Slashdot Mirror
UK To Passively Monitor Every Vehicle
DrSkwid writes "The UK Police are building a network to monitor the movement of every vehicle in the U.K. through an extensive Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) system. The data will be retained for 2 years. The Register further reports that the system will likely be used for issuing speeding fines." From the article: "The primary aims claimed for the system are tackling untaxed and uninsured vehicles, stolen cars and the considerably broader one of 'denying criminals the use of the roads.' But unless the Times has got the spacing wrong, having one every quarter of a mile on motorways quite clearly means they'll be used to enforce speed limits as well, which would effectively make the current generation of Gatsos obsolete. Otherwise, checking a vehicle's tax and insurance status every 15 seconds or thereabouts would seem overkill."
What's a Gatso?
Don't misread that you dyslexic perv.
"Piter, too, is dead."
having one every quarter of a mile on motorways quite clearly means they'll be used to enforce speed limits as well,
Does this mean drag-racers can practise on the highway and get away with it?
"A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
That we in the colonies won the war and started a country that didn't take away our rights and treat us like criminals.
I'd just like to say thanks for trying to waste my hard-earned tax money on this, rather than going out and using it for something useful like fixing the sorry state of our education system or making the NHS ever so slightly less pathetic.
First cameras on _every_ corner...now this.
Lenina Huxley, you are fined one-half credit for a sotto voce violation of the Verbal Morality Statute. Additionally, you are fined 120 credits per infraction of the Safe Speed Statutes, for exceeding the speed limit of 45 miles per hour on the freeway 72 times this morning. Be Happy!
Do daemons dream of electric sleep()?
Yet another reason for me to want to emigrate from the UK, what with ID cards, and 90 days detention without trial etc.(Thankfully the latter was defeated in parliment). At this rate, with ever more draconian laws I'll be able to claim asylum.
If I have nothing to hide, you have no reason to search me
I remember seeing something like this technology being tested with police. They setup a unit like this (might be the same thing) on a busy road. Anyways, a few hours later, the system caught a few stolen cars, speeders, and few other things, that led to a record number of arrests that day.
Kinda werid though, for some reason it reminds me of 1984.
Black Sky
2D Elite Inspired Game
this could be a very interesting tool. Other than it's privacy issues of course, it could be used in some neat ways.
Let's say you have a criminal who has been busted for drug charges. You could then find out where he's been, and probably track down where he gets his stuff from, and take it straight up the channels to the big guys.
Or does it not work that way?
One group of people asking why the English let their government run roughshod over them, and a group of Brits claiming that they fully understand the reasons behind the measures their government is taking and are willing to endure scrutiny for the public good.
1984 wasn't set in America.
That is some scary stuff! Bring on the 1984 references.
Ok, never mind.
In other news, the Atlantic Ocean is described as being "considerably broader" than the English Channel.
But these are folks whose pet name for the gulf of water separating North America from Europe as "the pond".
One might go further and suggest that British people are prone to occasional tendencies towards understatement.
I just hope that the US doesn't adopt this idea.
I used to carry a bottle of whiskey for snake bite. And two snakes. -Nefarious Wheel
Good thing that America does not have a way to track us.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
The point to point speeding measurements are much fairer than the spot speeding checks. For example if you average 150MPH down the freeway over 1km you can't really complain when you get busted. If however you get caught at 150MPH when passing a truck at the unfortunate location of a Gatso then that may just be bad luck.
The bikini - security through obscurity since 1943
... of pedants who point out that Britain != England.
Reality is defined by the maddest person in the room
I've always felt that these sorts of measures are alot better than the speed enforment that we have in Australia and many other places - The hidden multinova cameras that police now use here.
If you really want to stop speeding, this is the way to do it. All the time. Everywhere.
If it sounds radical, well at least it will mean that in the long run the speed limits themselves will have to be adjusted to something that is reasonable, rather than what has happened in most countries - speed limits that were set but which are only enforced a very tiny fraction of the time.
Also, getting done for doing too fast an average speed is far more important than getting unlucky for doing an instantaneous speed that is too fast at some random point in your trip. Almost everyone speeds a little at some time - unless you only use cruise control to drive with you will always run the risk of going too fast at some point when you aren't looking at your speedo. (And, its not exactly safe to drive the whole trip whilst looking only at your speed)
As for the privacy issues.
Well, I think its a little too late for anyone in the UK (maybe anywhere, really) to get worried about that. Look at the congestion tax in the UK (Automatic licence plate recognition). Look also at the ability to obtain a list of every base station that your mobile is associated with - the phone companies can do this if requested by a magistrate, although that usually only done in murder cases or similar. Look at the number of CCTV's that proliferate in every public place.
Unfortunatly, the invasion into our privacy has only just begun. There is no techonlogical way to avoid this - it will only get worse. Soon enough automatic facial recognition will be connected to all the CCTV's around and you will be trackable just for being visible. You can identify people by the way that they walk. Some systems now can identify potential suicides in the happening in train stations by the typical behaviour people make prior to jumping in front of trains.
The only solution to the privacy issues are legislative ones. You can't stop this level of data collection anymore, all we can do is ensure that only certain legitimate uses for it exist. This is the only way that any of us will have real protection in the future - if its in a constitution or in legislation.
Just my 2c worth,
Michael
There is no cryptographic solution to the problem where the intended receiver and the attacker are the same entity.
is keeping the records for two years - I can't see any good reason for that. The cameras themselves aren't much different from the camera system already used to maintain the congestuion charge in central london and are overall a Good Thing. (As a cyclist I find that the largest regular threat to my life tends to originate from speeding/incompetent motorists - and I want them to be caught and have their licenses revoked)
James P. Barrett
It would appear that the times DID get the spacing wrong, since I seriously doubt the UK has randomly decided to use US units.
The regularity of the cameras is irrelevant, you only have to know the distance between them, and ensure their clocks are in sync to be able to issue a speeding ticket.
So thinking around the subject:
boakes.org
> The UK Gov't hasn't given us a whole heck of a lot of trouble since...
Really they fuc8ed you over big time. If they hadn't gone with you on the Iraq war fiasco then Iraq II would not have happened and you Yanks would still have a reasonably good international reputation. The UK gov plan is to make the US look so bad that the UK can lead Europe as this centuries only super power.
God shave the Queen!
The bikini - security through obscurity since 1943
you can ride it if you like
It's got a basket, a bell that rings
and things to make it look good
I'd give it to you if I could,
but I borrowed it
Syd Barrett escapes the universal monitoring!
"Speaking the Truth in times of universal deceit is a revolutionary act." -- George Orwell
Every Western country is facing Big Brother issues. However, I wonder if the UK has created its own issue here: whether it is wise or moral to criminalize huge numbers of the population with the aim of raising extra revenue for the government. Few in the UK would argue that the present system of speed cameras (they are called Gatso cameras) is designed for much else other than making money for the state.
I guess if a government goes about giving very large numbers of otherwise law-abiding citizens a criminal record they should not expect much more than cynicism when it comes to other social problems. We are then all the losers.
A by-product of the current obsession with safety is that enormous sums have to be spent on repairing emergency vehicles whose suspension is wrecked going over speed bumps in urban areas. In addition, more acute cases die because it takes longer for an ambulance to get them to hospital and the ride there is bumpy to say the least. It might even turn out that the safety obsession kills more people than it is intended to save.
Meanwhile, new licensing laws in the UK permitting the sale of alcohol 24/7 promise many mores deaths from alcohol abuse and its fallout. Liver disease from alcohol abuse among those under 30 is several hundred per cent higher than it was even twenty years ago. Apparently it's OK to drink yourself to death in the UK, but woe betide you if you get in an automobile stone cold sober.
