Quantcast

Jump to content

» «
Photo

UK To Start Monitoring Web Activity

112 replies to this topic
_Rob_
  • _Rob_

    Game Dev, Graphics Artist

  • Members
  • Joined: 24 Sep 2006
  • None

#1

Posted 07 April 2012 - 08:35 PM

So much for a damn free county!

QUOTE
nternet firms have warned that government plans to monitor email and social media use in Britain are liable to be used by repressive regimes elsewhere in the world to justify their state surveillance.

No internet business was willing to offer a public criticism of the coalition's proposal on Monday, but many privately raised fears over the legalising of a power to see who is contacting whom online in real time.

"There is a question of jurisdiction. There is a risk that if you offer this access to [the authorities in] Britain, then you have to offer it to countries like Syria and Bahrain," said an internet industry official who declined to be identified because the proposal has not been outlined in detail.

A number of MPs and civil liberties groups argued that the plan would endanger privacy and unfettered free expression online. Julian Huppert, the Lib Dem MP, said on Twitter that the Commons home affairs committee wanted to call the home secretary, Theresa May, to give evidence on the proposal. More than 14,000 people have signed a petition by the internet advocacy body Open Rights Group.

The proposal is expected to be outlined in the Queen's speech on 9 May; it allows the authorities to have "on demand" access to online traffic in real time. However, the security minister, James Brokenshire, said the purpose was solving crime not "real-time snooping on everybody's emails". He told BBC Radio 4's World at One: "We absolutely get the need for appropriate safeguards, and for appropriate protections to be put in place around any changes that might come forward.

"What this is not is the previous government's plan of creating some sort of great big Big Brother database. That is precisely not what this is looking at."

One official familiar with the plan said the government wanted to bring social networks, such as Twitter and Facebook, "broadly into line" with existing legislation covering the surveillance of phone calls. Authorities would not be able to read the content of messages without an intercept warrant issued by the home secretary under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (RIPA)..

The Home Office is understood to have outlined its plans at a meeting in January with the Internet Service Providers' Association, which represents companies including Google and BT, after a series of high-level meetings with the government intelligence agency GCHQ. No detailed proposal has been seen by the association; it was given only an outline of what the government hopes to introduce.

Internet companies are anxious to learn what they will be required to do. Internet service providers, such as BT and TalkTalk, could be required to install systems to harvest so-called packet data from internet communications, so security officials will be able to see who is visiting which websites and talking to whom. "We haven't seen full proposal yet and we are hoping for more information from the Home Office soon It appears to be something we would have to look very carefully at," said one industry official.

Another official suggested that stronger powers to secretly monitor internet communication could compromise the government's bid for transparency.

But the backlash over the plan has been capitalised on by some internet firms. The makers of Tor, the internet anonymity shield used by activists in Iran and China, said that it would support users who wished to evade detection by UK authorities.

Andrew Lewman, the director of Tor, compared the UK plan to the data retention laws in Germany that require internet providers to log users' website visits. He said use of Tor rose after that law was introduced.

"Once the data is collected, regardless of the current intentions, it will be used for all sorts of reasons over time," Lewman told the Guardian. "The number of crimes will expand to include all sorts of petty issues, political repression, and restrictions on speech. Eventually someone will think they can predict crime before it happens by using the data."

The Association of Chief Police Officers said: "Telecommunications technology is changing rapidly; there is a need to look at how we can ensure the capability to investigate crime, save lives and prosecute offenders is maintained. It is a matter for government to ensure the right boundaries are set so that our approaches are justified, necessary and proportionate."

A Home Office spokeswoman said: "It is vital that police and security services are able to obtain communications data in certain circumstances to investigate serious crime and terrorism and to protect the public. We need to take action to maintain the continued availability of communications data as technology changes.

"Communications data includes time, duration and dialling numbers of a phone call, or an email address. It does not include the content of any phone call or email, and it is not the intention of government to change the existing legal basis for the interception of communications."

