You *are* being watched...
in [UK Drivers]
|
From: Theodore on 24 Mar 2010 04:24 On Tue, 23 Mar 2010 23:44:58 +0000, Vernon <big_vernie(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > >> >> The point I am trying to make is that the lives of the vast majority of >> the motoring public are totally innocuous and, as such, the police have >> not the slightest interest into checking where they are going. >> >> Kev > >So there is a knock at the door, can you tell us where you were xx >months ago? You say no, they ask if you have ever been to so-and-so you >say not that I can remember. Wrong answer, they already know you have >been there as they have your registration, so therefore you have lied to >them, next question why did you not come forward to eliminate yourself >from our enquiries..... oh dear doesn't look good does it, and all >because a database recorded your car (or a clone of your car) XX months >ago in the area where some serious crime occurred. > >It has always suprised me that the police have not yet installed ANPR >cameras on all roads in and out of towns, real easy to produce a list of >possibles from that. > I thought they already had (blue cameras everywhere in Nottingham/Leiceser for example). The guy convicted for those murders of five prostitutes in Suffolk had his registration recorded on ANPR cameras too.
From: Theodore on 24 Mar 2010 04:29 On Tue, 23 Mar 2010 19:52:11 +0000, Conor <conor(a)gmx.co.uk> wrote: >On 23/03/2010 11:40, Ret. wrote: > >> According to the article, once all the current 'batch' of cameras are up >> and running, there will be around 560,000 'reads' per day. > >Is that all? > > Who do you >> think is going to be checking up on the movements of 560,000 individual >> vehicles every day? (And why would they want to?). >> > >OK... > >Say for example that you do a bit of gardening and own an allotment. You >do a regular journey once a week or a fortnight to an agricultural >supplier where you buy bits and bobs for the allotment. Your wife is a >hairdresser and as you have more time free, you make regular trips to >the hairdressing suppliers to buy various consumables and equipment for >the missus. At both locations, you happen to pay cash because its small >amounts and you always have enough money on you. > >On the Monday, you went to the agricultural suppliers and then the >hairdressers. From there, you went to the allotment where you spent a >couple of hours before returning home. > >On Wednesday, you go to the allotment to check the plants and then take >a drive into a city. On that Wednesday there's a terrorist attack on a >high value target in that city within a couple of hundred yards from >where you parked. Forensic examination reveals a fertiliser bomb was the >explosive device used. > >Using ANPR data collated on a database, it could be ascertained that you >made regular trips to a place that sold fertiliser (agricultural >suppliers) and also a place that sold hydrogen peroxide (hairdressing >suppliers) and then went to the allotment where you had a shed that you >could construct a fertiliser bomb. On the morning, it could be claimed >that you went to collect the bomb, drove to the target area then planted >the device. You would have little to prove you didn't. You would have >trace chemicals on your clothes, in your house, in the car, in the >allotment shed. You paid cash so you can't prove that you didn't buy the >ingredients needed. Your journeys show a pattern that could be >interpreted as a bomber buying the components in small amounts so not to >arouse suspicion, storing them in an allotment shed whereupon you >assembled the device and transported it to its target. > >Hey presto, the Police have their man. You have no defence even though >all you did was a bit of gardening and some errands for the wife... A nice, if slightly exaggerated example. Ret. doesn't seem to understand in the slightest about how valuable such data will be and how many innocent people could be picked up simply for driving in the wrong area at the wrong time. Let alone private investigators bribing someone to search the database in divorce cases etc etc. The list is endless.
