Privacy and surveillance

[WJT]

[:D] Agreed. If they wanted, they could have watched me all day long hanging about waiting for a plumber that never showed up with pleasure.

[timc17]

Increasing the numbers of CCTV cameras together with a DNA database and ID cards will lead to a huge increase in the prison population which is already one of the highest in Europe.

The DNA database is the one that worries me the most. Insurance companies will somehow end up with a copy and will use it to either refuse cover or load possible high-risk people.

 

[Deimos]

I agree that a significant concern is when the information is passed out to other "interested parties". As mentioned earlier in this thread, the government already seems to be doing this.

Ian

[Cassis]

[quote user="timc17"]

Increasing the numbers of CCTV cameras together with a DNA database and ID cards will lead to a huge increase in the prison population which is already one of the highest in Europe.[/quote]

That's the govt's stated intention - to catch criminals.  If there's another motive, that's more worrying.  It appears unlikely that the already stretched-to-bursting point prison system can accept any more cons.

[Dick Smith]

[quote user="timc17"]

Increasing the numbers of CCTV cameras together with a DNA database and ID cards will lead to a huge increase in the prison population which is already one of the highest in Europe.

The DNA database is the one that worries me the most. Insurance companies will somehow end up with a copy and will use it to either refuse cover or load possible high-risk people.

 

[/quote]

Sorry, Timc, this just isn't logical.

So you are saying that we, effectively, shouldn't be trying to catch so many criminals? What if we have a higher number of criminals than other European countries - have you considered that? Which criminals should we try not to catch? Which victims of crime will we ignore?

Do you often worry that things will 'somehow' happen? Or do you have any real reasons for supposing this DNA transfer will happen?

[WJT]

I for one don't mind CCTV in fact as I mentioned I want one on our street. They have helped in the past with bombings, abductions and murders so I would welcome them on every street. The DNA database would be a worry to me though. I don't have a problem at all with finding too many criminals because we have access to better technology. However, even though having DNA information may help provide people with better knowledge in regards to their own health,  I too would be very worried about insurance companies having access to the information.

[Cassis]

I suppose it depends whether you believe it is right that (health?) insurance premiums should be loaded against higher risks, in the way that car policies are for younger drivers as they are statistically more likely to have more (and more serious) accidents than the norm. 

[Logan]

[quote user="WJT"]

I for one don't mind CCTV in fact as I mentioned I want one on our street. They have helped in the past with bombings, abductions and murders so I would welcome them on every street. The DNA database would be a worry to me though. I don't have a problem at all with finding too many criminals because we have access to better technology. However, even though having DNA information may help provide people with better knowledge in regards to their own health,  I too would be very worried about insurance companies having access to the information.

[/quote]

If you live in France I'm afraid you have no choice but to accept that everyone knows everything about you.....The French security services and other clandestine government departments routinely monitor all our telephone calls, e mail, text traffic, EDF bills, telephone bills, any bill etc.etc; They are likely to also monitor the traffic on this and every other forum web site that has a French dimension...... I have also been aware of government surveillance in my business activities. In France everything is monitored. It's routine. The French SIS know more about the sex life and monetary affairs of politicians than the politicians themselves. It's necessary in my view and I don't mind it a bit 'cos I've nothing to hide save my pride and what use is that? 

[timc17]

[quote user="Dick Smith"][quote user="timc17"]

Increasing the numbers of CCTV cameras together with a DNA database and ID cards will lead to a huge increase in the prison population which is already one of the highest in Europe.

The DNA database is the one that worries me the most. Insurance companies will somehow end up with a copy and will use it to either refuse cover or load possible high-risk people.

 

[/quote]

Sorry, Timc, this just isn't logical.

So you are saying that we, effectively, shouldn't be trying to catch so many criminals? What if we have a higher number of criminals than other European countries - have you considered that? Which criminals should we try not to catch? Which victims of crime will we ignore?

Do you often worry that things will 'somehow' happen? Or do you have any real reasons for supposing this DNA transfer will happen?
[/quote]

Dick,

I'm not worried about more criminals being caught. If it was up to me i'd bring back the death penalty.

The prison service can't cope now so what will happen is:

 Some crimes will not result in a prison sentence. Things like petty theft , drink-driving etc.

or

 More prisons will be built - up go your taxes.

With regards to the DNA database can you guarantee that this won't find it's way to the insurance co's?

[Dick Smith]

I can't guarantee all sorts of things, but that doesn't mean we should just give in. Legal safeguards on other data seem to work in all but a few cases - and most of those failures are small-scale, and can be attributed to incompetence not malice. Do you really and honestly think that the combined police forces of the UK would sell DNA data to insurance companies? If so, you need to spend a bit of time on the planet Reality.

I am trying to point out to you a flaw in your logic - it is not sensible to say you don't want cameras because they will catch more criminals. You either want to catch criminals or you don't. If you do, then cameras are a good weapon in your armoury. What you then do with them when you have caught them is another matter (and was not the point of your original post). It seems you object to catching criminals because the consequence may be that your taxes will go up. Look at what you have written.