Source

Seriously up our fuel (and cover it up with a strike), up our pasties and now this, this is bullsh*t!

KilnerLUFC
  • KilnerLUFC

    M.O.T

  • Members
  • Joined: 17 Apr 2011

#2

Posted 07 April 2012 - 09:02 PM

I was pissed off when I first read this in the paper, but then as the story went on, the finer details started to emerge, and to me it seems like it got blown way out of proportion. The only thing that this law would allow is to see who was talking to who, and on how many occasions, length etc...they would still need a warrant to access the data that was sent within the messages.

I'm not defending it though, as I still think it's wrong.

Typhus
  • Typhus

    OG

  • $outh $ide Hoodz
  • Joined: 11 Sep 2007

#3

Posted 07 April 2012 - 09:10 PM

Very dangerous and very misguided. I don't believe that the terrorists in this country warrant such measures, they have proven themselves to be nothing more than dull-witted bunglers. And whilst it's true that policing must constantly evolve to tackle the Jihadist cancer, I believe all these laws will do is further erode public faith in the democratic process and give certain unscrupulous leaders amble opportunity to abuse the system for their own ends.

I voted for David Cameron, I believed that he would be a strong leader who could give us some stability after the sleaze and lies of the Labour administration. I was wrong, instead of lying, he just seems to pass these draconian, terrifying laws without even really trying to convince us of their merit. He's a different animal all together, and one I am growing increasingly concerned with.

I initially thought this was an April Fools Day prank, how I wish it was confused.gif

OchyGTA
  • OchyGTA

    Rap game GTA forums

  • Members
  • Joined: 21 Dec 2010

#4

Posted 07 April 2012 - 09:10 PM

Guess I should probably delete my internet history, don't want them to find out about the midget donkey hermaphrodite porn I've been watching. No, in all seriousness this is kind of a joke, read about it the other day.

The Yokel
  • The Yokel

    True Gentleman

  • Members
  • Joined: 30 Mar 2007
  • Jamaica
  • Yardie Achievement Award

#5

Posted 07 April 2012 - 09:11 PM

Blown out of proportion or not, this is how these things start. Do not accept any kind of compromise. As soon as you do that you've shown a weakness and they'll just continue to squeeze you little by little until it's too late.

vertical limit
  • vertical limit

    When in doubt don't pull out.

  • Members
  • Joined: 27 Aug 2010
  • None

#6

Posted 07 April 2012 - 09:22 PM

QUOTE
nternet firms have warned that government plans to monitor email and social media use in Britain are



Phew!!

Good thing they haven't mentioned piracy.

SIKKS66
  • SIKKS66

    The Number of the Beast

  • Leone Family Mafia
  • Joined: 02 Apr 2008

#7

Posted 07 April 2012 - 09:24 PM

QUOTE (vertical limit @ Saturday, Apr 7 2012, 21:22)
QUOTE
nternet firms have warned that government plans to monitor email and social media use in Britain are



Phew!!

Good thing they haven't mentioned piracy.

Or porno.

Waddy
  • Waddy

    Gods foster son.

  • Moderator
  • Joined: 02 Feb 2004
  • None

#8

Posted 07 April 2012 - 09:25 PM

If you have nothing to hide then whats the issue? it makes the country a safer place to be.
I have no problem. Its funny how you think the government will be checking your email every day!

Typhus
  • Typhus

    OG

  • $outh $ide Hoodz
  • Joined: 11 Sep 2007

#9

Posted 07 April 2012 - 09:32 PM Edited by Typhus, 07 April 2012 - 09:35 PM.

QUOTE (Waddy @ Saturday, Apr 7 2012, 21:25)
If you have nothing to hide then whats the issue? it makes the country a safer place to be.
I have no problem. Its funny how you think the government will be checking your email every day!

