An article from the Daily Mail
tinyurl.com/y8n4xnc
I'm all for it personally but, as usual, Chakrabarti seems to have a bee in her bonnet...
|
|
In theory we should all benefit from such surveillance. But we don't live in a perfect world. Mistakes and abuses do happen, which is what people get so upset about, not the surveillance per se.
|
>> In theory we should all benefit from such surveillance. But we don't live in a
>> perfect world. Mistakes and abuses do happen which is what people get so upset about
>> not the surveillance per se.
No doubt you are right, I guess that I am just optimistic that he benefits will outweigh the possibilities for abuse.
I think that the press can be alarmist, for example the case the Daily Mail mentioned regarding the demonstration against the arms trade. On the face of it, it could look like a repressive police state, using its power to suppress protests and free speech. However, it could well be that there are radical groups involved (much like the animal defence leagues) that do border on domestic terrorism. That's not to say that the guy pulled over was involved, but that he may just have been caught up in a reasonable use of the powers.
|
>>
>> No doubt you are right I guess that I am just optimistic that he benefits
>> will outweigh the possibilities for abuse.
>>
Under the present government, I am of the opinion that the possibilities for abuse outweigh the benefits.
|
>> Under the present government I am of the opinion that the possibilities for
>> abuse outweigh the benefits.
I tend towards the same opinion, although I would substitute "any" for "the present". I am, in the morning, going to have the pleasure of opting out of the NHS central database, for the same reason. Unfortunately, I can't legitimately "opt out" of being ANPR'd all over the place.
|
The "Shadow Home Sec" seems agin it, too.
I am unsure of the purpose of this database.
Apparently,
"Officers are alerted if a vehicle is associated with a criminal so that they can track and intercept it"
All well and good, but "associated with a criminal" means what, precisely? Someone who's associated with "organised crime", a suspect, someone with a spent conviction, someone with "points" on their licence, someone who hasn't paid their Council Tax? Is this database linked to others? I would have to know rather more to say it's OK.
|
london bombers were found via anpr so these cameras do have a use (yes i know it was after the event)
its just that the powers that be who we voted in should be more open in to the way our data is stored and then deleted
|
>> london bombers were found via anpr so these cameras do have a use (yes i
>> know it was after the event)
That is IMO ("after the event") a legitimate use.
>> its just that the powers that be who we voted in should be more open
>> in to the way our data is stored and then deleted
And again! AOL.
|
>> All well and good but "associated with a criminal" means what precisely? Someone who's associated
>> with "organised crime" a suspect someone with a spent conviction someone with "points" on their
>> licence someone who hasn't paid their Council Tax? Is this database linked to others? I
>> would have to know rather more to say it's OK.
Yes, I agree that ideally there need to be safeguards, although I think it can be tricky to enforce them and to give people the confidence that they can be enforced (because we keep hearing cases of people who have terrorism powers used against them, when they are clearly not terrorists). If the police don't feel that they have the tools to get the job done, I can understand why they might be tempted to use a tool that isn't an exact 100% match - not condoning it, but I can just see why there might always be the risk of it happening.
I can imagine that the database could be a very powerful resource, when looking for patterns of behaviour.
For example, the police recently arrested a suspect in the Minstead Rapist case. Perhaps the technology isn't quite there yet, but if they knew he was at A on Monday, B on Tuesday, C on Wednesday and D on Thursday - there are probably very few cars, that would match that exact pattern, with enough reference points probably only one. It would likely be the same deal with the Suffolk Strangler a few years back.
|
>>14 million motorists photographed each day>>
We're very photogenic...:-)
|
14 million motorists photographed each day - Boxsterboy