[Chris Head]

War has changed over time. There is very much more technology available today than there was twenty years ago when we were at loggerheads with people like the IRA. As the technology has progressed so have the 'skills' of the 'terrorist' (I use that term loosely, it's what you all understand). Clearly the 'terrorists' who believe in what they believe in cannot fight on level ground with those they are opposed to so they become much more skilled in their trade over time and the agencies tasked with the counter operations have to try and keep one step ahead, and therein lies surveillance. To me it's very simple, if you've nothing to hide then stop moaning about civil liberties, that's just a bunch of cr**. You've all seen the pictures on TV of the victims of insurgent assaults and no doubt felt very sorry at the time, then in the next breath there are some who are moaning about their privacy when some poor sod is burying bits and pieces of their loved ones.

PLEASE don't give me the civil liberty rubbish, have a little respect for those who are trying to keep you all safe in your beds tonight and spare just a wee thought for those who have to do the dirty work and put their lives on the line so we can all sit behind our computers and bit ch and moan in comparative safety.

edit...I must improve my spelling and grammar

[Alane]

"Do you really and honestly think that the combined police forces of the UK would sell DNA data to insurance companies? ". Ten years ago would you have been as scathing about the possibility of the DVLA selling your details to Tescos and any dodgy wheel clamping organisation that asks?  The answer is that if it is seen as a money spinner for a cash strapped government then anything is possible.

A lot of claptrap is spouted about how the "security forces" need this or that power to combat terrorists. ID cards, DNA testing etc - none of these measures would have stopped the 9/11 attacks or the attacks on the tube system last year. Civil libeties aren't "cr*p" they are something that a lot of people have given their lives over the years to preserve and we give them up at our peril.

The more powers we give our rulers the more they consider themselves to be our masters. When government ministers announce they are going to change the laws on free speech because they don't like a particular court verdict when the defendant has said no more than the head of the intelligence services then we should start to get worried. And before anyone gets there first - I hold no brief for the BNP and consider their views to be odious but my opinions - or the fact that they aren't mainstream - shouldn't make them illegal..

 

[Deimos]

[quote user="Logan"]

If you live in France I'm afraid you have no choice but to accept that everyone knows everything about you.....The French security services and other clandestine government departments routinely monitor all our telephone calls, e mail, text traffic, EDF bills, telephone bills, any bill etc.etc; They are likely to also monitor the traffic on this and every other forum web site that has a French dimension......

[/quote]

Whatever the French may or may not do, according to the report originally referenced in this thread the UK gov. are far worse and monitor a lot more.

Ian

[Unknown]

The whole world has gone mad in my opinion.

I listened to an interview on the Jeremy Vine show the other day, about a guy who spends his time demonstrating.  He dresses up as Charlie Chaplin and silently holds a placard.

Apparently the government have passed a law to prevent anyone demonstrating within, I think it was 500 metres of the governments buildings.  This bloke has been arrested several times.

What is the world coming to?

[WJT]

Dotty, Unfortunately the terrorists are winning in that respect. If they let one nutter do it than someone that would actually want to blow the government buildings up next. I personally support that action.

Logan, I am really surprised that the French government monitor the way you say they do. Has it always been this way? I must admit I am with the " if you have nothing to hide why worry" train of thought particularly nowadays. For example just reading on the Yahoo news page yesterday that they have recent intelligence to support the fact that Al Qaeda is looking for ways to get nuclear weapons. But reading your post does make me feel uncomfortable. I have heard stories on how the French tax people can be extremely intimidating to businesses and can make day to day life very difficult. But didn't know it was to that extent.

As far as the DNA information, I personally don't fear that the government would sell that type of information. However, when it becomes readily available the insurance companies will want the information. As Cassis pointed out, it could be as simple as offering a rate similar to no claims discount on car insurance or non-smokers on life insurance. If you can prove that you have healthy DNA perhaps get better rates. But where would that leave the rest of us that can't or won't provide good information.

 

 

[Dick Smith]

It is actually much more likely that insurance companies will insist on you having a DNA test before they will insure you, and the carrot may well be that rates will go down for 'healthy' DNA. Those with 'faulty' DNA will become uninsurable, although it must be said that exactly the same thing was said about AIDS, and that hasn't come to pass.

A lot of the rest of this, and especially Alane's post, is in my opinion paranoid rubbish.

[Alane]

Dick

"A lot of the rest of this, and especially Alane's post, is in my opinion paranoid rubbish."

A bit emotive isn't it? The idea of a benevolent protective state is fine until it abuses those powers and you find you are powerless to stop it. Perhaps you could explain what exactly is paranoid in what I wrote?

[Dick Smith]

Unreasoned and unreasonable fear with no evidence to support it.

[Chris Head]

Alane, you're just one of millions of theorists, the armchair do-gooders.

Take a step or three back.

Tonight the West would have killed some Muslims and some Muslims would have killed some Westerners...how would you be feeling if 500kg of ordnance had wiped out your family right now? Or if a GI had put a round into your wifes head? The so called terrorists have as much right to fight their fight as the West has to fight it's fight, but we took the fight to them so who could possibly moan about the odd bomb going off in London? The Yanks and Brits kill infinately more Muslims.