It's a level of power and control that I feel very uncomfortable handing over to people who no longer feel accountable to the masses.
The government has lost touch with the public, they have grown detached from reality and willingly whore themselves out to lobbyists. Why, even the leader of the opposition is a half-witted dupe controlled by Union gangsters.

Politics has become filled with avaricious control freaks and debauched headcases, this level of power should never be surrendered to such a rabble as that.

agent17
  • agent17

    Absolution

  • Members
  • Joined: 18 Jul 2005

#10

Posted 07 April 2012 - 09:39 PM

The government should just put cameras all over our homes and bathrooms, you don't have anything to hide do you?

AlexGTAGamer
  • AlexGTAGamer

    Time flies when you throw a clock.

  • Members
  • Joined: 15 Sep 2010
  • None

#11

Posted 07 April 2012 - 09:41 PM

I hope the government doesn't transfer people's internet history/e-mails/personal information onto CDs and memory sticks, otherwise I guarantee you that some high ranking official will end up leaving that information on a bus, train, or in a public place, as has been done before. confused.gif

Waddy
  • Waddy

    Gods foster son.

  • Moderator
  • Joined: 02 Feb 2004
  • None

#12

Posted 07 April 2012 - 09:41 PM

QUOTE (Typhus @ Saturday, Apr 7 2012, 21:32)
QUOTE (Waddy @ Saturday, Apr 7 2012, 21:25)
If you have nothing to hide then whats the issue? it makes the country a safer place to be.
I have no problem. Its funny how you think the government will be checking your email every day!

It's a level of power and control that I feel very uncomfortable handing over to people who no longer feel accountable to the masses.
The government has lost touch with the public, they have grown detached from reality and willingly whore themselves out to lobbyists. Why, even the leader of the opposition is a half-witted dupe controlled by Union gangsters.

Politics has become filled with avaricious control freaks and debauched headcases, this level of power should never be surrendered to such a rabble as that.

Dont make the issue into something its not.
Its simply a way of catching the bad guys, thats it. There is nothing else to go into with it. It is what it is. It could stop people being blown up in subways, or building being blown to bits. It is not about your self importance or the fact that you think in some way it will possibly affect you.

Pat
  • Pat

  • The Connection
  • Joined: 03 Aug 2006
  • None

#13

Posted 07 April 2012 - 09:46 PM

QUOTE (Waddy @ Saturday, Apr 7 2012, 16:25)
If you have nothing to hide then whats the issue? it makes the country a safer place to be.
I have no problem. Its funny how you think the government will be checking your email every day!

Why don't you go ahead and post the full contents of your hard drive, Waddy? If you have nothing to hide then what's the issue?

Waddy
  • Waddy

    Gods foster son.

  • Moderator
  • Joined: 02 Feb 2004
  • None

#14

Posted 07 April 2012 - 09:50 PM

QUOTE (Pat @ Saturday, Apr 7 2012, 21:46)
QUOTE (Waddy @ Saturday, Apr 7 2012, 16:25)
If you have nothing to hide then whats the issue? it makes the country a safer place to be.
I have no problem. Its funny how you think the government will be checking your email every day!

Why don't you go ahead and post the full contents of your hard drive, Waddy? If you have nothing to hide then what's the issue?

Oh so you think I have stuff on my HD that would interest the governments of the world? Seriously?

confused.gif

Pat
  • Pat

  • The Connection
  • Joined: 03 Aug 2006
  • None

#15

Posted 07 April 2012 - 09:50 PM

QUOTE (Waddy @ Saturday, Apr 7 2012, 16:50)
Oh so you think I have stuff on my HD that would interest the governments of the world? Seriously?

confused.gif

I'm asking you a question. If there is no issue, why are you not comfortable enough to post the the full contents of your hard drive for all of us to see?

