The point about public places is a good one, and I too have never broken the law, but I do feel a little queezy about loss of freedom or loss of privacy.
I do not like anyone other than the taxman to know how much money I make, how much savings I have, what charities I donate to, and how much.
And I do not want to know the same about some one specific. None of my business. I would be interested in total and average incomes and savings in nations, but not any specific individual.
I do not want anyone other than my wife to know how I perform in bed. No one's business except the two of us. And I do not want to know how others perform. None of my business.
I do not want to be monitored all the time. I like my freedom, well, to be free.
Normsnockers, why should this attack on some people's human rights have occurred in a country like Britain, which has been a democracy, and a champion of human rights for so long, and that too by a Labour government?
Why cannot we ensure that any governemnt that comes to power does not tinker with certain rights?
I will let you in on a little secret,
This is what history tells me, and I believe in learning from history, because mankind seems to repeat it ever so often.
You compromise a little of your freedom for your security, the taker takes more after some time. You acqueise in that, and he takes some more again.
The security people are never satisfied with what information they have about you.
They want, more, and more. Their ideal state is when everyone's every action is recorded, nay, every word, nay every thought.
It does not mean a police state now, but somewhere down the line, we may well be develop into one.
Wonder whether we will be able to stop it.
___
And there is perhaps good news about the Belmarsh prisoners. The House of Lords just ruled against the government on such detentions. Am I right that this is about them?
The House of Lords Appellate Committee decision