Las qué passoun
tournoun pas maï
What I don't understand is why speeding is so strictly enforced with this system. It's an entirely arbitrary system (well, loosely based on some aspect of the road) that is outdated for current car designs. Do you think my 1,500lb escort should have the same speed limit as some guys 2 ton '88 Cadillac, or an H2? Should I be forced to drive at the same speed as a senile senior citizen?
What about other circumstances where I sped up to avoid an accident, or to avoid further traffic congestion (as in moving into place to merge into an open spot rather than having 10 people brake behind you)?
The Register thinks the worst of just about everyone and everything. Since it's pretty evenhanded in its loathing, 'biased' while technically correct doesn't quite convey the right picture here.
Real Daleks don't climb stairs - they level the building.
I don't know about the UK but if such a system were to result in speed compliance in a place like Texas, then many little (and not so little) towns would no longer be able to generate vast amounts of revenue from travelers who are just passing through and pay the fines just to be done with it. In my own case I'd really have liked to had this system then I could have successfully fought the false speed allegation (92 mph in a 70 mph zone with a $291 fine) that a state trooper leveled against me. In the end paying the locals off was easiest. It would be funny for the turkeys to have to tax themselves for a change.
At least in most of the USA, speeding is not a crime in the sense of "infringement on other people's rights."
Speed traps are used as a revenue source for small towns.
I expect donut shops in the UK to experience a large sales increase shortly. :-p
If you have not done so already, get in contact with your local branch of No2ID. Sign the I refuse pledge (or at least the I support pledge). Lobby your MP and your councillors: many councils across the UK are passing resolutions to forbid government services from requiring their users to have ID cards.
Except when they put you in the slammer for 90 days because you 3 times in the past 2 years have been driving behind a suspected terrorist.
This has already been reported by the bbc ( more reliable than The Register ) where a camera has been used to record car licence plates on entry to a car park, and generate automatic fines if a matching parking ticket was not purchased.
:o)
The system failed miserably because it falsely recorded cars *passing by* the car park.
It's a real intrusion, but on the other hand, try getting compensation if you are in an accident with someone driving without insurance.
I'll stick to monitoring speed cameras
Open Source Drum Kit, LPLC deve board - mjhdesigns.com
"The Register thinks the worst of just about everyone and everything."
But the vulture looks so friendly....The romans posed the question "Quis Custodiet Ipsos Custodes?"
I would be in favor of a system to track the movements of all cars and issue speeding violations as long as the data is a matter of public record and it can be proven (for example, via Freedom of Information requests) that all traffic regulations are being strictly enforce on all public officials, including elected official, appointed official, off duty police and their families, friends, and relatives, and anybody else in a position of influence.
If a speed limit is too low, I'm sure it would get rapidly fixed if there were 100% enforcement of fines and penalties against senators and representatives.
If a speed limit is, in fact, valid and legitimate for safety reasons then 100% enforcement is certainly a good thing.
The problem occurs when traffic regulations are constructed in such a way that everybody violates them because they are unreasonable and the police use them as a means of selectively grabbing people they have an illegitimate beef against.
I see a sudden market emerging for adhesive tape for modifying license plate numbers/letters to confuse the cameras. WIth little effort 5's make great 6's, 0's and 3's transmogrify into 8's, C's become 0's. And suddenly your car becomes anonymous. *cough* Not that I advocate this of course. -Kurt
"We can categorically state we have not released man-eating badgers into the area." - UK military spokesman, July 2007
This is simply a voluntary tax system. Want to help your gov.? Simply speed.
Besides, maybe they use the new money to fix some of the other systems or perhaps increase the police.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
I'm feeling sad that these kind of measures can be introduced in the UK and the citizens of the UK doesn't feel the need to throw those responsible for this surveilance into the ocean or something.
...
Seriously, why is it, that we have to live in such a passive society? Like if it would have been bred for obedience.
First, there were cameras on the streets and noone said a word
Then, there were monitoring of cars and noone said a word
Finally, when I got stripped from all my freedoms, labeled a criminal, then, there was noone to say a word.
Sad.
It takes a man to suffer ignorance and smile
Be yourself no matter what they say
The term I usually use to describe The Register is "journalistic snark." I considered "equal-opportunity curmudgeon" at one point, but curmudgeonly doesn't convey the self-satisfied attitude that generally comes through in their articles.
Just last night I was saying one of our local papers -- also called The Register -- would be much more interesting if it were like this site...
except at the end of the month when the cops are short on their quotas
I mean seriously... Of coarse speeding tickets will be issued with it. That is how they will raise funding for it. However, figuring out how much they were speeding is a whole different story altogether... Now grant it, the 1/4 mile distance will limit some of the speeds, but in theory, someone could hit 100+ mph and slow back down to 5 mph before they hit the next scanner, thus the overall time spent going the 1/4 mile could still be same time spent for going that distance as it would if you simply went the speed limit.
We were all warned a long time ago that MS products sucked, remember the Magic 8 Ball said, "Outlook not so good"
Indeed.
When did the UK switch from using kilometers to miles??
Speed and distance has for the most part been measured in miles in the UK for a long long time, kilometres haven't moved into that territory yet.
I don't normally like to resort to ad hominem attacks, but you are a moron for believing this.
There are so many problems with government organizations having this level of control over their citizenry. Starting with the people actually doing the control, who do they get to monitor these systems? What if it's some creepy guy trying to stalk women with this technology? What if it's someone trying to use knowledge of your actions to blackmail you? If I'm working the camera, and I see you walking down the street holding hands with one woman, then the next day another woman, I could demand that you pay me money or I'll let them know about each other, etc. This is one example but you can see many more. What if I'm not even working for the government, but I hack the system to gain access to this kind of information?
At a higher level, what's legal and what's not is always subject to change. You could be subject to hundreds of dollars in fines every day just for doing something that otherwise seems ordinary. See the above comment about the man asking a drug offender for directions. Nothing illegal took place, but in the investigation of the drug offender, while trying to find his customers and sources, you would get flagged for investigation and would be subject to search and arrest. Just getting arrested is often enough for you to lose your job and be embarassed by your friends, colleagues and family.
I can go on, but I hope that you see why your line of thinking that this is "only bad for bad people" is flawed.
Just put a tin-foil hat on your car!
Putting aside the massive privacy issues, and assuming it is used to monitor speeding; why put speed cameras on the statistically safest roads in the country? Speed cameras (statistically again) have rarely managed to improve accident rates where deployed, so I'll look foward to seeing how they justify this one (no doubt it will stop terrorists..).
Stuff like this makes movies like
Aeon Flux, Equilibrium, Minority Report etc.. seem more and more real...
Comment removed based on user account deletion
They never switched...
Speeding. What about the secondary aim? It would be a nice way to attempt to solve a murder if you had some suspects that needed to get from point A to point B and back. Then again, why stop at murder. You know there was a drug house at location X ... Let's see who was making long trips to somewhere in that vicinicty, not staying terribly long, and heading home. That sounds like probable cause for a little wire tapping too. Then again, drug deals will be taken care of the minute we get RFID in our currency ... or just go to a complete "credits" system. The future is so bright I gotta wear shades.
Could the stated goals not be acheived more cheaply simply by fitting each vehicle with a transponder? Anything that must be installed every quarter mile of every road will necessarily be ungodly expensive.
Vehicles operating without a transponder would be fined steeply. A few random checks would ensure compliance.
It's one thing to be an evil overlord, but there's no excuse for being an expensive and incompetent evil overlord.
"We reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals." --The American President (20.1.2009)
Now I just have to patent my "system of obfuscating an identification system for automobiles from digital optical collective devices".
