BIG Brother Has arrived--NOW

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.

Rhys wrote: Who puts them under surveilance?

They would be under the same system as us, only it would be details witheld on the pnc.

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.


Edited by livvy

Depends on what aspect.

Data Protection Commissioners etc

livvy wrote: spokey wrote: 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. 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. spokey wrote: livvy wrote: Why oh why do you really think that suddenly the Police will be after you if you are doing no wrong ? 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. We've covered that one already.

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.

spokey wrote: livvy wrote: It's not surveillance, surveillance would be targeted & observing identified individuals etc, not noting all car movements past a point. 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?

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 ?


Edited by livvy

livvy wrote: Why would they wait for 5 years ?

Because they might have a lot more "crime" to process.

spokey wrote: My basic concern is this: the police have no business recording the movements of law-abiding citizens. What is your defence of that?

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.

livvy wrote: The benfefits to security & crime detection outweigh the impact on freedoms.

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?

spokey wrote: livvy wrote: 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. I supposed this is just a coincidence, then?

No mention of ANPR in your link.

spokey wrote: livvy wrote: Like a Police officer at every junction noting cars that go by. Yeah, like that happens.

But that's the benefit it offers without the cost. It can't physically be done with officers, but can with cameras.