• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.

Britain: Police State?

Police State

Personaly, I dont rate our Cops very highly these days. I went to the aid of one who was arresting a somewhat violent offender, after he cuffed the guy the copper said to me that I,d better shove off in case I was lifted too, for assault, for Gawds sake!.

Well, as my old Nan used to say, "Once a Policeman, Never a Man". Discuss.
 
Expect members of the House of Lords to start vanishing in mysterious circumstances, or be caught on CCTV propositioning Rent Boys/Prostitutes/Sheep....

The Grauniad
Lords: rise of CCTV is threat to freedom


World's most pervasive surveillance undermines basic liberties, say peers
Alan Travis, home affairs editor The Guardian, Friday 6 February 2009

The steady expansion of the "surveillance society" risks undermining fundamental freedoms including the right to privacy, according to a House of Lords report published today.

The peers say Britain has constructed one of the most extensive and technologically advanced surveillance systems in the world in the name of combating terrorism and crime and improving administrative efficiency.


Alan Travis on a Lords report warning that CCTV is a threat to freedom Link to this audio
The report, Surveillance: Citizens and the State, by the Lords' constitution committee, says Britain leads the world in the use of CCTV, with an estimated 4m cameras, and in building a national DNA database, with more than 7% of the population already logged compared with 0.5% in the America.

The cross-party committee which includes Lord Woolf, a former lord chief justice, and two former attorneys general, Lord Morris and Lord Lyell, warns that "pervasive and routine" electronic surveillance and the collection and processing of personal information is almost taken for granted.

Although many surveillance practices and data collection processes are unknown to most people, the expansion in their use represents "one of the most significant changes in the life of the nation since the end of the second world war", the report says. The committee warns that the national DNA database could be used for "malign purposes", challenges whether CCTV cuts crime and questions whether local authorities should be allowed to use surveillance powers at all.

The peers say privacy is an "essential prerequisite to the exercise of individual freedom" and the growing use of surveillance and data collection needs to be regulated by executive and legislative restraint at all times.

Lord Goodlad, the former Tory chief whip and committee chairman, said there could be no justification for this gradual but incessant creep towards every detail about an individual being recorded and pored over by the state.

"The huge rise in surveillance and data collection by the state and other organisations risks undermining the long-standing traditions of privacy and individual freedom which are vital for democracy," he said. "If the public are to trust that information about them is not being improperly used there should be much more openness about what data is collected, by whom and how it is used."

The constitution committee makes more than 40 recommendations to protect individual privacy, including the deletion of all profiles from the national DNA database except for those of convicted criminals and a call for the mandatory encryption of personal data held by public and private organisations that are legally obliged to hold it.

But the report is silent on proposals from Jacqui Smith, the home secretary, for a "superdatabase" tracking everybody's emails, calls, texts and internet use and from Jack Straw, the justice secretary, to lower barriers on the widespread sharing of personal data across the public sector.

But the peers are critical of whether local authorities should continue to exercise their surveillance powers under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000. They say examples of local councils using covert surveillance operations to stop fly tipping, reducing dog fouling, and investigate fraudulent school place applications led them to question how they acquired such powers. Ministers should examine whether local authorities, rather than the police, are the appropriate bodies to mount surveillance operations, the peers say. If they are, then their use should be confined to crime investigations that carry a minimum two-year prison sentence.

The peers say individuals targeted by such operations should be informed when it is completed, as long as no investigation is prejudiced.
 
BigBrother1984_sml.gif
 
Government plans travel database

The government is compiling a database to track and store the international travel records of millions of Britons.

Computerised records of all 250 million journeys made by individuals in and out of the UK each year will be kept for up to 10 years.

The government says the database is essential in the fight against crime, illegal immigration and terrorism.

But opposition MPs and privacy campaigners fear it is a significant step towards a surveillance society.

The intelligence centre will store names, addresses, telephone numbers, seat reservations, travel itineraries and credit card details of travellers.

Big Brother


Shadow home secretary Chris Grayling said: "The government seems to be building databases to track more and more of our lives.

"The justification is always about security or personal protection. But the truth is that we have a government that just can't be trusted over these highly sensitive issues. We must not allow ourselves to become a Big Brother society."

A spokesman for campaign group NO2ID said: "When your travel plans, who you are travelling with, where you are going to and when are being recorded you have to ask yourself just how free is this country?"

The e-Borders scheme covers flights, ferries and rail journeys and the Home Office says similar schemes run in other countries including the US, Canada, Spain and Australia.

Minister of State for borders and immigration Phil Woolas said the government was determined to ensure the UK's border remained one of the toughest in the world.

"Our hi-tech electronic borders system will allow us to count all passengers in and out of the UK and [it] targets those who aren't willing to play by our rules," he said.