We were all warned a long time ago that MS products sucked, remember the Magic 8 Ball said, "Outlook not so good"
I shouldn't mind, as I don't drive in rush hour, on major roads, or very far very often. I work mainly at home, and a mile down the (b) road, so it will cost me less. But the truth is something I appreciate. Heh... "the new terror laws won't be abused"... so why keep an 81 year old heckler out of your conference under them, you lying fu--wits.
You're trying to be sarcastic but you are correct. There is nowhere in the U.S. where speeding tickets are issued based on toll transponder data - some people have of course proposed it but the only thing American's like more than cars is speeding in them.
Furthermore, did you not note that Exprestoll is a private company? Not being part of the government they care only about collecting tolls and not about issuing tickets.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
So how about we put cameras in every home, in order to detect criminal activities?
You've got nothing to hide, so it's all fine and dandy, right? After all, why watch you? You're just doing your average activities, right?
Mother, do you think they'll like this sig?
The standard in the UK police is 10% + 2 mph, so you have to be doing 79 in a 70 to be ticketed or 35 in a 30.
From what i've heard, some gatsos dont give you the 2mph but i believe laws only require that your in dash speedometer be accurate to 10% hence the slack.
Of course i'm sure speedos are more accruate nowadays so they might try to reign that in.
Also, getting done for doing too fast an average speed is far more important than getting unlucky for doing an instantaneous speed that is too fast at some random point in your trip.
Only one problem with your theory - 1/4 a mile is too short not to get caught for passing someone.
What if someone is going five under the limit. You try to pass them and they speed up, so you have to got a bit faster and it takes a bit longer to go around them - say 1/2 mile or more. Under the new system you are indeed getting a ticket.
I also wonder if it will lead to refinement of the law that says exactly how many tickets per mile you can get. For instance, let's say you did pass that car and realize it was long enough to register you as speeding. Why not keep going then since you already have a ticket? If I travel fifty miles at ten over am I just going to get one ticket? Or perhaps the fine would increase with duration of the speeding.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
I for one am sick of subsidizing their behavior in my overloaded insurance premiums.
Please dont make me laugh like that, how ever do you think that the insurance companies are going to lower rates. When have they ever done so on a broad scale? They are going to take more profit, espicallaly now that its illegal to even have a car in a garage without insurace.
A goverment with unchecked, uncontrolled power is far more dangerous than any individual can ever be. Unfortunatly many will find this out much too late.
1: Cameras, communications, hardware, and software -- (est.) $500/camera.
2: Spray can of black paint -- $3.99.
3: Afternoon out drinking beer with friends and spray painting over camera lens -- $50.
4: Sticking it to the Man -- PRICELESS!
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
Bear in mind that Blair's ability to railroad through deeply unpopular legislation is seriously damaged after losing the "90 days" vote last week. The PLP are restive and not likely to rubberstamp deeply unpopular legislation.
I've been had by the London congestion charge system many times, which is always a pain but overall I don't moan about it because it's a Good Thing to ration traffic in central london (for lots of reasons.) That argument won't wash outside of city centres though.
"None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free." -- Goethe
A home is a private place, a street is a public place. Shall I draw a diagram?
It seems that the reason why they want a camera every 400 yards is so that they can enforce variable speed limits. From the article: "400 yards along motorways, and a trial on the M42 near Birmingham will first be used to enforce variable speed limits".
I last drove along the M42 just over a week ago, and there are plenty of new temporary speed limit signs, one above each lane. These were in use to slow the traffic down to help remove a traffic jam. It seems that all of this has been put in with the intention of these camera trials.
Personally, I think this is a good idea. Variable speed limits might help to curb congestion, especially on the M42 which regularly gets jammed with traffic going to the NEC and the many motorways that connect to it. We have had variable speed limits in the UK for a while now, but everyone (including the police) ignores them.
In the UK, driving is a privilage and not a right. You are issued with a licence which of course can be revoked by a court. A lot of speed limits do seem like BS, and the motorway speed limit IMHO ought to be 80, but if everyone is doing the same speed things might be safer.
The only problem I have with this, is that they want to hold the records for two years. Why? This will probably get tied into our expensive ID cards. Might be time to migrate.
"Otherwise, checking a vehicle's tax and insurance status every 15 seconds or thereabouts would seem overkill."
Unless they are looking into "road pricing" where you pay for the use of the roads, which I believe they are looking into doing?
Britain: Land of really stupid criminals who don't know enough to switch license plates before committing a crime with a car.
Seems to me that Q knew what he was doing when he gave James Bond an Aston Martin with changeable license plates.
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
OK, they're monitoring the movements of vehicles on public roads. Exactly what privacy do you think is being violated?
I'm always confused by the fact (which seems to hold true in many countries) that speeding fines are based on how many mph or kph you are over the limit.
I'm of the mindset that 15mph over a 70mph limit is far less dangerous than 15mph over a 30mph limit - yet in some places they have the same penatly.
... despite the UK's continual attempts to make it easier to incarcerate people without trial, it does require motive, means, and opportunity, not to mention some evidence of a crime, rather than a conversation to get arrested/charged. There is always the option of wrongful arrest, if the police try to take it too far...
:-(
In general, though, I'm very disappointed. Christ, I thought geting rid of "lockemup, lockemALLup" Blunkett was a good thing. Looks like we swapped the frying pan for the fire
Simon
Physicists get Hadrons!
Hey, who needs privacy if it might catch a criminal.
You dont have anything to hide do you?
( this is sarcasm )
---- Booth was a patriot ----
I don't know why these things always raise the specter that the world is turning Big Brother all the time. Many crimes have been solved (and who knows how many have been prevented) by surveillance devices, thank goodness!
Ah but the World has turned Big Brother, what you may fail to realize is that it is not a bad thing for those in the know. And knowledge is a powerful tool for punishing bad behavior.
As long as your moral values never percievably transgress those mandated by the Community, then you have no worries.
Errr, hang on a second. I think you'll find that the US uses Imperial (as in British) units. Not the other way around. Well most of the time - there are of course the bastardised Imperial units the US uses like larger fl. oz, fewer fl. oz to the pint (and thus smaller gallons), and smaller tonnes.
I think you meant bastardized and tons. When will these Brits learn to spell?
i believe that this system will be usefull
1) for checking about stolen vehicles
2) to send tickets to everyone exciding the speed limit of 130 Km/h,
3) checking for untaxed and uninsured vehicles.
And generally for road safety reasons:
1) Those who dont wear their safety belt going below 50 km/h shouldn't get a ticket
2) for those that dont wear their safety belts ang speeding at 50-100km/h should not be punished too hard
3) For people speeding above 100km/h not wearing their safety belts their car should be hold by the police for only two days, and not more.
4) Finally the above should be known to public via advertisement in television.
5) this is only for their safety belts, and thats because TV is the only medium that everybody watches and the message can get to the public.
6) if someone wants to go over 250Km/h they can do so if they wear their safety belts
All of the above should be enforced to everyone , even policemen and politicians
IN AN INSANE WORLD, THE ANSWERS ARE INSANE
2+2 = 5 (for very large values of 2)
Well done that man! Saved me the trouble. Orf now for another G&T.
That explains the new signage in Heathrow:
"Welcome to Airstrip One"
I am becoming gerund, destroyer of verbs.
The variable speed limits mentioned are speed limits that are applied via illuminated boards by the side of the road to regulate traffic flow.
When there is a motorway incident a few miles ahead, the boards are set to lower speed limits to keep motorists from arriving at the scene too soon.
