Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
News
Original poster

Security or Big Brother's watch?

57 replies

peacedove · 22/12/2005 14:31

From 2006 Britain will be the first country where every journey by every car will be monitored.

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.

Would you call it security or snooping for Big Brother?

OP posts:
Mistletoo · 22/12/2005 22:15

I noticed that dragon

what do you mean 'you don't believe us' nn?

why would I worry if I ain't going to be doing anything wrong? Like others have said - there's a hell of a lot of stuff already recorded.

birth certificate, register at school, electoral register, NI number, marriage certificate, driving licence, security cameras etc, etc etc

Caligyulea · 22/12/2005 22:47

I think it's all very well if you live in a benign state where no conspiracies ever take place and where no government will ever be elected whose unstated intention is to deprive the citizens of their liberty.

But if anyone thinks that the election of an eventual dictatorship is a wild, way out possibility that could never happen, then I think they are very complacent. The arguments for this rest on the assumption that all governments in this country, always, will be basically benign. Which they might be. But personally, I wouldn't really want to take the risk.

Normsnockers · 23/12/2005 10:09

Message withdrawn

PantomimEDAMe · 23/12/2005 10:42

Peacedove is a man. He's said that he is, there's no conspiracy.

Those of you who are happy to let the authorities spy on you are dangerous. You are allowing the perfect conditions for a very bad government. We may have a fairly benign one at the moment, as Caligula says. But that's no guarantee that we will always have a benign one. Democracy depends upon the people ensuring government power is limited to that which is necessary for basic functioning of society and no more.

DoesntChristmasDragOn · 23/12/2005 10:51

"Those of you who are happy to let the authorities spy on you are dangerous" pmsl. Oh yes, I'm very dangerous.

I'm not complacent at all but I'm not going to live my life in paranoia.

BTW, I was only "checking out" peacedove to prove a point about how much information ou can gain about someone with very little effort. By using what I found on Mumsnet and assuming Peacedove uses the same posting name elsewhere, a simple Google search on 'peacedove islam' brings up a whole raft of other sites. And I would like to reiterate that I have no racist or religeous reasons for those searches

Mistletoo · 23/12/2005 11:33

that's a bit Big Brother dragon

Normsnockers · 23/12/2005 12:33

Message withdrawn

Original poster
peacedove · 23/12/2005 13:28

"PD - what has performance in bed got to do with any of this?!"

respect for privacy, that was brought up, and this was one of the examples, among the others that I have used.

So some MNers have objections to my using the name "peacedove", although I am a man. OK, I have no problem with that. Please suggest another nick that you will accept. I am prepared to affect that change.

And I am on a host of other sites, where I post on similar topics. That is very interesting. When I have time I will do the Google, too. In the meantime has it occurred to you that more than one person may be using this nickname, and may have similar interests. Or is it statiscally impossible.

And even if it were the case, is it a crime to post on Islam only?

As others have pointed out, PD has never hidden his identity.

OP posts:
monkeynutsroastingonanopenfire · 23/12/2005 14:15

Presumably we're all going to be employed to search thru the database of images? Will we all get a pension scheme?

Caligyulea · 23/12/2005 14:16

D'you know, lots of Germans in 1930 refused to be paranoid too. Lots of Dutch people refused to be paranoid about a system of census which classified them according to their religion, and made Dutch Jews some of the easiest and most efficient in Europe to round up and murder.

It's not a question of being paranoid, it's a question of learning from history and recognising that just because the world is the way it is now, that doesn't mean it's always going to be that way. There is absolutely nothing paranoid about that and it's not reasonable to call an awareness of change paranoia.

PantomimEDAMe · 23/12/2005 14:17

Hear hear, Caligula.

bigbaubleeyes · 23/12/2005 14:29

If you've got nothing to hide why not? They are public highways. I think the benfits of such surveillance far outweigh the costs.

I would ask civil rights activists how they would feel if someone they cared deeply about was abducted and this system wasn't in place knowing the technology was there to save/prevent such crimminal activity.