"Already e-Borders has screened over 75 million passengers against immigration, customs and police watch-lists, leading to over 2,700 arrests for crimes such as murder, rape and assault."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7877182.stm

Apart from my recent cruise, which was probably a one-off, I hardly go anywhere nowadys. Make perms and combinations of 'rynner goes to pub/Tesco/Library/computer repair shop' several thousand times over, and that covers most of it, apart from bus rides and country walks.

And big brother has missed a trick with the bus passes. When they were first issued they had an electronic chip which had to be read by the ticket machine on the bus, which would have made it easy to log 'rynner got ticket from Hayle to Truro', etc. But the passes changed a couple of years ago, and now they just have to be shown to the driver.(But many buses do have CCTV on board...)
 
rynner2 said:
And big brother has missed a trick with the bus passes. When they were first issued they had an electronic chip which had to be read by the ticket machine on the bus, which would have made it easy to log 'rynner got ticket from Hayle to Truro', etc. But the passes changed a couple of years ago, and now they just have to be shown to the driver.(But many buses do have CCTV on board...)

RFID chips can be read from a distance now, and they can be sandwiched between layers of card...
 
Mythopoeika said:
RFID chips can be read from a distance now, and they can be sandwiched between layers of card...
Our bus passes were originally just for Cornwall, and they were supposed to double-up as library cards too (and other things, which never came to pass).

But when the National bus pass scheme came in, I guess there were too many different systems around the country to comfortably merge them. (Plus, our bus passes seemed to have frequent chip failures, which may have been another reason to go for a simpler system.) So now I have separate bus pass and library cards.

And I'm pretty sure the bus ticket machines don't have RFID capability...

Anyhow, I hope the police and security services have more to worry about than my humble journeys! 8)
 
What I find really sad is the next generation will have a complete different take on the definitions of Freedom and Privacy that I enjoyed growing up in the UK. Already we're seeing how society's mindset is changing because of the surveillance state.
 
its only a matter of time folks

Passive UHF RFID

passive reading to up to 30 feet away
no maintenance
no clashes

tagged and bagged

why have the trouble trying to ID with cctv when each camera could be fitted with a reader and pick up a tag, ID card passport, driving license, posh jacket from next purchased by target,

all you,ve got to is make mandatory to carry ID, the rest is childs play, bit dear mind , but we love to waste money don't we ???
 
Thing is, we had/have mandatory ID in Germany when I grew up and it seemed very normal and quite handy. It was a small card and I had it with my other stuff in my purse. You needed it to get into clubs [proof of age] and all I always liked the idea that when someone was caught without a ticket in the tube, they had to show ID and if not, they were marched to the police. Not many people tried and our system is very open because of that [no turnstyles]. However the reason I am so against ID at this day and age is the amount of personal detail it has to have. Is it really neseccary to know everything about a person? I don't think so, considering that shady characters will not have any ID in the first place, so its the honest mugs that get caught doing stuff "wrong" and that is just bullying.
Why is a picture and a name on an official ID card not enough to recognise someone?
Britain is becoming very dangerously interested in people's privacy and I will not stand for it.
 
Tell you what

why don't we spend 4.4 billion when were broke as a country facing a banking disaster day by day.

on ID cards that are not mandatory !!! hey thats a good idea.

theres no point in issuing ID cards in any shape or form unless its mandatory.

no good saying it won't happen Ted

is it compulsory to wear a seatbelt in a car ???? how difficult is that to enforce ?

not happening errrrmmm 2012 ring a bell anywhere ?



http://nds.coi.gov.uk/content/Detail.as ... wsAreaID=2

"From 2010 young people can apply for the card and from 2012 the National Identity Service will begin to roll-out identity cards for the general population in significant numbers."
 
ted_bloody_maul said:
It would simply be impossible - and pointless - to enforce mandatory carrying of ID.

Hmmmm. They make a pretty good job of enforcing the paying of taxes.
I'm sure once a few thousand people get the message via a £1000 quid fine or a custodial sentence, Joe Public will become quite compliant.

And I'm not convinced the Government haven't already weighed up the 'pointlessness' of it all and the constant warnings from civil liberties groups in their goal of whatever it is they want to use it for in future.
 
Just pointing out that the government has made mandatory some practise or other does not demonstrate that all activity can be so easily controlled by its will. Tax and seatbelts are hardly comparable - the government is rather poor at enforcing tax law in fact hence the large grey economy. It can only enforce the law on those who choose to subscribe to it, in effect. The rationale behind introducing laws for detection of criminal behaviour and for the collection of some but not all potential tax revenues are clearly different. Likewise with seatbelts the way in which the public responds - and the way in which those choosing to break the law respond especially - makes things quite different.
 
