UK monitors EVERY MOVE YOU MAKE

[KenpoEMT]

I've always wanted to have my every move monitored by some unqualified government employee... When can we do this in the US???

http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/transport/article334686.ece

Britain is to become the first country in the world where the movements of all vehicles on the roads are recorded. A new national surveillance system will hold the records for at least two years.

Terrorism is a wonderful excuse for this type of government snoopery.

 

[KenpoEMT]

The network will incorporate thousands of existing CCTV cameras which are being converted to read number plates automatically night and day to provide 24/7 coverage of all motorways and main roads, as well as towns, cities, ports and petrol-station forecourts.
By next March a central database installed alongside the Police National Computer in Hendon, north London, will store the details of 35 million number-plate "reads" per day. These will include time, date and precise location, with camera sites monitored by global positioning satellites

All in the name of safety... Hey! Let's expand this to cover all pedestrians!

 

[michaeledward]

I blame STING. It was all his idea. Neurotic over his ex ..

~ Every move you make ~
~ Every breath you take ~
~ Every cake you bake ~
~ I'll be watching you ~



p.s. I know the words are wrong, the drummer used to sing this one, I just sang "da, da, da,da da", where it went.

 

[KenpoEMT]

:rofl:

 

[Makalakumu]

I predict that we'll see that soon enough...

 

[KenpoEMT]

I predict that we'll see that soon enough...

I fear that you are correct.
The technology to do this certainly exists already.

Biomonitoring...Cameras everywhere...Records that never die...

 

[Makalakumu]

I fear that you are correct.
The technology to do this certainly exists already.

Biomonitoring...Cameras everywhere...Records that never die...

Chips are the next big thing. Just wait until we are (made to be) afraid of something enough, and we'll download them like a bunch of sheep. The chips have already been approved by the FDA and they are used in pets and in a few other operants.

 

[KenpoEMT]

Here's a good read:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0252072154/ref=pd_sl_aw_alx-jeb-9-1_book_5851062_2/002-2944409-3066456?n=283155

Book title: I, Cyborg
Author: Dr. Kevin Warwick

Book Description
An account of an artificial intelligence experiment in humans.

Computer chips will be inserted into the nervous systems of both the author, a professor of Cybernetics, and his wife. The experiment is to determine if emotions such as intoxication, anger, lust, can be read by the computer in terms of patterns of nervous excitement. Can these recorded emotions be beamed back to the chip in the body and experienced all over again? Will the emotions be communicable between two people – if one feels desire in New York, will the other be able to feel it in London? Will it change forever what it means to be human?

Federally funded research?
Introducing the federal governments new "Happy Chip!" A good citizen is a happy citizen!

 

[sgtmac_46]

Chips are the next big thing. Just wait until we are (made to be) afraid of something enough, and we'll download them like a bunch of sheep. The chips have already been approved by the FDA and they are used in pets and in a few other operants.

This is what happens when we hide from the enemy rather than hunt him down and kill him. A society of brave citizens never need fear this kind of intrusion. But a society of cowards certainly might. I'd rather see our soldiers killing terrorists, than bureaucrats putting up surveillance systems.

I support the former, and strongly OPPOSE the later. Of course, that's what I believe about most laws. They should be designed to punish the law breaker, severly, not try and punish every citizen.

 

[Simon Curran]

I must admit, I don't subscribe to the "conspiracy theory" line of thought, I think the law enfocement agencies have a tough enough job to do as it is, and anything that can take a bit of the load off of them is fine by me, plus, if you have done nothing wrong, then you have nothing to fear.

 

[KenpoEMT]

...if you have done nothing wrong, then you have nothing to fear.

I love my privacy.

Elected officials and federal, or state, employees do not have the right to monitor the daily wanderings of law-abiding citizens. My government needs to have "probable cause" in order to violate my privacy. At least it did until the tragic events of 9/11.

I do not fear a government that tries to exercise the privilege of protecting me and my family.

I do fear government employees that violate my rights, at great financial cost to tax payers, while proclaiming their obligation to protect me from an invisible enemy.

 

[Xequat]

Terrorism is a wonderful excuse for this type of government snoopery.

Exactly...this is kind of scary and exactly why we have the right to privacy built into our governmental system. This is kind of like my viewpoint of the PATRIOT Act. I don't mind the surveillance of certain individuals and monitoring specifically for key words and all that...my biggest problem is that it's being used against all criminals...especially drug dealers, and that's not at all what it's designed for. I do not want the government tracking every move I make. I don't rob banks, I don't really do anything illegal or even immoral (except vote for Bush...haha beat you to it), so yeah, I have nothing to worry about, until my car gets seen by some satellite going to a street that has a felon living on it or they find a way to track the speed my vehicle's going and give me a speeding ticket from inner space. I'll hit a strip club every once in a while for a bachelor party or something, so that would probably end up flagging me as a potential sexual predator. This is a total violation of what I believe Anerica was founded upon, so I hope it never makes it here and I hope it gets shot down (literally or not, I don't care) in England.

 

[sgtmac_46]

I love my privacy.

Elected officials and federal, or state, employees do not have the right to monitor the daily wanderings of law-abiding citizens. My government needs to have "probable cause" in order to violate my privacy. At least it did until the tragic events of 9/11.

I do not fear a government that tries to exercise the privilege of protecting me and my family.

I do fear government employees that violate my rights, at great financial cost to tax payers, while proclaiming their obligation to protect me from an invisible enemy.

I agree most heartily. I don't think it should be necessary to monitor every citizen to protect ourselves. We know who the enemy is, all of this is an attempt to impose security concerns, without targeting the terrorists themselves.