I doubt the vicitms of the London bombings protested about the police using CCTV footage to trace perpetraitors.

It makes sense. Fear of technology and change i think comes into it for some also.

Mistletoo · 23/12/2005 15:11

Times have changed since the 30's though. We're not as subservient these days and are far more willing to question authority.

monkeynutsroastingonanopenfire · 23/12/2005 17:22

That's debatable..

Nightynight · 23/12/2005 17:57

thank god for the voice of sense Caligula! And loads of Americans right now are saying nothing, because they're only coming for the Muslims at the moment

monkeynutsroastingonanopenfire · 23/12/2005 18:03

Could be Weimar all over again, your right..

monkeynutsroastingonanopenfire · 23/12/2005 18:04

you're..

monkeynutsroastingonanopenfire · 23/12/2005 18:04

It's Monkeytrousers BYW

WickedWinterWitch · 23/12/2005 18:08

I'm with Edam and Caligula. I suspect though that it has nothing to do with security (haven't read the link yet) and more to do with revenue and charging per journey made.

Look at the way it's gone:
Tax people (rightly imo) for owning a car
Sell off public transport to the private sector
Let each new owner of trains/buses get rid of uneconomic/whatever routes they like so that that public transport deteriorates
Tell people they ought to use public transport (again, rightly imo) beause it's better for the environment/society
Oops! They go to and there isn't much decent public transport so people use their cars...SO
Tax them for doing so and then tax every journey they make! Marvelous, Ker-ching! I wouldn't mind at all except that public transport is so so deeply crap in this country that often it isn't a viable alternative.

DoesntChristmasDragOn · 23/12/2005 18:16

"In the meantime has it occurred to you that more than one person may be using this nickname" Of course it has With more information it would be possible to weed out any that weren't you IYSWIM. I don't want to though, obviously! As I said, I was merely using it to prove a point - should we remove Google because it allows us to "spy" on people?

"is it a crime to post on Islam only?" Goodness, no! Although as this is, technically, a parenting site it would be nice to have your thoughts on other subjects too.

Personally I have no objections to your posting name or to the fact that you're male. Can't see the issue really.

NotQuiteCockney · 23/12/2005 18:16

The tech isn't there, this won't happen.

There are many obvious problems with the gov't keeping this information:

  • I don't trust them not to sell the information to car companies, advertisers (billboards?), etc. The DVLA has been selling information to clamping companies. cite .

  • I don't trust them to keep the information properly. How rubbish is this government (all governments?) with computer systems? What's to stop someone from modifying records to make it look like someone was at the scene of a crime that they're sure the person committed?

monkeynutsroastingonanopenfire · 23/12/2005 20:00

Exactly NQC, they couldn't even keep track of Ian Huntley. That's not to say the intent isn't there and we shoudl all be wary of encroachments on our freedoms.

PD, I think the confusion over your id may have occured with a quote you included in one of your posts on a different thread a while back, (can't remember which one sorry) It was a bit confusing who was saying what and even I got confused as i thought you were saying something about your DH but after reading it a few times I realised you'd just misplaced some quotation marks.

hativity · 24/12/2005 00:01

re ww2 normsnockers - look at Caligula's post - look who and how ww2 started in the first place. I really don't think you can cite ww2 as a reason to infringe basic civil liberties. What do you think we were fighting for?

Normsnockers · 24/12/2005 07:30

Message withdrawn

ruty · 24/12/2005 13:48

i am not one to usually trust the government, but i'm torn on this one. Can anyone tell me, what motives would the govt/police have to track our cars' movements apart from trying to stop crime, in particular, terrorism? I can;t see any other reason for it, myself. And yes, i can see that muslim fundamentalism has increased probably because of the west's appalling actions in the middle east, but i can't say for sure that's the only reason. And now we have that threat, I'm grudgingly willing to do whatever it takes tp protect my family and others. Peacedove, I would be interested to know what kind of govt and society you view as the ideal. Do you believe in religious freedom, not just for muslims? Do you believe in a separation of State and religion? not a trick question, just asking.