It is not uncommon to see 60 & 40 Mph boards posted along the motorway, sometimes the cause is bad weather or just congestion. Until recently (see below) there was no enforcement of these signs.
The average speed camera system was used recently on a long stretch of road works on the M1 where a contraflow (where opposing traffic uses the same carriageway) was used. The speed boards were set to 40Mph for a 10 mile stretch of what is normally 70mph.
The M42 mentioned is a very busy stretch of motorway and at peak times it is safer to make all traffic go at a maximum of 50mph than have some at 70mph and some 50mph.
The motorway is not a freeway, the fastest moving traffic is supposed to use the right of the 3 lanes but often this outside lane moves lows up from congestion so people jump lanes to try and maximize speed, which can be more dangerous.
EOM
There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
When did the UK switch from using miles to kilometers??
There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
This just in...
Passive UK citizens to passivily allow the the UK Police to build a network to monitor the movement of every vehicle in the U.K.
Not that US citizens would act much differently these days.
Screw it I'm moving to France, their economy is shot but at least they know how to riot.
I totally agree with this. It doesn't invade privacy, and it ought to do something about the sheer volume of idiots driving about these days. Bonus.
A block of code, sufficiently well-written, is indistinguishable from magick.
At least here in the U.S., the arrest gets all the press. An acquittal NEVER gets nearly as much press. Case in point, recently nine women attending two fraternity parties near the University of Colorado were taken to the hospital for alcohol poisoning. It was front-page news for several days when two of the women apparently tested positive for GHB, a "date-rape" drug. One of the frats has actually had its local chapter closed down for the rest of the year, maybe permanently.
Fast-forward several weeks, and guess what, the "quickie" test for GHB has a non-zero occurence of false positives. The more expensive, accurate, and time-consuming lab test came back negative on all nine women. Was it front page news for over a week that "frats didn't drug women after all"? I'll let you guess at the answer.
I had a point somewhere in there. Oh yeah, I'd prefer not to be arrested just because I happened to come into casual contact with a criminal.
-paul
Pistol caliber is like religion: everyone has their favourite, and theirs is the only right choice.
UK is in a bad state right now. all this is, is an extra tax for us to pay! Debt in the UK is crazy!!! and you know why?.......because everyday wages don't actually pay for what the UK government takes away from you. I worked out, for about every £100 you earn, you only see around £15-£20. Why? What we call stealth taxes! wait...i can have 4 kids, sit on my ass all day, get a free house, free dental, free health and make £40,000 a yer. What the **** am i doing working really hard 12 hours a day? I can't even afford to run my car! UK SUX! Can i come to USA?
Or if you're driving a pink car and they've got a large break whilst playing motorway snooker. This also happens.
Damon Knight already predicted universal access to the cameras in his short story I See You.
Available as an ebook at the hyperlink. Good read.
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens.
Illegal and wrong are two different things.
Of course there are no exceptions ot the speed limit - it's a hard and fast law. But the laws of physics and reality sometimes differ from that which is written. If someone is going at an unstable speed I am going to pass them, as long as I can do so safley.
You seem to forget the point of the law is to reduce accidents. My not being near an unstable driver reduces the chance I will be in one. Therefore I am obeying the spirit of the law which in fact makes mer morally superior to someone who insists on obeying the law to the peril of traffic around them.
The law is slowly coming around to a similar point of view as well - recently a number of states have seen laws making it illegal for someone to be in the left lane unless they are passing. Note that it's not legal to stay there even if you are going the speed limit, which in theory means no-one should pass them (and is exactly what many of those people are thinking in a passive-agressive sort of way). Because this behaviour leads to accidents it is banned, even though there's no reason it cannot be legal.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
I submitted the story about Texas trying to do this (almost this EXACT story) but with ACTIVE RFID and yesterday and it was REJECTED! WTF!?!
e n/entries/1451n ow_this_worrie.html
If anyone cares, here's two write up on Texas' attempt from a both sides of the political aisle:
http://journals.aol.com/republicanjen/RepublicanJ
http://www.houstondemocrats.com/archives/2005/04/
Your thin skin doesn't make me a troll
If there were a camera system to detect obnoxious behavior, I would be all for it. Ticket someone pulling out in front just as you had happen? Great. Speeding up to prevent you from passing? Get them under the same road-rage laws that prevent people driving in the left lane unless they are passing. High-beaming you for no reason? Blow out thier tires with the roadside automated dart guns that provide instant enforcement.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
From the Register article: don't seem to have needed any kind of Parliamentary approval to begin the deployment of what promises to be one the most pervasive surveillance systems on earth
Law enforcement can not be trusted ever with broad powers. To initiate surveillance on every citizen of a country with a car and not think that parliment should need to approve the plan, demostrates how the police are always out to establish a police state. They do not see parliment as running the UK, only a hurdle to get in around in their dream of being able to monitor every citizen constantly.
Speeding tickets are the least of the problems with this kind of intrusion into every citizen's life. Next, the police will claim they need to take all this data and use it find people whose travel patterns fit those of terrrorists. After they succeeded by claiming all of the critics are terrorist smapathizers, they'll continually expand the use of the data your every movement is used and analized to see if you are committing some crime or the other and the entire UK is a police state.
wtf is this turn britain into an open prison day
theres people who get watched and they are called criminals and we have em in prison now it seems like the whole island will be an open prison. we will be given freedoms to an extent but we will be checked.
Didn't we used to pity the soviet russians with thier limited freedoms and having to get permission to travel
now here we have random searches checks on our movements stored for two years just in case. If I was a fuckin criminal i could understand it but I'm not your not and we are being treated as if we were. So fuckin what if you've got nothin to hide you've got nothing to fear, so great whats that make us then trustee's ??
This countrys goin to crap, its bollocks and there's nowt to be done unless you want to become a criminal and take some action.
and now I'm fucked i am inciting a terrorist act, bollocks.!!!
Blarney Quality Restaurant, Plants
Oh, this goddamned stupid argument again. So, if you're not committing crimes, why don't we stick a camera up your ass so you can have a perpetual colonsocopy? Obviously, it would be good for your health, no? It could have embedded GPS, and remote monitoring so in the event that you develop a polyp the doctors can come and tear you out of your mistress' bed and take that sucker out!
Maybe some of us don't like living under a microscope, for any reason? Could increase your safety in a way significantly relative to the amount of privacy (every)one gives up? I sincerely doubt it.
I'll take my chances with the fucking speeders and terrorists, thanks.
Constitutional rights may be respected, repealed, or modified; but they must never be ignored.
I for one am looking forward to a time where speeding, drink-driving, car theft and joy-riding will have fallen to minor levels. I predict maybe one or two instances of joy riding or street racing a year! In fact if I see a joy rider after this system is installed I think we should personally hold the person in charge of this project responsible.
This comment does not represent the views or opinions of the user.
Really it is a logical use for technology. If you can read a license plate, which can be captured by any carbon based unit already, why shouldn't you automate the task of doing the police officers job? The question for me is not if this can happen, it is about limiting the use of the information to traffic related behavior. I think that allowing this to be introduced in the USA is OK, but it needs laws to limit the information to the cars behavior on the road, as opposed to being used as a tracking device, and limit the storing of the data until the violations are cleared.
I am sure that this will be modded down, but I for one welcome our new traffic controlling overlords.
Anyone who has ever gotten a ticket knows that the reason they bring it to you and have you sign it is to prove that you were infact driving the car at the time of the infraction. When you place cameras and have them do all the citing for traffic infractions, tickets become that much easier to fight.
