You *are* being watched...
in [UK Drivers]
|
From: Cynic on 24 Mar 2010 10:55 On Wed, 24 Mar 2010 12:40:42 +0000 (UTC), boltar2003(a)boltar.world wrote: >>>Depends, of course, on whether ANPR stores images as well as just >>>registration/location data as to whether even that's necessary... >>It won't store images. Even if it did, one red Ford Fiesta looks the >>same on CCTV as any other red Ford Fiesta. >The drivers wouldn't though. They would on a CCTV quality of image. Note that even the much higher quality photographs taken by a Gatso are not good enough to identify a driver in most cases. -- Cynic
From: Conor on 24 Mar 2010 10:55 On 24/03/2010 10:42, Cynic wrote: > And you don't think there is a possibility that the ANPR database > could be used to impose more nannyism? The more that people are > surveilled, the greater the number of opportunities to impose > controls. > > So eventually someone gets a knock on the door from social services > who are concerned about how many time the parents of young children > are visiting fast food places, for example. > How about this? Actual true incident. 17 year old neice was in a car driven by her 20 year old boyfriend. Also in the car was my 12 year old nephew who has Muscular Dystrophy. Boyfriend overtakes a bus crawling along in a village, without exceeding the speed limit and gets tugged by plod who see him as a young driver and an easy target. They tell him that overtaking a slow moving vehicle in an urban area is illegal - first I've ever heard - and as he's young, he believes them. THE VERY NEXT MORNING, social services are round at my sister in laws saying that they had concerns about my disabled nephew being carried in a car that was stopped by the police. When did this occur? Last week. And you wonder why we all have the concerns about the gubbermint, Kev. -- Conor I'm not prejudiced. I hate everyone equally.
From: AlanG on 24 Mar 2010 10:56 On Wed, 24 Mar 2010 10:34:25 +0000, Cynic <cynic_999(a)yahoo.co.uk> wrote: >On Wed, 24 Mar 2010 09:54:06 +0000, AlanG <invalid(a)invalid.net> wrote: > >>>It is so trivial to retain the non-hits that it will almost certainly >>>be done. The police retain the DNA and fingerprints of innocent >>>people and did so even when they were breaking the law by retaining >>>them, so they will almost certainly retain the data on innocent >>>motorists (even if they claim not to). > >>ISTR an article in the Reg last year saying the data was retained for >>a month then wiped. Or was that some other data? > >I don't believe statements that data is wiped unless there is a >plausible independent monitoring process. We were told the same about >DNA retention before it was permitted. Found it. 2 years http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/02/03/police_anpr/
From: Conor on 24 Mar 2010 10:57 On 24/03/2010 11:51, Brimstone wrote: > Are there any reports of the incidents that the police got wrong? > Road Wars at the end when they give you an update. It'll be something like "The woman in the astra who was stopped for no insurance produced her documents and got her car back." What they don't tell you is that was after paying �150 "removal fee" plus �12 for each day it was in storage. -- Conor I'm not prejudiced. I hate everyone equally.
From: AlanG on 24 Mar 2010 10:58
On Wed, 24 Mar 2010 08:24:31 +0000, Theodore <theodoredice(a)gmail.com> wrote: >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). Those are traffic master cameras and only record traffic flow. Allegedly > >The guy convicted for those murders of five prostitutes in Suffolk had >his registration recorded on ANPR cameras too. |