KilnerLUFC
  • KilnerLUFC

    M.O.T

  • Members
  • Joined: 17 Apr 2011

#16

Posted 07 April 2012 - 09:51 PM

QUOTE (Waddy @ Saturday, Apr 7 2012, 21:41)
QUOTE (Typhus @ Saturday, Apr 7 2012, 21:32)
QUOTE (Waddy @ Saturday, Apr 7 2012, 21:25)
If you have nothing to hide then whats the issue? it makes the country a safer place to be.
I have no problem. Its funny how you think the government will be checking your email every day!

It's a level of power and control that I feel very uncomfortable handing over to people who no longer feel accountable to the masses.
The government has lost touch with the public, they have grown detached from reality and willingly whore themselves out to lobbyists. Why, even the leader of the opposition is a half-witted dupe controlled by Union gangsters.

Politics has become filled with avaricious control freaks and debauched headcases, this level of power should never be surrendered to such a rabble as that.

Dont make the issue into something its not.
Its simply a way of catching the bad guys, thats it. There is nothing else to go into with it. It is what it is. It could stop people being blown up in subways, or building being blown to bits. It is not about your self importance or the fact that you think in some way it will possibly affect you.

I'm sorry, but I already thought that plenty of terrorist plots have been foiled due to intelligence that has been gathered against them? Yes, as the internet is starting to take over, it seems the most reasonable thing to do, but they're treating everyone on the same level of suspicion.

As I said above, the details emerged that all that would be monitored is who has contacted who and the time/date/length of said conversations, but how is anything going to come from this?

There's always ways to get around being monitored on the internet these days.

Typhus
  • Typhus

    OG

  • $outh $ide Hoodz
  • Joined: 11 Sep 2007

#17

Posted 07 April 2012 - 09:55 PM Edited by Typhus, 07 April 2012 - 09:58 PM.

QUOTE (Waddy @ Saturday, Apr 7 2012, 21:41)
QUOTE (Typhus @ Saturday, Apr 7 2012, 21:32)
QUOTE (Waddy @ Saturday, Apr 7 2012, 21:25)
If you have nothing to hide then whats the issue? it makes the country a safer place to be.
I have no problem. Its funny how you think the government will be checking your email every day!

It's a level of power and control that I feel very uncomfortable handing over to people who no longer feel accountable to the masses.
The government has lost touch with the public, they have grown detached from reality and willingly whore themselves out to lobbyists. Why, even the leader of the opposition is a half-witted dupe controlled by Union gangsters.

Politics has become filled with avaricious control freaks and debauched headcases, this level of power should never be surrendered to such a rabble as that.

Dont make the issue into something its not.
Its simply a way of catching the bad guys, thats it. There is nothing else to go into with it. It is what it is. It could stop people being blown up in subways, or building being blown to bits. It is not about your self importance or the fact that you think in some way it will possibly affect you.

I think it's an issue of liberty. Is it right to infringe on our freedoms to stop a bunch of people who have consistently proven themselves to be choke-artists and failiures? The terrorists are nothing, less than nothing, they aren't going to destabilise the government, they aren't going to kill thousands of people, some have even been caught thanks to tip offs from members of their own religious community.
They are doomed, nothing but a dying beast.

The government is giving these idiots too much credit, 7/7 was a gnat bite, and every attack since then has been an utter farce. Are they really so scary that we should hide behind The Queen's skirts and cower like children? I think not.

Outcast
  • Outcast

    Scorps4Lyfe

  • The Connection
  • Joined: 20 Apr 2003
  • Taiwan

#18

Posted 07 April 2012 - 09:56 PM

I don't see what the big deal is to be honest, I live in China and thats arguably the most monitored and restricted internet in the world. Even with this in place, I doubt it'd make a difference in our lives.

If you're so against this then where are the protests against phone tapping? essentially its the same thing, just different forms of communication.

Waddy
  • Waddy

    Gods foster son.