Lets use this as an example, its 3 am and you're sitting at a red light. No traffic is coming from either direction and then you notice in your rear view mirror someone closing in on you way too fast. You all the sudden hear their brakes lock up and they're obviously too close and still going too fast, what do you do? Personally I run the red light, no cross traffic, and I'm avoiding an accident. You bring that before a judge, the ticket will be dismissed. Reason being is there is no reason to subject yourself or property to injury or damage because of a traffic signal.
The same can be said about speed limits, if you're passing someone on a two lane highway, find me one person that does it at the speed limit, more specificly find someone who has lived to tell about it. Do the math if you dont believe me. Example 65 mph zone, someone's doing 60 instead, that means you pass at 5 miles per hour. That means you close at about 7 feet per second. You need to account for the space behind the vehical your passing as well as the front, and lets say its a semi, total thats going to be about 95 feet. 95/7 =14 seconds. That means for almost a 1/4 of a minute you're in the oncoming lane, at 65 miles an hour you actually cover 1430 feet, over a quarter mile. I live in Pullman WA and often travel to seattle on highway 26. That distance is often pushing the limits of passing zones and sight limits. Personaly I prefer to minimize time in the oncoming lane and do what is necessary to protect myself and my passengers.
Personally I feel that this is nothing but another form of big brother. This way they can watch us all the time, and try and railroad us in to what they want. The biggest kicker about all of this is they have to prove who was driving the vehicle, just because its your car, does not actually make you liable for the ticket because you could have lent it to your buddy joe. Again this is why it comes back to you signing the ticket when you get one.
I have helped numerous friends fight tickets, and I have fought a few myself, I was the only one to actually end up paying, but as it was a wolfpack that busted me, there's no real hope at getting out of that, it was reduced by well over half however. I've seen other instances where you have no option but to run a red light, truck with heavy machinery, rapid light change, chase car can't see the light. You have two options, run the light and you just have to worry about people jumping the light, one you should always be careful just after a light change, or 2 slam the brakes, slide into the intersection most likely, and damage the $30,000 dollars worth of equipment in the back. Again, you drive your car, you are responsible for what happens, but you shouldn't let the traffic signs drive your car for you.
pbtpu40
-PB_TPU_40 The trick to flying is to throw yourself at the ground and miss.
So America is becoming just like England.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
Unfortunately at the moment the UK is a very centralized government. The local officials have trivial or negligible powers. They are ordered from central government what to do, they only have discretion in how. The police are technically local, but de-facto centralized and entirely unelected. Judges are unelected. In fact, there are only 3 elected layers of government, and usually only 2 apply: parliament, councils (almost powerless) and city mayors (only in London at the moment). Because of our "first past the post" voting system, the central elections are entirely too blunt an instrument to register details of voter preferences. So in reality, democracy isn't going to dig the UK out of this hole. Probably the best solution would be to vote in the Conservatives and hope that their localist policies stretch far enough to help.
"There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. Who wants a nation of law-abiding citizens? What's there in that for anyone? But just pass the kind of laws that can neither be observed nor enforced nor objectively interpreted - and you create a nation of law-breakers - and then you cash in on guilt. Now that's the system, Mr. Rearden, and once you understand it, you'll be much easier to deal with."- Ayn Rand, "Atlas Shrugged"
Your thin skin doesn't make me a troll
Until they are denounced for thought crime? Any predictions?
~ I am logged on, therefore I am.
These measures that the government of the UK proposes may very well be a bit more intrusive, passive or not, that most people care for. We can feel this way because of certain rights and privileges that have been earned by blood. There are certain individuals that use these same rights to prepare themselves to do all manner of mischief, which include attempting to de-stabalize the elected government. While having one eye firmly planted on the hands that will be using and storing the collected information, the other eye should also be placed at those that use our freedoms to pursue their owm aims that are firmly diametrically oppossed to our free expression of our freedoms, including the right to live in a place where we can be unfraid of taking a train, bus or plane. As an aside, would it upset many of you to know that a group of people were tracked from a suspected "terrosist" safehouse to a bus station where they were held with incendiary devices using this or similar technology?
For every present, there is a past
Those responsible have been sacked.
This sort of garbage is creeping into the US. I attended, as an attorney and activist with the National Motorist's Association, a seminar at the Transportation Research Board in Washington a few years back. Present were many traffic engineers from England, who were excited about the photo enforcment (luckily US engineers are generally not) and didn't understand why we Yanks were so slow to adopt this wonderful technology. I advised them politely that we are "citizens", not "subjects", and inherently distrust our government (prophetic words those, but I digress). The ONLY nationwide organization fighting photo scameras is at www.motorists.org, the National Motorist's Association. I personally lobbied for many years to remove the 55 mph moron speed limits, but with Gatso, scameras for revenue, and black boxes in cars, we are far from finished. Red light cameras cause an increase in rear end collisions, and don't really "save lives", rather, they are about money. There ARE forces and highly paid lobbyists who are pushing speed scameras at every opportunity, waiting for a gullible town council or greedy state government. While we are told "its for the children", it's really for the State Treasury. www.motorists.org Think of us as the EFF for drivers..........
Does anyone else feel that the UK is becoming an ultra right wing religious police state?
You mean like the USofA? Yeah, I noticed that too...
// TODO: Insert Cool Sig
I'm British and I'm appalled.
Not only at the sheer waste of money being thrown at this project but also the very concept itself. I fully agree that there is an appropriate time and place for speed cameras but the motorway, and particualarly every 400 yards, is not one of them.
I cannot begin to concieve the sheer distraction of these would create. Drivers on a high speed section of road need to put their eyes on the cars around them not their speedometers.
Maybe in your country, but where I live (USA), getting caught stealing cars is some serious time. Right up there with kidnapping and copyright infringement.
In one very famous case in California, a person was incarcerated for life for stealing a bicycle (which is a felony). The three strikes law over there means that a third felony leads to life in prison. His other two crimes were stealing another bike and stealing a car. Kidnappers generally don't get life in prison, though a repeat or particularly brutal kidnapping might.
Where's the outrage coming from? Once you bought into license plates, registration, driver's licenses and credit checks, you already submitted a substantial portion of your privacy to "the man."
The truth is you gave up more liberty by BUYING the car.
Every car owning American is wearing the same slave's yolk: Working to pay for insurance, license, registration, maintenance, car payments, tickets, gasoline, oil, deductibles.
Assume that's $530 a month x 12 = $6360 a year, and if you're earning $32k a year then it's 20% of your time and income.
To pay that hefty fee you work, and they tax you another 15%-35%.
Work time + tax time = 20% + 15%-35% = 35% - 55%.
OF YOUR TIME AND MONEY.
THAT is where your liberty went.
YOUR CAR ATE IT.
Throw in noise pollution, "the war on terror," and wasted urban space as second tier expenses. Your neighbors bear those with you, whether they own cars or not.
If you've already "sold out" on all those levels, why would you be so upset about the incidental tagging of your car? That you cannot break the speed limit anymore? Is that "liberty" above all the others, which you already sold?
"Forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive those who trespass against us." -Jesus Christ The Lord's Prayer
More exactly - just to find out who is an opposition LEADER before people start listening and vote. And jail him for 90 days.
... of parking in front of one of these cameras with a TV and an old episode of "Dukes of Hazard?"
That is very debatable. The speed limits here in the UK are now so absurd in many places that the vast majority of motorists exceed the limit, yet no accidents ever result (literally; speed limits have been dropped on roads that haven't had even a minor injury accident in a decade).
This is just another power play by Blair's dictatorship and his ever more draconian Home Secretaries, right along with ID cards for everyone, the National Identity Register, electronic strip searching on the way onto the London Underground, the RIP Act, detention without trial for as long as they can get away with, installing CCTV everywhere (yes, we're still the most spied-upon nation in the world), reversing the burden of proof and/or attempting to do away with jury trials for increasing numbers of cases...