And you pontificate about your precious privacy being invaded? Jeeeez, get a life.

[Alane]

Dick

Thanks for the quite reasonable definition of paranoia but you still haven't explained why what I wrote is paranoid.

Unreasoned and unreasonable fear is a state many people have got themselves into in relation to crime and in particular the terrorist threat. I have no doubt the terrorist threat is real and that a lot of dedicated people are doing a tremendous job in keeping us safe behind our keyboards but kneejerk reactions aren't the way to deal with it.

If you don't like my suggestion that it is a bad idea to give governments powers they don't need then consider that if we go down the road of invading the privacy and restricting the activities of the law abiding individual without any good reason the government are wasting resources that could be better directed in the fight against crime and terrorism.

Chris

I've just seen your post - I've never been called a do-gooder before. Come off it - where did I say that we shouldn't do all we can to fight the terrorist threat?

[Dick Smith]

You have no evidence for what you are saying. You are simply parrotting general civil liberties tosh. You may well believe it, but that doesn't make it true. Is that clear enough?

Instead of mealy-mouthed statements ("I have no doubt that" usually means "I don't believe it") give us some examples of where, as in your original case, the UK government or its agents the police forces of the UK (you seem, by the way, to think there is only one, but there are many) have taken confidential information and sold it to commercial enterprises, or on what basis you hold your suspicions that they may do so in the future. Though you seem to be backing away from that now.

It is rubbish like this which prevents a sensible debate taking place. Try a bit of clear and critical thinking - or indeed, thinking of any kind.  Sorry, I suspect you may not get told the truth very often.

By the way - did you give your religion as 'Jedi'?

[Chris Head]

So Alane...would you accept your 'activities' being inconveniently restricted if it meant that one of your loved ones was saved from a bomb?

[WJT]

[quote user="Chris Head"]

Alane, you're just one of millions of theorists, the armchair do-gooders.

Take a step or three back.

Tonight the West would have killed some Muslims and some Muslims would have killed some Westerners...how would you be feeling if 500kg of ordnance had wiped out your family right now? Or if a GI had put a round into your wifes head? The so called terrorists have as much right to fight their fight as the West has to fight it's fight, but we took the fight to them so who could possibly moan about the odd bomb going off in London? The Yanks and Brits kill infinately more Muslims.

And you pontificate about your precious privacy being invaded? Jeeeez, get a life.

[/quote]

 

Chris, personally, I cannot see where you could possibly compare the actions of terrorists to our troops! At the moment, terrorists setting bombs off blowing themselves up and killing mostly other Muslims (along with kidnapping as happened today) on a daily basis as well as our boys (and girls) over there. I don't think you will find too many of our troops intentionally putting bullets in the heads of Muslim wives!

Your statement that the Yanks and Brits kill infinitely more Muslims is incorrect. It is Muslim terrorists killing other Muslims at the moment.

[Alane]

Dick

You are using the old debating device of putting up a false argument, attributing it to me and then arguing against it. Nice try.

I asked you if you would have believed ten years ago that the DVLA would sell our details to Tesco and others? A previous poster highlighted the release of medical information which again we would not have expected 10 years ago. I don't back away from my view that the government, particluary this one,  would be quite capable of selling other information. The fact that you don't agree with that doesn't make it untrue.

I am well aware that there are many police forces and security agencies in this country but as I hadn't mentioned the word police in any of my posts, other than to quote you, have to assume that you have deduced I think there is only one by use of the "critical thinking" you refer to.

When I say "I am in no doubt" thats what I mean, nothing more, nothing less. You are fond of pointing people at exactly what you wrote, try doing the same yourself.

My religion is no concern of yours and is certainly not Jedi - but then that was just a put down, like the bulk of your response, just bluster, to hide the fact that you had no real argument. If you want a debate on this topic I'm happy to oblige but to indulge in late night trades of insults - life's too short.

Chris - I said knee-jerk reactions - I have not said, although it is surely only a matter of time before someone says I did, that the security services and the many police forces worldwide shouldn't do all that is necessary to combat the terrorist threat. I have no issue with CCTV or e-mail surveilance and heaven help anyone who has to monitor the content of forums like this. The days when the cold grey ships of the Grand Fleet kept danger at bay are long gone, if they ever existed. If someone can demonstrate that ID cards, DNA matching and suchlike will prevent terrorist attacks then I'll buckle down and carry one - but they haven't and spending billions on introducing them which could be spent on better intelligence, counter terrorist operations, or even, heaven forbid, humanitarian aid to some of the countries that hate us, would be a better use of limited resources.

Any way - I'm off to sleep safe and sound in my bed.

[Dick Smith]

Alane:

""Do you really and honestly think that the combined police forces of

the UK would sell DNA data to insurance companies? ". Ten years ago

would you have been as scathing about the possibility of the DVLA

selling your details to Tescos and any dodgy wheel clamping

organisation that asks?  The answer is that if it is seen as a money

spinner for a cash strapped government then anything is possible."

Those are your words - how am I making that up? It certainly is a false argument, but it is attributable to you. I am not setting up a straw man here, I am responding to what others have stated and you have agreed with.