  • Moderator
  • Joined: 02 Feb 2004
  • None

#19

Posted 07 April 2012 - 09:58 PM

QUOTE (Pat @ Saturday, Apr 7 2012, 21:50)
QUOTE (Waddy @ Saturday, Apr 7 2012, 16:50)
Oh so you think I have stuff on my HD that would interest the governments of the world? Seriously?

confused.gif

I'm asking you a question. If there is no issue, why are you not comfortable enough to post the the full contents of your hard drive for all of us to see?

What the hell are you on about?
If people in the government want to see the contents of my HD or anyones HD they should be able too. In many crimes nowadays its the first thing they look at.
I didnt say I would feel okay with showing some ginger kid who likes to post pictures of his cock on the internet.

@Butters - You are correct. these days everything is dont on the internet, they days of brief case swapping in the park are long gone, now its encrypted messages in cyber space, it is the new threat and with every new problem/crime then the authorities have to come up with a solution. There will be ways to get round it, then they have to come up with new ways...and it goes on and on.

Waddy
  • Waddy

    Gods foster son.

  • Moderator
  • Joined: 02 Feb 2004
  • None

#20

Posted 07 April 2012 - 10:03 PM

QUOTE (Typhus @ Saturday, Apr 7 2012, 21:55)
QUOTE (Waddy @ Saturday, Apr 7 2012, 21:41)
QUOTE (Typhus @ Saturday, Apr 7 2012, 21:32)
QUOTE (Waddy @ Saturday, Apr 7 2012, 21:25)
If you have nothing to hide then whats the issue? it makes the country a safer place to be.
I have no problem. Its funny how you think the government will be checking your email every day!

It's a level of power and control that I feel very uncomfortable handing over to people who no longer feel accountable to the masses.
The government has lost touch with the public, they have grown detached from reality and willingly whore themselves out to lobbyists. Why, even the leader of the opposition is a half-witted dupe controlled by Union gangsters.

Politics has become filled with avaricious control freaks and debauched headcases, this level of power should never be surrendered to such a rabble as that.

Dont make the issue into something its not.
Its simply a way of catching the bad guys, thats it. There is nothing else to go into with it. It is what it is. It could stop people being blown up in subways, or building being blown to bits. It is not about your self importance or the fact that you think in some way it will possibly affect you.

I think it's an issue of liberty. Is it right to infringe on our freedoms to stop a bunch of people who have consistently proven themselves to be choke-artists and failiures? The terrorists are nothing, less than nothing, they aren't going to destabilise the government, they aren't going to kill thousands of people, some have even been caught thanks to tip offs from members of their own religious community.
They are doomed, nothing but a dying beast.

The government is giving these idiots too much credit, 7/7 was a gnat bite, and every attack since then has been an utter farce. Are they really so scary that we should hide behind The Queen's skirts and cower like children? I think not.

The only possible way this could ever affect you is that if you became known to the police/authorities. They just cant go snooping on anybody, a warrant must be applied for to see the data.
The UK is already the most CCTV'd place in Europe I believe, theres not many places you can go without them knowing (If they wanted to know) This is just a natural progression in in the fight against crime.

Pat
  • Pat

  • The Connection
  • Joined: 03 Aug 2006
  • None

#21

Posted 07 April 2012 - 10:06 PM

QUOTE (Waddy @ Saturday, Apr 7 2012, 16:58)
What the hell are you on about?
If people in the government want to see the contents of my HD or anyones HD they should be able too. In many crimes nowadays its the first thing they look at.
I didnt say I would feel okay with showing some ginger kid who likes to post pictures of his cock on the internet.

You do realize that your government officials are people too, yes? They should be no different in your eyes from anyone else when it comes to matters of personal liberties. The fact that you're willing to give up your privacy to them so willingly (as well as resort to ad hominem attacks; at least try to show a little maturity for your age, please) is, quite frankly, disturbing. There is no reason you should find it acceptable to allow a balding middle aged man to search through your personal files but then reject anyone else who asks to do the same, and then go on to criticize anyone who rejects the request of the aforementioned middle aged man. That is extremely hypocritical.