All of these things, of course, are "justified" by arguing that they increase national security, help to prevent crime, or otherwise benefit Joe Public. Unless he's in the wrong place at the wrong time, in which case he loses his benefits because some junior staffer in a government office mistyped one number out of 1,000 they entered that day into the master database. Or the ANPR system misreads a number plate, and sends him a fine for doing the physically impossible, which he then has to challenge in court after several weeks of concern, with no compensation for the time wasted or grief caused. Or his daughter's the one being rendered naked for the pervert watching the screens at the Underground station. Or he's late for the train, and since he ran through the screen he's obviously a terrorist so they shoot him dead. Or he's black, old, bald, young, or a registered member of an opposition political party, the biometric recognition doesn't work, and he's held for three months as a suspected terrorist on the whim of a senior politician, by which time he's lost his job, his home, and the trust of all his family and friends, not to mention the ability to challenge the statements of absolute fact issued by our political leaders (and I use the term loosely, since they didn't even win the popular vote in England, never mind an overall majority that might justify their absolute control of parliament, not that this particular abuse ever went before parliament) to justify all these Big Brother efforts.
I used to think the tin foil hat brigade were eccentrics. In recent years, looking at the direction New Labour have taken our government, I think the sooner we have a written constitution and a constitutional court above parliament and answerable only to the public, the better.
If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
I think that this will probably cost them money.
If you know that you will be "caught" and have to pay everytime you speed, you probably won't do it if you really don't have to.
So my guess is that they will spend a lot of money to install such a system and afterwards will lose lots of money because of less people speeding.
I think it is more likely that the system will be used to create a giant toll system.
Just you dummies forget about Canada. This shit is all coming down on your watch. Why the hell would we want you here, where you'd just let it happen again? You made your bed, you sleep in it. Don't come over here and mess up mine.
--
Don't like it? Respond with words, not karma.
You need to understand the situation here. People make the distinction between observation and control.
Observation is ok. The UK has pretty much gotten over the idea of no real public privacy. With CCTV for example, it is generally believed that the positives outweigh the negatives, and the public has a non-paranoid idea of what can or can't be done. Post-reality tv, the idea of being watched or monitored, or to sign some sort of register doesn't creep the average person out anymore.
What puts the media on alarm is whenever someone acts on such information. Hence the whole debate over ID cards - it is generally considered that the privacy concerns aren't a big thing, since the government and private organisations have most of such info anyway. What concerns people is the potential use of the cards to control the giving of services. E.g. evil government can use this to stop people from being able to use libraries, and stuff like that. It's thoughtcrime that scares people, not Big Brother.
Taking this in mind, this policy will probably be passed with no problems. A matter of national mentality.
Unless your home happens to be covered by a CCTV camera, which the operator uses to spy on your wife while she's changing. Not that there have ever been any cases of that happening, of course.
Unless you ever go out shopping, drive anywhere, use the Internet, use the phone, or fail to complete various statutory notifications, that is.
Sure, and we have freedom of information legislation, too. Strangely, both that and the DPA have exemptions for things where they'd really count, though.
Credit reference agencies have no obligation to seek your permission before obtaining and holding potentially very significant information about you, for example, and while you theoretically have rights to challenge it, the agencies have a captive market, so their "customer" service is terrible, and as anyone who's been brave enough to get a copy of their credit record can testify, the accuracy of the information is highly suspect as well.
Ever ask your doctor if you can see your medical records? He doesn't have to show them to you. He's exempt.
The government, both central and increasingly local, dodges freedom of information requests on technicalities all the time. We'll gloss over the fact that 3x the usual volume of records were destroyed in the days immediately before the FOIA came into effect; I'm sure that was just a coincidence.
And then these people have the nerve to criticise a former civil servant who publishes memoirs exposing the actions of our representatives in the run up to a war of dubious legality, described from first hand knowledge, in contradiction of explicit statements given by the representatives at the time that this wasn't happening.
It's about time we started impeaching senior government figures. <rhetorical>Do we still have the death penalty for treachery in this country?</rhetorical>
If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
To accompany the new vehicle monitoring network, the British government is also introducing a law whereby you have to park in front of each camera for 90 days in order to be identified and tracked.
>The Nazi Germany had a VERY little crime rate.
There seems to be a divide between those who consider that period to be a quaint, distant, vaguely interesting piece of history, and those who have a personal recollection of the time, or at least, were not born so far after it that it was forgotten.
What people don't seem to grasp is the suddenness with which the situation turned from seemingly reasonable to atrocious.
-fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
You'd think so, wouldn't you. Curiously enough a British traffic cop recently got away with something pretty close to that (slightly faster, on a 70MPH limit road). Also over 80MPH in an urban 30MPH zone. He claimed he was testing the capabilities of a new vehicle.
If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
I had this idea years ago :( Thought it would be too expensive cover the whole country and it would be against the human rights...
What happens when you do feel the need to commit a crime? You're not going to be too happy then are you?
Driving a car on a public highway is a public act, and thus, one has absolutely no expectation of privacy doing it.
Furthermore, driving is a PRIVILEGE and NOT a right.
There.
"We reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals." --The American President (20.1.2009)
This isn't about catching speeders. It's about tracking your each and every move, for ever and ever. I'd be nervous about this if they were keeping records for two *weeks*, nevermind two *years*. What they really want is to be able to say "Where is license plate #27D726" at any given moment in time, so that they can put "the bad guys" away. The definition of "the bad guys" can easily change with the wind, and they'll have the security net to find and catch all the homosexuals, johns, pot-smokers, poker players, or any other evil-criminal-du-jour. Stupid laws that have made criminals of everyone have been passed before, and will pass in the future. This is just stupid.
"No problem. I have the capacity to do infinite work so long as you don't mind that my quality approaches zero."-Dilbert
Who needs checkpoints at the borders and airports when you can have them every 1/4 mile!
Or 1/3 km, or whatever.
Anyway, along with secret RFID tags in flu and childhood vaccines, this is something we here in the States should really look into.
"I hearby inform you under powers entrusted to me under section 47, paragraph 7 of council order numbr 438476, that Mister Buttle, Archibald residing at 412 North Tower Shangri-La Towers has been invited to assist the Ministry of Information with certain inquiries, and that he is liable to certain financial obligations as specified in council order RV/CZ/907/X. Sign here, please. Thank you. That is your receipt for your husband, and here is my receipt for your receipt."
For the first time in the UK, money made from breaking the law (in this case speeding) was used by local police to buy resources to fine more people breaking the law. So they basically fine people and then use the fines to get more fines. They brought out speed cameras, mobile (gun sized) speed cameras, clock based speed cameras. Obviously you can see where this has lead, so what's next? Issuing fines for accelerating too fast, breaking too harshly, etc. So it occured to me that this kind of thing is like a pyramid scheme, that we've all been opted into and there's only one winner. And I'm sure that pyramid schemes are illegal in the UK...
Are you feeling a bit subjugated and trod-upon these days?
It's time to read this.
If you disagree with me on social issues, then it's pretty clear that you are a narrow-minded bigot.
I for one welcome our new all-seeing traffic overlords.
I wouldn't be at all surprised if, two years from now, if your number plates aren't readable, your car doesn't look like the proper model for the plates, or something in your dossier indicates you're suspicious, you'll be physically prevented from entering Central London. Traffic lights and arrows will divert you to an inspection lane. Vehicles that don't comply will be brought to a very abrubt stop.
that's a lot of cameras.
why can't people on foot adjust them if they become a problem?
