Lets settle this "UK is a Police State" rubbish, right now..

page: 5
13
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 15 2007 @ 08:49 AM
link   
Of course I don't like the fact of CCTV being in many businesses, but here I can avoid those businesses or live with it. But I can not avoid walking on the streets. Its just like your local authorities distrust the whole population and must monitor them all the time. I would not and do not like this.

Again there are harsh regulations about the phone tapping. I think the system they use is ok, and I cant blame them for making use of it a lot. Unless you are really involved in crime, chances are very low you are being tapped. While walking on a Central London street you will get filmed, no matter what.

And with UK being a member of Echelon, there is no question who is phone tapping champ, Uk or Germany in my mind.

[Edit: Last paragraph added]

[edit on 15-7-2007 by casketizer]




posted on Jul, 15 2007 @ 08:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by stumason

Originally posted by casketizer
And no, I don't consider the german police more approachable than the UK's, but at least they don't watch me all the time.


No, thats because they listen to your phone calls instead


Hehe..


lol good one

or a retired man (Barry Reingold) getting in a conversation with the locals at his gym saying "george bush is no different to bin laden" only to get the FBI knocking at his door.

[edit on 15-7-2007 by st3ve_o]



posted on Jul, 15 2007 @ 08:58 AM
link   
@WolfofWar

Those are the things i mean, UK hast them almost on every corner, there is not a single other Western "democracy" where you could find those.



posted on Jul, 15 2007 @ 08:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by casketizer
Of course I don't like the fact of CCTV being in many businesses, but here I can avoid those businesses or live with it. But I can not avoid walking on the streets. Its just like your local authorities distrust the whole population and must monitor them all the time. I would not and do not like this.


Monitoring implies record keeping and tracking. All they are doing is watching the streets in case anything should go down. It frees up Police resources by allowing them to deploy to where they are needed, rather than maintaining a presence EVERYWHERE at ALL TIMES.

WolfOfWar, care to trim your pics, mate? They're huge!

Also, your not really adding much to the discussion there.

All you've done is post pics of the Camera's used to regulate the Congestion charge and a control room full of half-blind security guards, one of whom looks asleep!!

Way to prove a point, whatever it was.....



posted on Jul, 15 2007 @ 09:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by casketizer
@WolfofWar

Those are the things i mean, UK hast them almost on every corner, there is not a single other Western "democracy" where you could find those.


They are for the congestion charge, not tracking people. They can't even track people, so if your scared of them, your barking up the wrong tree.



posted on Jul, 15 2007 @ 09:06 AM
link   
Yeah sure, and the guys on the monitors just watch traffic jams, ok i move back to UK tomorrow! NOT!



posted on Jul, 15 2007 @ 09:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by WolfofWar

Cameras? noo....we have no camera's here!

They don't exist. Theyre....ugh...privately owned....yeah.... nothing to worry about.

la la la la la!


Those cameras are London Congestions charging cameras, used only for pointing at cars.
Oh by the way, they also played a big part in identifying the two car bombers a few weekedns back.
Dont try and insinuate they are anything other than Congestion cameras



posted on Jul, 15 2007 @ 09:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by stumason
Monitoring implies record keeping and tracking. All they are doing is watching the streets in case anything should go down. It frees up Police resources by allowing them to deploy to where they are needed, rather than maintaining a presence EVERYWHERE at ALL TIMES.


Exactly, its just like having a policeman standing beside you ALL THE TIME, EVERYWHERE. And thats what i hate.
And of course it implies record keeping, or how did they find the 77 bombers after it happened? Some monitoring officer draw their image from remembering? Get real.



posted on Jul, 15 2007 @ 09:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by Chorlton

Oh by the way, they also played a big part in identifying the two car bombers a few weekedns back.
Dont try and insinuate they are anything other than Congestion cameras


Ahh, so they actually do watch people when needed. If a camera is there if films everything, no just traffic jams, some people really have illusions....



posted on Jul, 15 2007 @ 09:14 AM
link   
Have you considered seeing someone about your paranoia ?



posted on Jul, 15 2007 @ 09:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by stumason

Originally posted by casketizer
@WolfofWar

Those are the things i mean, UK hast them almost on every corner, there is not a single other Western "democracy" where you could find those.


They are for the congestion charge, not tracking people. They can't even track people, so if your scared of them, your barking up the wrong tree.