From: Bod on 24 Mar 2010 04:31 On 24/03/2010 08:29, Theodore wrote: > On Tue, 23 Mar 2010 19:52:11 +0000, Conor<conor(a)gmx.co.uk> wrote: > >> On 23/03/2010 11:40, Ret. wrote: >> >>> According to the article, once all the current 'batch' of cameras are up >>> and running, there will be around 560,000 'reads' per day. >> >> Is that all? >> >> Who do you >>> think is going to be checking up on the movements of 560,000 individual >>> vehicles every day? (And why would they want to?). >>> >> >> OK... >> >> Say for example that you do a bit of gardening and own an allotment. You >> do a regular journey once a week or a fortnight to an agricultural >> supplier where you buy bits and bobs for the allotment. Your wife is a >> hairdresser and as you have more time free, you make regular trips to >> the hairdressing suppliers to buy various consumables and equipment for >> the missus. At both locations, you happen to pay cash because its small >> amounts and you always have enough money on you. >> >> On the Monday, you went to the agricultural suppliers and then the >> hairdressers. From there, you went to the allotment where you spent a >> couple of hours before returning home. >> >> On Wednesday, you go to the allotment to check the plants and then take >> a drive into a city. On that Wednesday there's a terrorist attack on a >> high value target in that city within a couple of hundred yards from >> where you parked. Forensic examination reveals a fertiliser bomb was the >> explosive device used. >> >> Using ANPR data collated on a database, it could be ascertained that you >> made regular trips to a place that sold fertiliser (agricultural >> suppliers) and also a place that sold hydrogen peroxide (hairdressing >> suppliers) and then went to the allotment where you had a shed that you >> could construct a fertiliser bomb. On the morning, it could be claimed >> that you went to collect the bomb, drove to the target area then planted >> the device. You would have little to prove you didn't. You would have >> trace chemicals on your clothes, in your house, in the car, in the >> allotment shed. You paid cash so you can't prove that you didn't buy the >> ingredients needed. Your journeys show a pattern that could be >> interpreted as a bomber buying the components in small amounts so not to >> arouse suspicion, storing them in an allotment shed whereupon you >> assembled the device and transported it to its target. >> >> Hey presto, the Police have their man. You have no defence even though >> all you did was a bit of gardening and some errands for the wife... > > A nice, if slightly exaggerated example. > > Ret. doesn't seem to understand in the slightest about how valuable > such data will be and how many innocent people could be picked up > simply for driving in the wrong area at the wrong time. > > Let alone private investigators bribing someone to search the database > in divorce cases etc etc. The list is endless. > > How long have you suffered from paranoia? Bod
From: Theodore on 24 Mar 2010 04:33 On Wed, 24 Mar 2010 08:31:03 +0000, Bod <bodron57(a)tiscali.co.uk> wrote: >On 24/03/2010 08:29, Theodore wrote: >> On Tue, 23 Mar 2010 19:52:11 +0000, Conor<conor(a)gmx.co.uk> wrote: >> >>> On 23/03/2010 11:40, Ret. wrote: >>> >>>> According to the article, once all the current 'batch' of cameras are up >>>> and running, there will be around 560,000 'reads' per day. >>> >>> Is that all? >>> >>> Who do you >>>> think is going to be checking up on the movements of 560,000 individual >>>> vehicles every day? (And why would they want to?). >>>> >>> >>> OK... >>> >>> Say for example that you do a bit of gardening and own an allotment. You >>> do a regular journey once a week or a fortnight to an agricultural >>> supplier where you buy bits and bobs for the allotment. Your wife is a >>> hairdresser and as you have more time free, you make regular trips to >>> the hairdressing suppliers to buy various consumables and equipment for >>> the missus. At both locations, you happen to pay cash because its small >>> amounts and you always have enough money on you. >>> >>> On the Monday, you went to the agricultural suppliers and then the >>> hairdressers. From there, you went to the allotment where you spent a >>> couple of hours before returning home. >>> >>> On Wednesday, you go to the allotment to check the plants and then take >>> a drive into a city. On that Wednesday there's a terrorist attack on a >>> high value target in that city within a couple of hundred yards from >>> where you parked. Forensic examination reveals a fertiliser bomb was the >>> explosive device used. >>> >>> Using ANPR data collated on a database, it could be ascertained that you >>> made regular trips to a place that sold fertiliser (agricultural >>> suppliers) and also a place that sold hydrogen peroxide (hairdressing >>> suppliers) and then went to the allotment where you had a shed that you >>> could construct a fertiliser bomb. On the morning, it could be claimed >>> that you went to collect the bomb, drove to the target area then planted >>> the device. You would have little to prove you didn't. You would have >>> trace chemicals on your clothes, in your house, in the car, in the >>> allotment shed. You paid cash so you can't prove that you didn't buy the >>> ingredients needed. Your journeys show a pattern that could be >>> interpreted as a bomber buying the components in small amounts so not to >>> arouse suspicion, storing them in an allotment shed whereupon you >>> assembled the device and transported it to its target. >>> >>> Hey presto, the Police have their man. You have no defence even though >>> all you did was a bit of gardening and some errands for the wife... >> >> A nice, if slightly exaggerated example. >> >> Ret. doesn't seem to understand in the slightest about how valuable >> such data will be and how many innocent people could be picked up >> simply for driving in the wrong area at the wrong time. >> >> Let alone private investigators bribing someone to search the database >> in divorce cases etc etc. The list is endless. >> > > > > How long have you suffered from paranoia? Ever been arrested for something you didn't do?
