You *are* being watched...
in [UK Drivers]
|
From: Theodore on 24 Mar 2010 05:08 On Wed, 24 Mar 2010 08:37:53 +0000, Bod <bodron57(a)tiscali.co.uk> wrote: >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. Well that's nice for you, but if or when it does happen you might not call it paranoia to be worried about this increasing surveillance society we're living under.
From: Bod on 24 Mar 2010 05:15 On 24/03/2010 09:08, Theodore wrote: > On Wed, 24 Mar 2010 08:37:53 +0000, Bod<bodron57(a)tiscali.co.uk> > wrote: > >> 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. > > Well that's nice for you, but if or when it does happen you might not > call it paranoia to be worried about this increasing surveillance > society we're living under. > > > > I worry more about the nanny state that is encroaching on us, ie; must wear a crash helmet for a m/bike, also coming soon, not allowed to smoke in my own car on my own, can't take certain photos in London, can't take videos of our own kids at school etc. I likes my choices in a supposedly free society. Bod
From: AlanG on 24 Mar 2010 05:51 On Tue, 23 Mar 2010 23:27:07 +0000, Conor <conor(a)gmx.co.uk> wrote: >On 23/03/2010 20:04, Ret. wrote: > >> These are simply traffic census points. Intended to discover traffic >> flow along a particular road and where it is coming from and going to - >> usually with the aim of improving local roads. Being rude and >> uncooperative is self-defeating. >> > >What does where I've come from have to do with traffic flow? What does >who I am working for have to do with traffic flow? What does what I'm >carrying have to do with traffic flow? What does my name have to do with >traffic flow? > >Surely, all it needs is those people you see sat at the side of a road >in pairs with a counter counting the traffic by category? Not even that. They used an ANPR system here last year and publicised what they were doing. (nice of them) Set a couple of portable cameras up at two points and collected all the data. All automated
From: Theodore on 24 Mar 2010 05:52 On Wed, 24 Mar 2010 09:15:27 +0000, Bod <bodron57(a)tiscali.co.uk> wrote: >On 24/03/2010 09:08, Theodore wrote: >> On Wed, 24 Mar 2010 08:37:53 +0000, Bod<bodron57(a)tiscali.co.uk> >> wrote: >> >>> 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. >> >> Well that's nice for you, but if or when it does happen you might not >> call it paranoia to be worried about this increasing surveillance >> society we're living under. >> >> >> >> > I worry more about the nanny state that is encroaching on us, ie; >must wear a crash helmet for a m/bike, also coming soon, not allowed to >smoke in my own car on my own, can't take certain photos in London, >can't take videos of our own kids at school etc. > > I likes my choices in a supposedly free society. So don't you include in that the privacy to travel where you like, when you like, without anyone keeping records of what you do?
From: Conor on 24 Mar 2010 05:54
On 24/03/2010 08:31, Bod wrote: > How long have you suffered from paranoia? > > Bod Ask the guy who was wrongly convicted for the murder of Gill Dando. He was convicted purely on the fact he was in the area and minute traces of gunpowder were found in his pocket. -- Conor I'm not prejudiced. I hate everyone equally. |