So, I say again - if you have nothing to hide, you should have no issue sharing with us. Yet, you do. So explain to me what gives you the right to criticize others for wishing not to share their personal information either.

Waddy
  • Waddy

    Gods foster son.

  • Moderator
  • Joined: 02 Feb 2004
  • None

#22

Posted 07 April 2012 - 10:10 PM

QUOTE (Pat @ Saturday, Apr 7 2012, 22:06)


So, I say again - if you have nothing to hide, you should have no issue sharing with us. Yet, you do. So explain to me what gives you the right to criticize others for wishing not to share their personal information either.

As I have said, and what everyone one else understands.
I have no problem at all with the authorities monitoring my online activities or anything else. I am a law abiding citizen, and if they were monitoring my online activities I would not be a law abiding citizen, so they would catch me, which I believe is the entire point.
Your 'argument' about just because its ok for them to so everyone should is a bit of a damp squib.

Typhus
  • Typhus

    OG

  • $outh $ide Hoodz
  • Joined: 11 Sep 2007

#23

Posted 07 April 2012 - 10:11 PM

QUOTE (Waddy @ Saturday, Apr 7 2012, 22:03)
QUOTE (Typhus @ Saturday, Apr 7 2012, 21:55)
QUOTE (Waddy @ Saturday, Apr 7 2012, 21:41)
QUOTE (Typhus @ Saturday, Apr 7 2012, 21:32)
QUOTE (Waddy @ Saturday, Apr 7 2012, 21:25)
If you have nothing to hide then whats the issue? it makes the country a safer place to be.
I have no problem. Its funny how you think the government will be checking your email every day!

It's a level of power and control that I feel very uncomfortable handing over to people who no longer feel accountable to the masses.
The government has lost touch with the public, they have grown detached from reality and willingly whore themselves out to lobbyists. Why, even the leader of the opposition is a half-witted dupe controlled by Union gangsters.

Politics has become filled with avaricious control freaks and debauched headcases, this level of power should never be surrendered to such a rabble as that.

Dont make the issue into something its not.
Its simply a way of catching the bad guys, thats it. There is nothing else to go into with it. It is what it is. It could stop people being blown up in subways, or building being blown to bits. It is not about your self importance or the fact that you think in some way it will possibly affect you.

I think it's an issue of liberty. Is it right to infringe on our freedoms to stop a bunch of people who have consistently proven themselves to be choke-artists and failiures? The terrorists are nothing, less than nothing, they aren't going to destabilise the government, they aren't going to kill thousands of people, some have even been caught thanks to tip offs from members of their own religious community.
They are doomed, nothing but a dying beast.

The government is giving these idiots too much credit, 7/7 was a gnat bite, and every attack since then has been an utter farce. Are they really so scary that we should hide behind The Queen's skirts and cower like children? I think not.

The only possible way this could ever affect you is that if you became known to the police/authorities. They just cant go snooping on anybody, a warrant must be applied for to see the data.
The UK is already the most CCTV'd place in Europe I believe, theres not many places you can go without them knowing (If they wanted to know) This is just a natural progression in in the fight against crime.

But may I ask you a question? Do you still believe that the courts will be free from corruption in the future? From what I understand, Cameron wants to hold some trials in secret.
My point is, obtaining a warrant could be easier if the legal system is freed from public scrutiny, which is an outcome some appear to be working towards.

Doesn't this idea only work if you can trust your elected officials to be incorruptable? What if they use the records of phone conversations for political leverage?
A tad melodramatic perhaps, but it's one of the possible outcomes of this.

Pat
  • Pat

  • The Connection
  • Joined: 03 Aug 2006
  • None

#24

Posted 07 April 2012 - 10:13 PM

QUOTE (Waddy @ Saturday, Apr 7 2012, 17:10)
As I have said, and what everyone one else understands.
I have no problem at all with the authorities monitoring my online activities or anything else. I am a law abiding citizen, and if they were monitoring my online activities I would not be a law abiding citizen, so they would catch me, which I believe is the entire point.
Your 'argument' about just because its ok for them to so everyone should is a bit of a damp squib.