From: Bod on 24 Mar 2010 04:37
On 24/03/2010 08:33, Theodore wrote: > On Wed, 24 Mar 2010 08:31:03 +0000, Bod<bodron57(a)tiscali.co.uk> > wrote: > >> On 24/03/2010 08:29, Theodore wrote: >>> On Tue, 23 Mar 2010 19:52:11 +0000, Conor<conor(a)gmx.co.uk> wrote: >>> >>>> On 23/03/2010 11:40, Ret. wrote: >>>> >>>>> According to the article, once all the current 'batch' of cameras are up >>>>> and running, there will be around 560,000 'reads' per day. >>>> >>>> Is that all? >>>> >>>> Who do you >>>>> think is going to be checking up on the movements of 560,000 individual >>>>> vehicles every day? (And why would they want to?). >>>>> >>>> >>>> OK... >>>> >>>> Say for example that you do a bit of gardening and own an allotment. You >>>> do a regular journey once a week or a fortnight to an agricultural >>>> supplier where you buy bits and bobs for the allotment. Your wife is a >>>> hairdresser and as you have more time free, you make regular trips to >>>> the hairdressing suppliers to buy various consumables and equipment for >>>> the missus. At both locations, you happen to pay cash because its small >>>> amounts and you always have enough money on you. >>>> >>>> On the Monday, you went to the agricultural suppliers and then the >>>> hairdressers. From there, you went to the allotment where you spent a >>>> couple of hours before returning home. >>>> >>>> On Wednesday, you go to the allotment to check the plants and then take >>>> a drive into a city. On that Wednesday there's a terrorist attack on a >>>> high value target in that city within a couple of hundred yards from >>>> where you parked. Forensic examination reveals a fertiliser bomb was the >>>> explosive device used. >>>> >>>> Using ANPR data collated on a database, it could be ascertained that you >>>> made regular trips to a place that sold fertiliser (agricultural >>>> suppliers) and also a place that sold hydrogen peroxide (hairdressing >>>> suppliers) and then went to the allotment where you had a shed that you >>>> could construct a fertiliser bomb. On the morning, it could be claimed >>>> that you went to collect the bomb, drove to the target area then planted >>>> the device. You would have little to prove you didn't. You would have >>>> trace chemicals on your clothes, in your house, in the car, in the >>>> allotment shed. You paid cash so you can't prove that you didn't buy the >>>> ingredients needed. Your journeys show a pattern that could be >>>> interpreted as a bomber buying the components in small amounts so not to >>>> arouse suspicion, storing them in an allotment shed whereupon you >>>> assembled the device and transported it to its target. >>>> >>>> Hey presto, the Police have their man. You have no defence even though >>>> all you did was a bit of gardening and some errands for the wife... >>> >>> A nice, if slightly exaggerated example. >>> >>> Ret. doesn't seem to understand in the slightest about how valuable >>> such data will be and how many innocent people could be picked up >>> simply for driving in the wrong area at the wrong time. >>> >>> Let alone private investigators bribing someone to search the database >>> in divorce cases etc etc. The list is endless. >>> >>> >> >> How long have you suffered from paranoia? > > Ever been arrested for something you didn't do? > > No and neither have my friends or family either. Bod |