You could make it de facto compulsary by making it practically impossible to function without one...i.e. made it mandatory to show ID when purchasing alcohol...slip that one through on the basis that it's unfair only to demand ID from only from people who look underage...can't see your doctor without your ID card...can't claim benefits without your ID card...on the basis of stopping terrorism you have to show your ID card when buying bus or train tickets...clubs, cinemas, pubs, shopping malls etc demanding ID cards...

Might not actually be mandatory, but except for the complete outsiders the effect would be the same....
 
And some fun...

A secret police intelligence unit has been set up to spy on Left-wing and Right-wing political groups.

The Confidential Intelligence Unit (CIU) has the power to operate across the UK and will mount surveillance and run informers on ‘domestic extremists’.

Its job is to build up a detailed picture of radical campaigners.

Targets will include environmental groups involved in direct action such as Plane Stupid, whose supporters invaded the runway at Stansted Airport in December.

The unit also aims to identify the ring-leaders behind violent demonstrations such as the recent anti-Israel protests in London, and to infiltrate neo-Nazi groups, animal liberation groups and organisations behind unlawful industrial action such as secondary picketing.

The CIU’s role will be similar to the ‘counter subversion’ functions formerly carried out by MI5.

The so-called reds under the bed operations focused on trade unionists and peace campaigners but were abandoned by MI5 to concentrate on Islamic terrorism.

The unit is being set up by the Association of Chief Police Officers (Acpo) and will be based at Scotland Yard in Central London.


The Mail

OK, not so fun, but Henry Porter's view

"A secret police intelligence unit has been set up to spy on leftwing and rightwing political groups," said the story in the Mail on Sunday. Who has decided that political and environmental groups consisting of individuals, who are guaranteed the rights of demonstration, association, free speech and privacy under the Human Rights Act, should be spied upon by this new sinister police unit?

The answer is the Association of Chief Police Officers – and that is the problem.

Few understand that ACPO is a private company, which happens to be funded by a Home Office grant and money from 44 police authorities. But despite its important role in drafting and implementing policies that affect the fundamental freedoms of this country, ACPO is protected from freedom of information requests and its proceedings remain largely hidden from public view. In reality ACPO is no more troubled by public scrutiny than the freemasons.

That is wrong. Senior police officers are acting with increasing autonomy in drafting these authoritarian new policies. If you wonder how it came to be that police officers are being equipped with 10,000 stun guns, despite the reports of hundreds of deaths in the United States, or how the automatic number plate recognition camera network was set up to record and store data from most road journeys, look no further than ACPO.

Too often it seems ACPO is the driving force behind policy, and the Home Office succumbs, either because of its own autocratic instincts or because the police are exceptionally good at pushing through the things they want.

Now the police have set up the confidential intelligence unit to monitor the political life of this nation. The only reason we know of this is because the Mail on Sunday followed up an internal police job advertisement for the head of the confidential intelligence unit, who would work closely with government departments, university authorities and private sector companies "to remove the threat of criminality and public disorder that arises from domestic extremism". The story tells us that the CIU will also prevent details of its operations being made public.

Source
 
techybloke666 said:
its only a matter of time folks

Passive UHF RFID

passive reading to up to 30 feet away
no maintenance
no clashes

tagged and bagged

why have the trouble trying to ID with cctv when each camera could be fitted with a reader and pick up a tag, ID card passport, driving license, posh jacket from next purchased by target,

all you,ve got to is make mandatory to carry ID, the rest is childs play, bit dear mind , but we love to waste money don't we ???

You could view Little Brother (Cory Doctorow) as a survival guide....
 
Timble2 said:
You could make it de facto compulsary by making it practically impossible to function without one...i.e. made it mandatory to show ID when purchasing alcohol...slip that one through on the basis that it's unfair only to demand ID from only from people who look underage...can't see your doctor without your ID card...can't claim benefits without your ID card...on the basis of stopping terrorism you have to show your ID card when buying bus or train tickets...clubs, cinemas, pubs, shopping malls etc demanding ID cards...

Might not actually be mandatory, but except for the complete outsiders the effect would be the same....

To gain access to a doctor (at least initially) or to claim benefit you're already required to show some state provided identification. With regards to payments of various kinds - given the sheer volume of credit and debit card transactions (not to mention the method by which most get hold of cash) most of this information is already available. Of course, it might not be possible to monitor in real time but then in practical terms it's barely possible to monitor in real time with the introductions of the various technologies proposed unless for some reason you're already a suspect. In any case it still wouldn't be mandatory in that permanent surveillance would be acheivable in the sense referred to earlier ie uhf rfid installed

Also, the fact that you'd still be able to regularly leave your home without identification renders the whole project pointless from a anti-criminal perspective. Even if it were impossible to leave home without it it would still be largely unenforceable due to the frequency with which it would occur, the ease with which a valid excuse could be provided and the procedures that would be required to detain a suspect.
 
Mythopoeika said:
Enforcement?
Well, 'they' have the police, the army and the secret service working for them.
We, the people, don't.

I think it's unlikely that the army will be deployed every time a jogger is stopped sans ID card.
 
"A secret police intelligence unit has been set up to spy on leftwing and rightwing political groups," said the story in the Mail on Sunday. Who has decided that political and environmental groups consisting of individuals, who are guaranteed the rights of demonstration, association, free speech and privacy under the Human Rights Act, should be spied upon by this new sinister police unit?

The answer is the Association of Chief Police Officers – and that is the problem.

Few understand that ACPO is a private company, which happens to be funded by a Home Office grant and money from 44 police authorities. But despite its important role in drafting and implementing policies that affect the fundamental freedoms of this country, ACPO is protected from freedom of information requests and its proceedings remain largely hidden from public view. In reality ACPO is no more troubled by public scrutiny than the freemasons.

Hmm. It's not hugely surprising that far left and far right groups, as well as organisations which probably qualify as terrorist (such as the ALF) are of interest to the police.

I'm usually a fan of Henry Porter but I think he's being a little disingenous here. ACPO as I understand it is a company limited by guarantee, which is the standard format for a body which is not trading and is used extensively by charities, social clubs etc. Calling it a "private company" conjures up a picture that it is being used as a commercial enterprise. It would be hard to see what other legal format could be used for such an organisation.

I also think that the "freemasons" comment is something of a cheap shot and unworthy of Porter.

That said, I'm surprised that a public body such as ACPO is exempt from FOI requests. Does anyone have any more information on this?
 
ted_bloody_maul said:
Just pointing out that the government has made mandatory some practise or other does not demonstrate that all activity can be so easily controlled by its will. Tax and seatbelts are hardly comparable - the government is rather poor at enforcing tax law in fact hence the large grey economy. It can only enforce the law on those who choose to subscribe to it, in effect. The rationale behind introducing laws for detection of criminal behaviour and for the collection of some but not all potential tax revenues are clearly different. Likewise with seatbelts the way in which the public responds - and the way in which those choosing to break the law respond especially - makes things quite different.

The point about tax is that Income Tax was introduced in 1799 as a temporary measure to finance the War Against Terror...er I mean Napoleon. The fact that it has become the cornerstone of Public Finance is just one precedent where a measure can have wider implications for future generations.

Also, I think it's wrong to say that the Government can only enforce the Law on those who subscribe to it. That principle simply wouldn't hold up in court.
 
Ted

its easy to make them compulsory without the need for them to announce it.

all it takes is

ID cards are needed for any public service access and access and purchases to supermakets.

job done, without your card you would be buggered !
 
techybloke666 said:
ID cards are needed for any public service access and access and purchases to supermakets.

job done, without your card you would be buggered !
I read a short SF story with that theme - back in the 60s! :shock:

(Sadly, I can't remember title or author now... :( )
 
rynner2 said:
techybloke666 said:
ID cards are needed for any public service access and access and purchases to supermakets.

job done, without your card you would be buggered !
I read a short SF story with that theme - back in the 60s! :shock:

(Sadly, I can't remember title or author now... :( )

What? If you didn't have your iD card you would be buggered? Blimey! :shock:
 
ted_bloody_maul said:
Mythopoeika said:
Enforcement?
Well, 'they' have the police, the army and the secret service working for them.
We, the people, don't.

I think it's unlikely that the army will be deployed every time a jogger is stopped sans ID card.

But if we had mass protests that got out of hand, then the army might be used.
 
National ID card offences - already in place
19.10.2006 17:03

New offences under the ID Cards Act include the following (at least correct just before Bill was passed):
*refusal to obey an order to register = £2500
*failure to submit to fingerprinting and biometric scanning = £2500
*failure to provide information demanded by the government = £2500
*failure to attend an interview at a specified place and time = £2500
*failure to notify authorities about a lost, stolen, damaged or defective card = up to 1yr in prison and/or a fine
*failure to renew a card = £1000
*failure to attend subsequent fingerprinting and biometric scanning when demanded = £1000
*failure to provide subsequent information when demanded = £1000
*failure to attend subsequent interview at specified place and time when demanded = £1000
*failure to notify authorities of any change in personal circumstances (including change of address) = £1000
*providing false information = up to 2 years and/or a fine
 
You will not be required to use a card unless you wish to work, use the banking or health system, travel or receive benefits


that just about covers everyone except bums in card board boxes.

and perhaps terrorists !!!
 
Back
Top