AIN'T THE LAW!

 

 

Roger

Edited July 11, 2008 by Roger Gunkel

[Dominic M]

I really hope my local council miss this new opportunity to snoop. If Google try that near me, I may have to borrow Bones' mac and flash them. I can't imagine them wanting an image of that!

I think you should place the photo on the forum and let us be the judges of that.

[Bones]

You can borrow my mac when I am done with it.......... or, I mean............... I will see it to you.... I could sell it now if you wanted..... 85,000pounds?

[Valonia]

I think you should place the photo on the forum and let us be the judges of that.

 

I think the mods would chuck me out for disorderly conduct. I'll wait til I'm no longer a newbie and celebrate by flashing then.

 

You can borrow my mac when I am done with it.......... or, I mean............... I will see it to you.... I could sell it now if you wanted..... 85,000pounds?

 

Erm... is it made of precious metal?

[Sir Nibble]

I think this highlights, for me, one of the almost insurmountable problems we face. The criminal, at any level, makes their own choice on the amount of violence and intimidation they use. They are not contrained by guidlines, reccommendations or areas of juristiction, neither are they concerned with following correct procedures and keeping within the law. If a thug chooses to knife you in the chest to steal your mobile phone, he does not issue a warning using the correct wording or give you a chance to explain your circumstances. It is down to his own concience and morality. In the unlikely event that he gets caught, there are a million excuses and reasons to assist him getting a minimal sentence and legions of paid councillors and advisers to plead his case. Every one of these reasons, circumstances and plain lying, has to be discounted to get a conviction. Even then, the punishment is quite likely to be minimal compared with the loss, hurt and trauma caused by the crime.

 

In the face of extreme violence, real and potential, the policeman is expected to follow all the correct procedures and only apply appropiate force to the situation. This means little or no room for anticipation, only reaction, which is often too late. The police need also to be aware that every move will we carefully observed and analysed from CCTV by the criminal's support team, to look for non-procedural escape routes.

 

It is not enough to know who the criminals are and what they have done, they need to be caught in the act, not only with the 'smoking gun' in their hand, but actually pulling the trigger and preferably on CCTV incase they are being 'stitched up' by the police. What makes all of this even more sickening, is that all the criminals and thugs know exactly how easy it is to get away scott free and how to pull every string to get off, while we all pay the bill. Unfortunately we have all contributed to it by making all of this information public and easily available, making the the criminals the victims and taking away any fear of the police and authority.

 

I am quite aware that force can be abused and innocent people get wrongly punished, but far more innocent people are becoming ever increasing victims of crime and the only thing the local bobby can gain by being tough, is a suspension and court appearance.

 

As an earlier poster quite rightly (IMHO) said, the only thing a great number of lawless people respect, is something much harder and tougher than they are.

Unfortunately IT AIN'T THE LAW!

 

 

Roger

In my opinion there is a great deal to be said for this point of view. Unfortunately, in the past the police as an institution has been shown time and time again that they are not to be trusted. I am convinced that criminal justice, like most things is an example of "You get what you pay for".

The state cannot tackle offences against the innocent by broad brush knee jerk policing which invariably becomes itself, an offence against the innocent. For example, the view that the small number of people wrongly executed may seem a small price to pay for the (mostly illusional) benefits of capital punishment, until you find yourself on the scaffold.

[grahoom]

The police need also to be aware that every move will we carefully observed and analysed from CCTV by the criminal's support team, to look for non-procedural escape routes.

 

It is not enough to know who the criminals are and what they have done, they need to be caught in the act, not only with the 'smoking gun' in their hand, but actually pulling the trigger and preferably on CCTV incase they are being 'stitched up' by the police.

 

 

so the benefits of the UK having 20% of the world CCTV camera's are...... ??