Can't track people? ofcourse they can. They have a human user on it, presumably, like most good CCTVs, with a scrolling zoom, and they have a camera on every corner.

One for every 14 people in the country

not just that, the UK has 20% of the world's CCTV cameras, yet only 1% of the world population. 20%!

With 20% of the worlds "population" of CCTVs all centralized in the UK, they could track whomever they wont, prohibiting they're on the streets. Just follow the person from camera to camera.


WolfOfWar, care to trim your pics, mate? They're huge!


Nah, they need to be that size. They shouldn't be small and convienant to pass up, they need to be large and fly in the face of people who claim that there are no "government CCTVs" on the streets and, I forget whom said it, but that 93% of all the CCTVs were "privately owned"


Also, your not really adding much to the discussion there.

Actually, I believe the pictures speak louder then words, I contributed fine, unlike this post you just made, which contributes nothing besides telling me how I didn't contribute....gosh, now I'm doing it.


All you've done is post pics of the Camera's used to regulate the Congestion charge and a control room full of half-blind security guards, one of whom looks asleep!!

Way to prove a point, whatever it was.....



Penn & Teller did a good experiment. They had some unsuspecting victims think they were working for the government with a surveillance van and a movable camera. They told them to watch if this van left. Next door, some racey and entertaining drama was unfolding outside, and inside (with the curtains open.) Almost all of those doing the experiment (4 out of 5) stopped surveilling to look at the more entertaining incident.

People aren't reliable to protect you through cameras, because they ignore things too easily, and get distracted. All your doing is keeping a record of your actions, and possibly incriminating yourself.

After all, how useful are they to monitor people, if all the cameras in the subway on 7/7 were mysteriously offline?

weren't very helpful then, now were they?



posted on Jul, 15 2007 @ 09:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by casketizer
Ahh, so they actually do watch people when needed. If a camera is there if films everything, no just traffic jams, some people really have illusions....


Er, no. WolfofWar has misrepresented two separate things and claimed they were the same. The Congestion camera's are automated and only have plate recognition software, which compares against known Congestion Charge payees. They don't require a human operator.

The control room he posted is for the local CCTV network, which isn't all to do with traffic.



posted on Jul, 15 2007 @ 09:20 AM
link   
Ahh its so nice those nice cameras help catch bombers and murderers and rapists.....
The SS and the Gestapo also caught a lot of murderers, rapists and other criminals, does that justify their methods? (I AM NOT SAYING THAT UK EQUALS NAZI GERMANY!!).

I fell good with a healthy dose of paranoia, its well justified in our times.



posted on Jul, 15 2007 @ 09:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by stumason

Originally posted by casketizer
Ahh, so they actually do watch people when needed. If a camera is there if films everything, no just traffic jams, some people really have illusions....


Er, no. WolfofWar has misrepresented two separate things and claimed they were the same. The Congestion camera's are automated and only have plate recognition software, which compares against known Congestion Charge payees. They don't require a human operator.

The control room he posted is for the local CCTV network, which isn't all to do with traffic.


I was aware of that, but do you honestly believe they don't use that material when it suits their purpose? The other members post just proved that when he said they helped catch the car bombers. If a camera is there and in control of authorities they will use it to the full extend of its capabilities.



posted on Jul, 15 2007 @ 09:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by WolfofWar

Can't track people? ofcourse they can. They have a human user on it, presumably, like most good CCTVs, with a scrolling zoom, and they have a camera on every corner.


No, they don't. They are plate recognition camera's, as explained above.


Originally posted by WolfofWar
One for every 14 people in the country

not just that, the UK has 20% of the world's CCTV cameras, yet only 1% of the world population. 20%!

With 20% of the worlds "population" of CCTVs all centralized in the UK, they could track whomever they wont, prohibiting they're on the streets. Just follow the person from camera to camera.


And the UK has one of the lowest crime rates in the world. Go figure.


Originally posted by WolfofWar
Nah, they need to be that size. They shouldn't be small and convienant to pass up, they need to be large and fly in the face of people who claim that there are no "government CCTVs" on the streets and, I forget whom said it, but that 93% of all the CCTVs were "privately owned"



Well, no doubt a mod will trim your pics for you then.

That was me who "claimed" that and, guess what, it's from the exact same report people like you use as a source to cite the infamous "300 times a day" claim. I linked to that report, obviously you deemed yourself above reading the thread.