You're missing the point. This is about personal liberties, and the fact that a government body does not have any more of a right to infringe upon them than anyone else does. As I mentioned before, your government officials are people too, just like everyone else. They should only have authority when it comes to matters of protection, and searching through your C:\ drive should not be a factor in a matter of protection.

You seem to be of the opinion that 1984 should have been a documentary, not science fiction.

Waddy
  • Waddy

    Gods foster son.

  • Moderator
  • Joined: 02 Feb 2004
  • None

#25

Posted 07 April 2012 - 10:15 PM

QUOTE (Typhus @ Saturday, Apr 7 2012, 22:11)
QUOTE (Waddy @ Saturday, Apr 7 2012, 22:03)
QUOTE (Typhus @ Saturday, Apr 7 2012, 21:55)
QUOTE (Waddy @ Saturday, Apr 7 2012, 21:41)
QUOTE (Typhus @ Saturday, Apr 7 2012, 21:32)
QUOTE (Waddy @ Saturday, Apr 7 2012, 21:25)
If you have nothing to hide then whats the issue? it makes the country a safer place to be.
I have no problem. Its funny how you think the government will be checking your email every day!

It's a level of power and control that I feel very uncomfortable handing over to people who no longer feel accountable to the masses.
The government has lost touch with the public, they have grown detached from reality and willingly whore themselves out to lobbyists. Why, even the leader of the opposition is a half-witted dupe controlled by Union gangsters.

Politics has become filled with avaricious control freaks and debauched headcases, this level of power should never be surrendered to such a rabble as that.

Dont make the issue into something its not.
Its simply a way of catching the bad guys, thats it. There is nothing else to go into with it. It is what it is. It could stop people being blown up in subways, or building being blown to bits. It is not about your self importance or the fact that you think in some way it will possibly affect you.

I think it's an issue of liberty. Is it right to infringe on our freedoms to stop a bunch of people who have consistently proven themselves to be choke-artists and failiures? The terrorists are nothing, less than nothing, they aren't going to destabilise the government, they aren't going to kill thousands of people, some have even been caught thanks to tip offs from members of their own religious community.
They are doomed, nothing but a dying beast.

The government is giving these idiots too much credit, 7/7 was a gnat bite, and every attack since then has been an utter farce. Are they really so scary that we should hide behind The Queen's skirts and cower like children? I think not.

The only possible way this could ever affect you is that if you became known to the police/authorities. They just cant go snooping on anybody, a warrant must be applied for to see the data.
The UK is already the most CCTV'd place in Europe I believe, theres not many places you can go without them knowing (If they wanted to know) This is just a natural progression in in the fight against crime.

But may I ask you a question? Do you still believe that the courts will be free from corruption in the future? From what I understand, Cameron wants to hold some trials in secret.
My point is, obtaining a warrant could be easier if the legal system is freed from public scrutiny, which is an outcome some appear to be working towards.

Doesn't this idea only work if you can trust your elected officials to be incorruptable? What if they use the records of phone conversations for political leverage?
A tad melodramatic perhaps, but it's one of the possible outcomes of this.

Again, you are making it something it isnt.
I dont care how corrupt a court is or whatever else. I care about the safety of people who live in the UK and other countries.

What you're saying is that its ok for crime to run rampant in cyber space and I would have thought a huge chunk of crime is run on cyber space, but you dont want the police to have the power to stop them.
I would think terrorism is the prime reason, but it will trickle down to all crimes no matter how petty, and the more evidence the police have the better to make it stop.

Corruption is an entirely different subject.

