Police say that such methods are necessary to investigate suspects who use cyberspace to carry out crimes. These include paedophiles, internet fraudsters, identity thieves and terrorists.
These days, any state craving control over citizenry thinks that throwing the word "terrorist" or "a variation for undesirable" is justification enough.
The sad part is, many are "nodding their heads in approval". After all, it is for our own good, and "who wants pedophiles, thieves and terrorists in our mist?"
Wake up ignorant!
In what way, creating at least a minimum of protection to safe guard the innocent; like obtaining a warrant, would hinder any investigation? Who's there, beside "self monitoring" to insure that the power is not abuse (if there's such a thing), or that the individual "liberties and privacy" are not trampled under feet, and taken for naught?
More "The UK is just a shit-house"
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7819230.stm
Not forgetting that the UK has the widest deployment of security cameras in the world. You'd think the crime rate would be zero by now, but it's at near record levels.
Also, the DNA database of everyone who's ever been questioned by the police. Guilty or not, you're on the database for life.
Proper police, on the streets, talking to people is what gets it done.
Not sitting at desks, data mining everyone's private lives and showing up after the event with some cryptic analysis.
They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty or security
[...]
Also, the DNA database of everyone who's ever been questioned by the police. Guilty or not, you're on the database for life.
Every state performs the music according to what its citizen would not mind to hear, until it is too late to say: "I don't like that music".
Proper police, on the streets, talking to people is what gets it done.
Not sitting at desks, data mining everyone's private lives and showing up after the event with some cryptic analysis.
It seems logic, doesn't it? However, logic, reasoning, and common sense do not apply, because the purpose given is not security, nor a betterment of life, but rather to have a system of control established, that it can be manipulated to any particular advantage.
Whether is to tell the public: "Look what we are doing for your benefit", or to "purposely have dominion upon any citizen".
Where most "civil right" organizations "fail" rising awareness, is trying to approach the issue like if it were just a matter of some failure in logic.
e.g.
"There are much better things to do to spend our billions on than snooping on everybody in the country just on the off-chance that they're a criminal."
Or objecting, base in some previously overlooked flaw like:
"That, of course, includes all the spam."
When it should be irrelevant if those flaw of reasoning exist o not.
This is about privacy and liberty, freedom if you will, to not feel a brick in the wall, to not be included among the statistics, suspected criminal, just because we know there are criminals in the world.
NO! The price is not worthy of any "exaggerated perceived security".
There's a real risk in states knowing your personal life. Today, it is in its infancy and just perceived as a mild risk at best, tomorrow...well let's hope we'll never need to face it.
Here is the positive side of the police state (sorry for the re-post but I love this vid). Here is a story about them: The Get Out Clause
"claim it was deleted".
Yes, and I bet if it where in their interest, it would be "found" again.
And for all those "nothing to fear if you've nothing to hide" types, consider this.
20 years ago, smoking was still largely considered the socially acceptable norm. Whereas today (in some places at least), smokers are forced to huddle outside in the cold. It might soon slip into illegality before too much longer.
So, take your idle chat about "restaurants" (link:obesity), "politics" (whoever is in power you don't agree with), "religion" (ha!, the world is full of these idiots), "holidays" (read: too much C02 on flights) etc etc ad nauseum. Now imagine a future well within your lifetime, where what was considered the "norm" is now the subject of some witch-hunt. It doesn't matter what, some idiot with an agenda will exploit if for their own ends, and they'll have you by the short and curlies.
"nothing to hide today" maybe, but computers have very long memories, and excellent recall.
Still think "share and enjoy" is a good idea?
Here's an excellent example of the junta mis-using these "security" laws.
http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/paperchase/2008/10/uk-treasury-invokes-anti-terrorism-law.php
You've got to go a long way into 3rd world despot territory before you get to 42 days detention without charge
So, take your idle chat about "restaurants" (link:obesity)
Universal healthcare and the waistline police
Imagine a country where the government regularly checks the waistlines of citizens over age 40. Anyone deemed too fat would be required to undergo diet counseling. Those who fail to lose sufficient weight could face further "reeducation" and their communities subject to stiff fines.
Is this some nightmarish dystopia?
No, this is contemporary Japan.
Wow, the Fatso patrol! Would it lower the cost of healthcare?
Of course Japan has a lot of rather crowded puplic transport, too many fat folks would just make it worse.
The last flight I took, the guy next to me was so fat that he literally overflowed into my seat. Maybe the airlines should charge by the pound.
Maybe the airlines should charge by the pound.
Keep regurgitating what you hear from sources that has an agenda and benefit behind those ideas.
In what way would that improve your experience as a traveler? That would be engineered to make traveling difficult for people that has more mass, punishing them for something that it should not be punished for.
Wouldn't be better for you to demand from air lines to provide seats with more space? Now there's an original idea? Why don't you ask and propagate that kind of ideas? Because you know you'll be dismissed or at best, you would have to pay more for it. Just exactly, what you are proposing that your fellow traveler do, instead of you.
It is common for people to support policies and regulations that they think it would not affect them.
[disclaimer]
I am in the slender side, by nature, not by any merit or effort in my part. My policy is to be conscious that what I don't want for me, I don't want for my neighbor.
Now imagine a future well within your lifetime, where what was considered the "norm" is now the subject of some witch-hunt. It doesn't matter what, some idiot with an agenda will exploit if for their own ends, and they'll have you by the short and curlies.
I don't have to imagine it. It is here. Nevertheless, you would think common sense would dictate a correction from the part of citizenry.
The truth; they are complacently being driven to slavery on a voluntary bases. Incarcerated in a jail without walls, for a promise of "risk free" society; security and comfort no matter the cost.
Aia, I am glad I do not live in your world! How do you get out of bed in the mornings?
We're a friendly, industry-focused community of developers, IT pros, digital marketers, and technology enthusiasts meeting, networking, learning, and sharing knowledge.