She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
Very rarely will they mention the waste that is so pervasive in our public services.
It might be interesting to note that (at least in the US) the public has been clamoring for the privitization of certain government services, thinking it would save money. The joke's on them. Many private companies, once they get their hand on the public teat, won't let go, and milk it for all they can. This is where these astronomically-prised ambulance rides come in. I can't seem to figure it out, but people in government that are responsible for spending money (never mind wisely, because that clearly doesn't happen), think this is OK. The government just can't seem to get away from this mindset that has them paying several times what a normal person with half a brain would end up paying for the same thing.
There is in Washington state when passing somebody on a road that has a single lane in each direction.
Well thank goodness somebody has some sense! I'll remember that next time I'm in Washington. Heck, that might be a good reason to MOVE to Washington.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Criminals will have a far higher chance of driving cars that are on false plates, or aren't theirs, or which are registered to fictitious addresses, or are stolen. It's like the congestion charge: it's a tax on the middle classes, because the methods and consequences of evasion have the wrong risk/reward profile for them.
ian
Here in Oz, the concentration on speed has lead to an interesting situation on many of the roads. You can do what you want, as long as you dont speed. The drivers here have the worst lane discipline EVER! People crawl along at 5 or so k's under the very low speed limits in fear of being caught and never look in their mirrors. My girlie is soon going to take lessons here and I'm really interested to see what she is going to be taught in comparison to the UK (where I got my licence..) Makes the gov's previous plan of putting a GPS inside each car seem better... at least you can just put a lump of lead above the black box...
I think this shows where the priorities of the UK government is. Millions of pounds to collect even more money from the citizens, but not one pence to solve the chav problem.
Um... Read the FAQ and quit foaming.
.: Max Romantschuk
It might be interesting to note that (at least in the US) the public has been clamoring for the privitization of certain government services, thinking it would save money. The joke's on them.
Who has more incentive to operate smoothly, efficiently and effectively--the government or a private company? A large part of answering that rests on whom has more competition--and if the government is subsidizing an entire field, they don't have much competition at all. Privatizing in itself does little--it's competition that keeps things going. Also, people in other people's pockets will always exist, public or private. But privatization is, on the whole, a much better way to run things.
The rest of your post seems willynilly and I have no idea what you're talking about, but the begining was hogwash.
We now have confirmed reports from an informed Orange County minister that Ethel is still an active communist.
Considering the usual disregard by Tony Blair for the popular opinion or even his own party, the awful antiterrorist laws, among many other totalitatian measures, Why the citizens let their goverment officials get away with it? Why they vote for being more enslaved (sp?)? Why the brits or the americans feel that they have the right to impose "freedom" on other nations? They -well, we- need more men like Feingold, McCain or Robin Cook (RIP) in Senates/Parliaments/Goverment; men that believe in ideals, not in party lines/discipline, and less Cambells, Scarletts, Cheneys, Blairs, Fox* or Albrigths
*Vicente Fox -president of Mexico, if Blair is Bush's poodle, he is Bush's overzised Chihuahua
Mexico: 100% conservative's America now!
"Oh, a lesson in not changing history from Mr I'm-my-own-Grandpa." - Dr Hubert Farnsworth
Actually the new system helps this situation. You can floor it and pass the guy in 300m safely, and then slow right down for the next 100m.
:-)
But doesn't that lead to the problem of the guy you just passed passing you in turn, since you have to slow down way below the limit to be going slow enough not to trigger a ticket? And so on and so forth?
Perhaps that's why the guy in front was going so slow in the first place.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Thanks for being so safety concious on your trips to my country.
Here's a tip : "What do those numbers on that sign mean ?"
There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
If this was all about limiting speeds in places where speeding impairs quality of life, most people would applaud. It cannot be. But, you have to see it in context. In the last 5-10 years there has been a very significant shift in civil liberties in the UK. If you add universal car surveillance to the list, the picture is quite remarkable.
Consider: (1) the ASBO. A judge can issue an order forbidding someone to do something, which may or may not be unlawful in itself, whereupon to do it, for that person, becomes a criminal offence. ASBOs have famously been granted forbidding a teenager from being sarcastic (he replied that he was being ironic), and forbidding a lady from attempting suicide. People have been banned from certain areas, from associating with named others, from wearing certain clothes. There is no limit on what may be forbidden, other than the reasonableness of the authorities, and if a previously unlawful act is subject to an ASBO, the effect is often that, for this person, the penalty has been increased by decree.
(2) We then have extensive powers for the authorities to split up families, take children into care, by the use of the Family Courts, which meet in secret, and from whose decisions there is no appeal. It is an offence to reveal the fact that you have appeared before the Family Court. The justification is child protection.
(3) We then have the various preventive detention measures. As a foreigner, you can be held without trial for years. We are seeing attempts to prolong holding periods, not simply without trial, but without charging.
(4) Finally, we have the proposed mental health legislation, which would make it impossible to refuse treatment for mental illness, and would permit 'intervention' on 'children at risk' in 'dysfunctional' families, where there was a pattern of criminal behaviour. The justification is public protection from the violently insane or psychopathic - or those suffering from personality disorders, and the protection of children from growing up criminal. As the former Home Secretary said, why wait till a crime has been committed? Protect the public first!
The uneasiness people feel in the UK is not about any one of these measures. Each one may be reasonable in itself. The problem is not with the present government, which does not seem bent on abusing the measures. The problem is if you add them all up, and suppose some demagogic authoritarian regime elected in future, and there are no safeguards. With minimal new legislation or involvement of the judiciary, such a regime could incarcerate dissidents in mental hospitals, drug them or shock them, split up their families, forbid them to publish or broadcast, even own and read certain materials, track their every move.....
Europe has been down this route. The UK seems not to have learned. It is not who is in power now that matters, its who may be in ten years time. Of course, we don't want the Underground to be bombed again, and most people basically trust the security services. But is this really the answer?
Instead of reporting specific incidents where a vehicle exceeds a speed limit collect statistical data and hand it over to the insurance companies.
Owners of vehicles which consistently drive faster than the traffic around them (regardless of the speed limit) or consistently keep a shorter than average distance from the vehicle ahead will have to pay more because they are more likely to be involved in accidents.
Stop worrying about the risks of nuclear power and start worrying about the risks of not using nuclear power.
This is the fundimental problem with 'speed' cameras - they are dumb! - and you can't build 'Stupid driving' cameras, oh wait, there is a way to do that.... yep, it's a new invention... just out... they are called TRAFFIC POLICE... yep, apparently they can be trained to have common-sense & spot stupid drivers.... (so I've heard).
As for the privacy implications... well i think that is obvious... stupid stupid stupid...
btw, it's not technically speeding that kills, I mean if it was then all of the formula one drivers would be DEAD by now.... no (& this is going to get a bit technical now) it actually STOPPING *very* quickly that usually does it...
The number plates watch you.
The politicians and other high-ranking Party members get their own lanes on the road.
To be perfectly honest, why the hell would the life of a politician be any more worthwhile protecting than the life of a lawyer? Hell, if Tony Blair is worth protecting from an invasion of his privacy, so am I, and so is every man, woman, child and their dog in the country.
They were also conveniently not working the day of the London tube and bus bombings on 7/7. They even tried that scam the day Jean Charles de Menezes was gunned down at point blank after calmly walking through the ticket barriers, stopping to buy a newspaper and entering and sitting down in the tube train. Then it was leaked that the cameras were working fine, with their evidence not corrobating the police's version of events.
