And this is scary

[JAG]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/6524495.stm

"Talking" CCTV cameras that tell off people dropping litter or committing anti-social behaviour are to be extended to 20 areas across England.

I don't know about most, but the thought of talking CCTV cameras ordering people to do things, ordered by faceless people who can see everywhere you go and do, but cannot be talked to themselves, is possibly the most police state - type action taken by this government. Who is behind the cameras ordering us to do things, who has given them the power and why should they tell me to do things? I have the right aslong as I am not hurting others to do exactly what I want to do and I do not want some big brother - type faceless mass telling me otherwise.

It is cases such as this, which are so important in keeping civil liberties, which make the Daily Mail screaming about baa baa black sheep so ridiculous and so stupid on the Daily Mail's part. Because of their insessant screaming about a 'police state' and 'politically correct', real and dangerous infringes on our liberties are able to be brought in. That is as shameful as the proposal in itself.

Now even if these talking CCTV cameras stop some forms of anti-social behaviour like loud music, gangs shouting and pushing their weight about etc, do we really think that this is either the right way to deal with this or that it will do anything other that breed resentment and push the activities to areas where there are not these cameras? Does this mean we need cameras like these everywhere, and where does it end? Do we end police on the street and rely on talking CCTV cameras which can zap you if you disobey? This is big brother in reality and the fact it has not garnered significant news time is worrying.

And we all know that the only way to deal with anti-social behaviour and to fix it, is not by these overbearing authoritarian measures, but by sorting out the root causes of the behaviour in the first place.

[InsaneApache]

Well it's taken you some time to catch up mate, but hey, better late than never. I've been saying for years how draconian this government is. The only saving grace is that the government are such incompetent nincompoops that couldn't run a whelk stall, never mind an administration.

The faster we dump these idiots the better. Gordon for PM, just to finish the bastards off for another two decades.

Well done JAG you've turned the first corner.

Edit:for spelling

[Crazed Rabbit]

Hmmm. I appear to agree with you.

A question: are you opposed to omnipresent CCTV camera's that don't talk to people?

And we all know that the only way to deal with anti-social behaviour and to fix it, is not by these overbearing authoritarian measures, but by sorting out the root causes of the behaviour in the first place.

I think the 'root cause' of littering might just be...laziness.

Crazed Rabbit

[Devastatin Dave]

Wow, its good to see you JAG!!

How's out little Che doing?

[Adrian II]

Heh, the JAG'ster is back...

Good rant, bro'

[rory_20_uk]

Any solutions to the problems that they're trying to prevent? Homeopathy? Ear massage? Classes to try to group hug these cheeky little scamps with their high spirits until they don't smash property for laughs? I know it's not their fault, so just tell me who to blame - please!!!

I feel we need Trotsky back. He knew how to bring law and order to the masses.

[InsaneApache]

I was going to post something very similar Rory, but then I thought I'd leave it for someone else.

As an ex-paper pusher I can tell you this. I had a budget of £350, 000 pa to run the establishment I was the manager of, (well it was 20 odd years ago) and over 75% of it went on admin! Sound familiar?

[Big King Sanctaphrax]

I have the right aslong as I am not hurting others to do exactly what I want to do and I do not want some big brother - type faceless mass telling me otherwise.

I'm generally not in favour of these cameras as I imagine it will cost a huge amount and no-one will listen to them anyway, but this statement seems somewhat erroneous. You're right, you do have the right to do what you want as long as it's not hurting others, but

dropping litter or committing anti-social behaviour

don't seem to fall under that particular umbrella.

[Ironside]

I'm generally not in favour of these cameras as I imagine it will cost a huge amount and no-one will listen to them anyway, but this statement seems somewhat erroneous. You're right, you do have the right to do what you want as long as it's not hurting others, but don't seem to fall under that particular umbrella.

Doesn't make it less of an police state.

Makes a difference on the oppressive scale though.

as a conscript army is worse than useless

Now you got me curious.

Think were I live and 15+ years back and you might get my curiousity

[Banquo's Ghost]

Any solutions to the problems that they're trying to prevent? Homeopathy? Ear massage? Classes to try to group hug these cheeky little scamps with their high spirits until they don't smash property for laughs? I know it's not their fault, so just tell me who to blame - please!!!

I feel we need Trotsky back. He knew how to bring law and order to the masses.

I have an alternative solution.

Compulsory national service from 16 to 20 - not including military service, as a conscript army is worse than useless, but certainly including marching the unrepentant up and down hills in the rain for long periods of time. For the more constructive, lots of socially supportive jobs in the community - like litter picking. There would be options to join the regular armed services in the same manner as now (i.e. as professionals) or the nursing profession and suchlike. Training in literacy, numeracy and other essential skills would be important, and hard working people could earn the right to apprentice positions alongside the community work. University would not be an option until completion and satisfactory discharge.

It's about time more young people learned about societal responsibilities. There should be a parallel option for older people who haven't as yet got the message, focussed through the courts and benefit system.

Surveillance of the general citizenry is useless and dangerous for democracy. It creates a society of secrecy, mistrust and paranoia, rather than one of community and shared responsibilities.

[rory_20_uk]

I think that is an excellent plan. I wuold still put it under the control of the Armed Forces though, and allow those that want to choose a career in the armed forces to do so ASAP. As such it would be as pleasant or as miserable as the persons make it.

[KafirChobee]

Talking spy cameras are going to get "the bird" shown to them more often than a positive response - like picking up a disgarded candy wrapper.

The fear of terrorist activity seems (for the moment) to outweigh the majority of peoples' fear of the decline in their freedoms. Expect more evasive policies into the lives of democratic citizenry - and expect the majority of them to accept it as a necessity. After all, if one is doing nothing wrong - what do they have to hide? Beside their freedom to privacy - and that has always been a myth anyway.

[Kralizec]

Silly people. A police state is a SAFE state.

[rory_20_uk]

And as most acts do not have a definite effect on the liberties of others, but have a probability of doing so makes this far from clear cut, however the statement is written.

I fail to see how this shows my example is "wrong". Transponders on private planes infringes the rights of those on board whilst the lack of one does not cause the infringement of the rights of others.

And this of course neglects where the right of one's free speech falls foul of others not wanting to hear / see evidence of this.

That your country can have a war to prevent states leaving the Union shows how often this is referred to.