You either give your warriors free reign to kill the enemy as needed afar, or you spend your time paranoid in your own homes and streets.

This is nothing but more evidence of how far we have fallen as a people. Too skittish to actually kill the enemy, and too timid to live with the consequences of not killing the enemy. We really should just make up our minds.

At any rate, it should never be necessary for US citizens to give up any constitutional protections in the name of security. Target the enemy, not US citizens.

 

[KenpoEMT]

...

This is nothing but more evidence of how far we have fallen as a people. Too skittish to actually kill the enemy, and too timid to live with the consequences of not killing the enemy.

...

That is the most accurate description of the current of American politics that I've ever heard.

Let's fight this war as wars need to be fought. To say that there aren't any hard targets or nation states that we could destroy in order to bring a swift end to action is certainly fallacious.

Let us fight this war as if it were a real war, or let us come home and strengthen our borders.

At this point, either one of these options would be acceptable to me.

...let's just pick one, and let's do it right.

I don't need to lose my privacy in order for my nation to become safe.

 

[mantis]

This is what happens when we hide from the enemy rather than hunt him down and kill him. A society of brave citizens never need fear this kind of intrusion. But a society of cowards certainly might. I'd rather see our soldiers killing terrorists, than bureaucrats putting up surveillance systems.

I support the former, and strongly OPPOSE the later. Of course, that's what I believe about most laws. They should be designed to punish the law breaker, severly, not try and punish every citizen.

dude
we've already invaded a couple of countries to "hunt him down"
what else do you need?!
i'd rather be dead once than being followed my entire life

 

[sgtmac_46]

dude
we've already invaded a couple of countries to "hunt him down"
what else do you need?!
i'd rather be dead once than being followed my entire life

Think you missed it. I didn't suggest any of us get followed. I suggested the terrorists get hunted down. I'd rather kill a 1000 foreign terrorists, than restrict the rights of 1 American citizen.

I do not support wider surveillance of the general population as a whole, for any reason. My position on law and crime, is that the average citizen should NEVER be punished for the crimes of a few. Rather, the few should be SEVERELY punished for the crimes they commit.

 

[KenpoEMT]

...I'd rather kill a 1000 foreign terrorists, than restrict the rights of 1 American citizen.

...My position on law and crime, is that the average citizen should NEVER be punished for the crimes of a few. Rather, the few should be SEVERELY punished for the crimes they commit.

Well said.

 

[Danny T]

I agree most heartily. I don't think it should be necessary to monitor every citizen to protect ourselves. We know who the enemy is, all of this is an attempt to impose security concerns, without targeting the terrorists themselves.

You either give your warriors free reign to kill the enemy as needed afar, or you spend your time paranoid in your own homes and streets.

This is nothing but more evidence of how far we have fallen as a people. Too skittish to actually kill the enemy, and too timid to live with the consequences of not killing the enemy. We really should just make up our minds.

At any rate, it should never be necessary for US citizens to give up any constitutional protections in the name of security. Target the enemy, not US citizens.

The problem as I see it is that the people of the United States are not at war. Some of us are but for the most part we are not. How has this war affected you? How much of your life has changed because of this war. I dare to state for most of us absolutely non! We still get up in morning to got about our lives without any worry about if we will make it through the day because of the war. We give very little thought of how am I going to get to work or home again because of the war. We have no worry of getting food or clothing because of the war. We are not at war. Some of the government is and the military is but not we the people and as long as we are not at war we will not demand the government release the military to do its work in the manner it must be done. When our military is allowed to do its job they are great. What they are not any good at is police action. They are trained to kill and destroy the enemy. Not to coddle and make the world feel good. We know who the enemy is yet we have not pressured our congress to do something about them. We want to feel good about ourselves yet we play a deadly game of cat and mouse in the hopes of making the rest of the world feel good about us. Won't happen. Until we go to war and back the destruction of the enemy where ever they are we will be subjected to many types of rights infringements in the name of security. Destroy them where they live and operate and we won't have to fight them here. Part of that fight here is the surveillance we are now seeing and hearing about.

Danny

 

[sgtmac_46]

The problem as I see it is that the people of the United States are not at war. Some of us are but for the most part we are not. How has this war affected you? How much of your life has changed because of this war. I dare to state for most of us absolutely non! We still get up in morning to got about our lives without any worry about if we will make it through the day because of the war. We give very little thought of how am I going to get to work or home again because of the war. We have no worry of getting food or clothing because of the war. We are not at war. Some of the government is and the military is but not we the people and as long as we are not at war we will not demand the government release the military to do its work in the manner it must be done. When our military is allowed to do its job they are great. What they are not any good at is police action. They are trained to kill and destroy the enemy. Not to coddle and make the world feel good. We know who the enemy is yet we have not pressured our congress to do something about them. We want to feel good about ourselves yet we play a deadly game of cat and mouse in the hopes of making the rest of the world feel good about us. Won't happen. Until we go to war and back the destruction of the enemy where ever they are we will be subjected to many types of rights infringements in the name of security. Destroy them where they live and operate and we won't have to fight them here. Part of that fight here is the surveillance we are now seeing and hearing about.

Danny

I agree. Part of the surveillance here is the compromise that we force ourselves in to for only engaging the enemy in a half-hearted manner. If we are going to give him quarter, then we have to restrict our own liberties.

That's a compromise I don't feel we should make as a people. It is our enemy that wants to harm us, not the average citizen, so let them feel the entire consequences, not us.