Results 1 to 3 of 3

Thread: More Big Brother For The UK

  1. #1
    Senior Member itschad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Location
    West Yorkshire England
    Country
    UK
    Posts
    529
    Thanks
    239
    Thanked 238 Times in 180 Posts

    More Big Brother For The UK

    The UK is introducing cameras to catch people throwing rubbish out of their cars. It's being trialled in Maidstone Kent first. Christ, you just cannot move around the UK without being on camera and now these. I certainly do not condone littering, they deserve a slap. Fines of £120 (about $168 US or $212 in Canadian)
    I guess it'll be viewed as a money raising excercise by many. So, what next? Sensors placed in vehicles so that when you fart your fined for damaging the ozone layer. God forbid if you get caught fornicating in your car, hung, drawn and quartered I guess.
    A case for going back to a horse & cart?


    Growing old is compulsory- Growing up is optional

  2. #2
    Senior Member PityOnU's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2020
    Location
    WA, USA
    Country
    United States
    Posts
    426
    Thanks
    97
    Thanked 191 Times in 133 Posts
    I've thought a little about this topic over the past couple of years, and there are some pretty big questions that come along with it.

    The first one is your view of what we'll call "right to privacy" in a public space. We will call a public space anywhere that a regular person could easily enter and exit (and also see) without requiring special permission. If another person could easily see you there, what is the difference between that and a security camera? The idea that a person could potentially miss things, while a machine would always catch everything? But you are in a public space, nothing you do is private at that point, so how could you expect there to be some weird protections that allow you to be semi-invisible, just not to humans?

    Second is your views of law enforcement. Are laws and the punishment for breaking them absolute? Or should law enforcement always be a game of hide and seek - i.e. consequences are not a universal expectation, but rather come from "losing the game" and being caught? That would seem to suggest that there's not anything inherently wrong with breaking the law, it's just a case of being dumb enough to do something in front of an authority figure that could punish you for it... if they were paying attention... if they felt like it. Do you place more faith in a singular police officer, or in the societal system that defines and codifies it's beliefs into laws?

    One sentence summation: CCTV in public places for catching murderers seems fine but having a camera that automates giving tickets for running a red light feels like cheating somehow.

  3. #3
    Senior Member itschad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Location
    West Yorkshire England
    Country
    UK
    Posts
    529
    Thanks
    239
    Thanked 238 Times in 180 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by PityOnU View Post
    I've thought a little about this topic over the past couple of years, and there are some pretty big questions that come along with it.

    The first one is your view of what we'll call "right to privacy" in a public space. We will call a public space anywhere that a regular person could easily enter and exit (and also see) without requiring special permission. If another person could easily see you there, what is the difference between that and a security camera? The idea that a person could potentially miss things, while a machine would always catch everything? But you are in a public space, nothing you do is private at that point, so how could you expect there to be some weird protections that allow you to be semi-invisible, just not to humans?

    Second is your views of law enforcement. Are laws and the punishment for breaking them absolute? Or should law enforcement always be a game of hide and seek - i.e. consequences are not a universal expectation, but rather come from "losing the game" and being caught? That would seem to suggest that there's not anything inherently wrong with breaking the law, it's just a case of being dumb enough to do something in front of an authority figure that could punish you for it... if they were paying attention... if they felt like it. Do you place more faith in a singular police officer, or in the societal system that defines and codifies it's beliefs into laws?

    One sentence summation: CCTV in public places for catching murderers seems fine but having a camera that automates giving tickets for running a red light feels like cheating somehow.
    Apparently littering has increased by 250% since Covid, how they can justify and confirm this increase is way beyond me.
    Firstly the camera is irrefutable unlike a single enforcer whose evidence cannot be corroborated. We always have the option to plead not guilty BUT if you're found guilty the penalty is harsher.
    There are many cameras in the UK with London being the highest user. See Below

    London is the only city outside of China to feature in the top 10. The capital of the United Kingdom has 627,727 cameras for a population of 9.3 million – equal to one camera for every 14 residents.


    Growing old is compulsory- Growing up is optional

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •