BIG Brother Has arrived--NOW

I really don't know what the public thinks, I would hope they agree.  I'm sure there is a great deal of ignorance out there. 

I'd imagine that the tories maybe a bit concerned about PR in the long term, but as it stands they would probably benefit. 

In the long term it's more important that we have a proper democracy. 



Edited by scarface

livvy wrote: As has already been said it's for society to decide at the ballot box. We elect the governments that implement such things, in our names.

Hehehe.. As I've said before, it doesn't appear that the general public have any say in what happens.. 

If we are to stop this madness we need first to address the electoral system.  That reform will never happen though as it will knock the current government out of power.  By rights they shouldn't be in power now

spokey wrote: livvy wrote: Because it provides the optimal balance of effeciency & reasonableness for the system I'd imagine. The bigger the database & with all vehicles covered the more effective the search can be. Most reg plates will be unused data, but if you miss any, that could be the important one for your search a year or two down the line in an investigation. At the time of recording the importance of a single reg plate for future investiagtons can't be pre-determined. But if you have them all the data will be there. So that's OK, is it? Because it's convenient for the police, we should all be spied upon? What is reasonable about keeping record of the movement of every citizen for five years?

As has already been said it's for society to decide at the ballot box.
We elect the governments that implement such things, in our names.

It is also not what I think or you think as individuals, but what measures society is willing to accept in order to strike that balance of security & freedom.

Where the information held is of most use will be for the most serious events.
If your child is abducted & the Police locate & arrest a suspect the following day in a car, then the search of that vehicles movements may provide valueable leads that help in the safe recovery of that child.

Where Police identify a terrorsist cell & the vehicles they are using, , long depth searches of prior vehicle movements for those vehicles could be instrumental in identifying their movements & others related to their activities. The several years of data could be very useful in these enquiries because people don't become terrorsists overnight.

Now in both cases these vehicles would not have been identified as target vehicles prior to Police's first contact with the people concerned, but the search facility available could be instrumental in saving of further lives. As the need to record those particular vehicles movements couldn't be pre-determined. If every vehicle is covered, then it ensures that they will be there. The millions of other vehicles that are of no interest just lay on file, which is not going to affect the users of those vehicles adversely.


Edited by livvy

spokey wrote: livvy wrote: 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. Please, livvy, this is pure sophistry on your part: what can happen in 400 yards on a motorway that would require an ANPR camera at that interval?

Car stop & occupants get out.

spokey wrote: AND WHY ARE THEY KEEPING THE RECORDS OF LAW-ABIDING, TAX-PAYING MOTORISTS AT ALL? Let alone for five years?

Because it provides the optimal balance of effeciency & reasonableness for the system I'd imagine. The bigger the database & with all vehicles covered the more effective the search can be. Most reg plates will be unused data, but if you miss any, that could be the important one for your search a year or two down the line in an investigation. At the time of recording the importance of a single reg plate for future investiagtons can't be pre-determined. But if you have them all the data will be there.

spokey wrote: 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?

Again that is a public decision, with which party they vote for based on their policies.

Which party in power will not be considering this though?

Have you an assessment that shows that general publci opinion of the majority is against such a move ?


Edited by livvy

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.

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: 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: Why would they wait for 5 years ?

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

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