Originally posted by WolfofWar
Actually, I believe the pictures speak louder then words, I contributed fine, unlike this post you just made, which contributes nothing besides telling me how I didn't contribute....gosh, now I'm doing it.


I've actually been involved in the discussion. Posting pics without comment adds nothing.


Originally posted by WolfofWar
Penn & Teller did a good experiment. They had some unsuspecting victims think they were working for the government with a surveillance van and a movable camera. They told them to watch if this van left. Next door, some racey and entertaining drama was unfolding outside, and inside (with the curtains open.) Almost all of those doing the experiment (4 out of 5) stopped surveilling to look at the more entertaining incident.

People aren't reliable to protect you through cameras, because they ignore things too easily, and get distracted. All your doing is keeping a record of your actions, and possibly incriminating yourself.


Oh my god! On one hand, you cry that we're followed from street to street, and now you claim the above?

Which is it? 24/7 monitoring by bootstrapped nazi's, or lazy operators that don't care? Sort your argument out....

If your "incriminating" yourself, that implies your committing a crime. So, if your committing a crime, what possible defence could you employ that CCTV is bad? Simple answer, don't commit a crime.... Or, if you have to, don't be so daft as to do it in front of a CCTV camera....


Originally posted by WolfofWar
After all, how useful are they to monitor people, if all the cameras in the subway on 7/7 were mysteriously offline?

weren't very helpful then, now were they?


Maintainence, perhaps? I don't know what the official reason is, or even if it is true. Care to enlighten me?



posted on Jul, 15 2007 @ 09:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by casketizer
I was aware of that, but do you honestly believe they don't use that material when it suits their purpose? The other members post just proved that when he said they helped catch the car bombers. If a camera is there and in control of authorities they will use it to the full extend of its capabilities.


So now, because they caught criminals and terrorists with it, you have a problem?

Some seriously fuzzy logic coming out of your mouth there....



posted on Jul, 15 2007 @ 09:28 AM
link   
We also have the cameras on the autobahn to check the Autobahn licenses of commercial traffic. The authorities openly admitted they want to use the data to monitor the movements of criminals, but wait shouldn't the cameras only check trucks and lorries, ah I must be paranoid....



posted on Jul, 15 2007 @ 09:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by casketizer
We also have the cameras on the autobahn to check the Autobahn licenses of commercial traffic. The authorities openly admitted they want to use the data to monitor the movements of criminals, but wait shouldn't the cameras only check trucks and lorries, ah I must be paranoid....


What they'll do is input the dude's license plate into their computer and it will chuck out his movements on the autobahn.

So, if they want to find out where a child rapist has vanished to after 2 little girls dissapear, they can track his movements and go and apprehend him.

Don't have an issue with that at all.

What your problem is, is that you have no faith in either Humanity or your Government. It's not the camera's, per se, you have a problem with. You just don't trust your (or ours) own people.

Do you vote? Do you take part in the political process?



posted on Jul, 15 2007 @ 09:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by stumason

Originally posted by casketizer
I was aware of that, but do you honestly believe they don't use that material when it suits their purpose? The other members post just proved that when he said they helped catch the car bombers. If a camera is there and in control of authorities they will use it to the full extend of its capabilities.


So now, because they caught criminals and terrorists with it, you have a problem?

Some seriously fuzzy logic coming out of your mouth there....



Yes I do have a problem with a government that uses anything in its power to watch and monitor its citizens every minute they don't spend in their homes. I see nothing fuzzy with that logic. then again the inventor of fuzzy logic almost got a Nobel price, so there must be something good about fuzzy logic. my washing machine also uses fuzzy logic, according to its manual, but i don't have the foggiest idea for what.....



posted on Jul, 15 2007 @ 09:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by casketizer
Yes I do have a problem with a government that uses anything in its power to watch and monitor its citizens every minute they don't spend in their homes. I see nothing fuzzy with that logic. then again the inventor of fuzzy logic almost got a Nobel price, so there must be something good about fuzzy logic. my washing machine also uses fuzzy logic, according to its manual, but i don't have the foggiest idea for what.....


Ah, from your own mouth. You distrust Government.... It's not the camera's everyone hates, it's Government...

why not do something about it then?

Maybe your washing machine cleans clothes only when it feels like it?

I know mine does....






top topics



 
13
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join