KilnerLUFC
  • KilnerLUFC

    M.O.T

  • Members
  • Joined: 17 Apr 2011

#26

Posted 07 April 2012 - 10:16 PM

Pat, what's with the constant derailment of the topic in hand? This is in no way a personal attack against you, but you seem to think that this new law would allow this group access to personal data, whereas in reality the only thing they have access to is the length/time of who spoke to who, and nothing else.

Would you leave your doors open to your house and allow anyone to come in and snoop around as they please?

Crokey
  • Crokey

    Builders Like Erections

  • Zaibatsu
  • Joined: 05 Aug 2003
  • Belize

#27

Posted 07 April 2012 - 10:17 PM

Who cares anyway this plan is dead in the water anyway, that is that the legislation would need to go to consultation, then draft, blue paper, white paper, then drafted again, taken the commons to get a time to debate, then get debated, then amended, then debated, then amended again, then sent to the lords, then sent back again, then debated, then amended, then sent back to lords again, then the lords reject it, then the commons vetos it into law, then Europe find out and throw it out of law for being against human rights laws, politicians spit the dummy out, the press say told you so and meanwhile we're left wondering what the hell that was all about as the whole issue has cost millions that could have been spent on proper intelligence gathering and proper security.

Fin.

Pat
  • Pat

  • The Connection
  • Joined: 03 Aug 2006
  • None

#28

Posted 07 April 2012 - 10:19 PM

QUOTE (Butters 2011 @ Saturday, Apr 7 2012, 17:16)
Would you leave your doors open to your house and allow anyone to come in and snoop around as they please?

No, and I wouldn't let a government official do it either unless they had a warrant, which they could only achieve if they had sufficient evidence to prove that it was a matter of protection. The difference is that Waddy would open the door up, invite them in, and give them a cup of tea the minute they showed him their badge.

Maybe it's just a US vs. UK thing. I was raised to believe that no one has the right to infringe upon personal liberties no matter how much they're paid or what kind of desk they sit behind, but maybe it's different over there.

Typhus
  • Typhus

    OG

  • $outh $ide Hoodz
  • Joined: 11 Sep 2007

#29

Posted 07 April 2012 - 10:20 PM

QUOTE (Waddy @ Saturday, Apr 7 2012, 22:15)
Again, you are making it something it isnt.
I dont care how corrupt a court is or whatever else. I care about the safety of people who live in the UK and other countries.

What you're saying is that its ok for crime to run rampant in cyber space and I would have thought a huge chunk of crime is run on cyber space, but you dont want the police to have the power to stop them.
I would think terrorism is the prime reason, but it will trickle down to all crimes no matter how petty, and the more evidence the police have the better to make it stop.

Corruption is an entirely different subject.

But what if the definition of a 'terrorist' or a 'criminal' eventually becomes judged based on political expedience rather than public safety?
We trust the law to judge who it is that means us harm, but if the integrity of the law is compromised, what's to stop them switching their surveillance from legitimate targets - the type you have mentioned - and on to non-violent political dissidents and critics?

I maintain that this could only work if we could be absolutely sure that it would not be abused, but the net of 'national security' can be cast very far and very wide.

Waddy
  • Waddy

    Gods foster son.

  • Moderator
  • Joined: 02 Feb 2004
  • None

#30

Posted 07 April 2012 - 10:20 PM

QUOTE (Gareth Croke @ Saturday, Apr 7 2012, 22:17)
Who cares anyway this plan is dead in the water anyway, that is that the legislation would need to go to consultation, then draft, blue paper, white paper, then drafted again, taken the commons to get a time to debate, then get debated, then amended, then debated, then amended again, then sent to the lords, then sent back again, then debated, then amended, then sent back to lords again, then the lords reject it, then the commons vetos it into law, then Europe find out and throw it out of law for being against human rights laws, politicians spit the dummy out, the press say told you so and meanwhile we're left wondering what the hell that was all about as the whole issue has cost millions that could have been spent on proper intelligence gathering and proper security.

Fin.

Or until something happens where this law could have saved it all from happening, and it will. Then it will be brought in straight away.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users