I am a professional driver, and see this every day. The motorways are full of people who are too scared to use the outside lane when neccessary, but who drive in the centre lane almost obsessively. Consequently, when they come up behind a slower moving vehicle in the centre lane, they brake, causing following traffic to either, brake hard themselves, or, swerve into the outside lane, regardless of the traffic situation. This is what causes pile-ups. I drive for miles on virtually empty motorways sometimes and there are still lines of cars in the centre lane, usually only 20 or 30 feet behind each other. There is another problem with this - when I have to overtake a vehicle in the left hand lane, I have to 'break into' this line of cars somehow. This is difficult when they are only 20 feet apart, so I have to pull out much sooner, and stake my claim before they pull alongside.
I could go on for hours about the bad things that are happening on the roads, but speeding is the least of my worries. My truck has a tachograph, so anytime the police wants to stop me, they can tell instantly whether I've been speeding or not. Why should the car drivers be exempt from this ? Bad driving is the real issue, and nothing much is being done about it. I am fed up with seeing females negotiating junctions with their right hand holding a phone to their left ear and their left hand on the right hand side of the steering wheel. Sometimes the right hand has a piece of food in it as well ! No-one can argue that that behaviour is safe, either for them or others.
In the end, there are too many cars on the road, driven by very basically qualified people. No one forced them into this situation. The free market sold these people cars and the idea of freedom, so they can't really complain that they need a car to get to work, the shops, whatever. It's down to their buying habits that turned villages into dormitories for workers who have to drive 50 miles to work everyday. Either people find alternative ways to work (internet based etc) or live closer to the place of employment.
How long can the country as a whole be held to ransom by the car ? The government can't ban cars outright, but they can make it as difficult (read expensive) as possible to own and operate one.
As a disclaimer, I must add that I ride a GSX1100 suzuki, and so speeding is a virtual certainty, but even then, it is so much harder to find adequate space in which to do so, because of the unpredictability of the other traffic. But as a motorcyclist, I know with painful certainty what a mistake at speed will mean. I have in the past fallen off and hit the road at over 60 mph, and it's not fun believe me. So, hands up all those car drivers who have intimate knowledge of the surface of the road. Apart from motorcyclists / cyclists, there aren't any hands showing. This is where it has gone wrong. Every driver should be aware of the road surface in front of them, the temperature, how wet the road is, what white lines feel like as you go over them. That's where true control comes from, being aware of your surroundings.
Instead, they have the heating up high, the sound turned up, and sit in the middle lane eating and talking on their phones, and hope that no-one gets in their way until they get to work.
I for one won't miss their departure from the environment, and sad to say, they deserve everything they get in the mean time.
To anyone suggesting such powers do not get abused I'd offer the old gentlement ejected from the Labour (the current UK government) conference for mumbling the word "nonsense" in Jack Straw's (Home Secretary) general direction when he was talking about Iraq. The chap was throw out very heavily handily and held by the police under prevention of terrorism laws. There may have been apologies afterwards but this happened. If recent legislation changes had been made he could have been detained for 90 days. Far fetched, yes, but this happened. Period.
To anyone suggesting we're innocent until proven guilty there was a news report last night of a chap fined for parking in a bus lane in a company van. No problem yet but he hasn't worked for the company for nine months, the company has written to Transport For London (TFL) to confirm this, and the culprit has owned up. Despite this TFL won't see sense and the guy will face bailiffs to recover the debt unless someone comes to their senses in the next week or so.
To anyone suggesting there's no erosion of liberty in the UK I'd offer the demonstration against the war in Iraq. Although this took place a senior minister tried to prevent this happening on the basis of not be able to secure public safety.
Liberty doesn't disappear overnight but one day at a time. And we've had several days already with the prospect of many more to come (id cards, etc.)
When i drove through nottingham on the M1 there is an average speed check, and it keeps you on edge all the time, the road was of minor importance like wise other cars, my speed was my primary consern as it was with other drivers, you can see this from cars "wandering" onto the lane divisions.
Bottom line then is that you, and the rest, are bad drivers. You cannot control your cars at the required speed. You seem to have a compulsion to go faster than is legal for the road you are on, and you are by your own admission not paying diligent attention to road and other cars.
If you cannot competantly do something so simple as drive at a continuous speed, why should you even be on the road?
Drive slower. It's easy!
May the Maths Be with you!
Here is the irony and wrongness of this entire argument. Highways, statistically speaking are the safest roadways. In Germany highways are extremely safe, and there are many stretches where there are NO speed limits. So speed is not the issue.
What is the issue are country roads. People often drive too fast on a country road underestimate a curve and plow into a tree. This is a proven statistic, and the authorities in Switzerland, and Germany want to increase camera's on the roads, not the highways!
If you put lots and lots of camera's on the highway it's a revenue stream plain and simple.
"You can't make a race horse of a pig"
"No," said Samuel, "but you can make very fast pig"
My step-father is a policeman in South East England, they have this exact same technology in place in their policing district. It scans the number plates of all road users coming into a certain roundabout, its clear as day. How does this affect your civil liberties? How does this differ from a man in a reflective jacket sitting on a stool and noting your number plate? The truth is that this system works, I have heard it has flagged up stolen cars from as far as Scotland entering the area. Sensationalist journalism rears it's ugly head once more.
IANAL but as far as I know it's already an offense to have an obscured number plate. Expect ASBOs to get drivers like yourself to clean their plates when they hit a non-dirt road.
The CCTV cameras don't use a flash so hairspray is unlikely to work either.
The next logical step once this new system is 'accepted' is RFID tagging of cars anyway and once that is 'accepted', why not RFID tagging of citizens, oops, sorry, this is the UK subjects?
~ Better a freak than a sheep. ~
The UK government plays an environmental card as part of its arsenal of reasons as to why we shouldn't exceed 50/70mph (depending on the road). It used to be true that most cars were most fuel-efficient when they were driven at 56mph.
However, this is no longer true. Cars that are manufactured primarily for the European market (so you're talking VW, Audi, Seat, Skoda, Mercedes, BMW, Porsche, Fiat, etc.) are these days tuned so that they are most efficient when driven at between 80 and 90mph, which is roughly the speed limit on the vast majority of motorways and highways on the continent.
So the government can cunt off with their environmental argument, frankly.
There was a suggestion to use transponders in that way in order to switch to a pay-by-the-mile taxation system a while back, and the political fallout was enormous, due to security issues. ID fraud is problematic enough, without someone duping your transponder signal.
Cameras, on the other hand, leave a trace. The image can be compared against the car registered with that number, which means you can eliminate false positives to a large degree. That in turn means that you can reimplement the system optically with minimal chance of fraud.
I'd love to use my biclycle in London but I find it very dangerous because of the cars. Cities in Holland have better built lanes for biclycle only, and it is very safe. That is what cities like London should do, build a proper network of biclycle lanes (not the existing dodgy ones). Biclycles are healthy for the ones who ride them and the most environmental friendly.
It depends on what you're privatising.
In the UK privatising the railways has been an unmitigated disaster - it's a monopoly, and private companies with a monopoly will be far less efficient than a government run company (who are at least accountable to the electorate).
So much so that part of the railways was put back into state hands as it was about to go bankcrupt (not to mention the safety record had gone down the toilet - people had died. It should have been done sooner.).
Private hospitals for example don't provide emergency or chronic care - only NHS hospitals do that.. there's no money in looking after such things, so they don't (in fact it's damned near impossible to get private health insurance for anything other than curable diseases that you don't have already, so coughs and colds are OK but anything else you're stuffed).
that this system was something that "in principle" the police could pull together very easily. He went on to say, that of course, he was just a techy, he didn't get involved in politics, etc. This was a couple of years ago at a conference about public services and XML in Manchester.
At the time I thought he had his tin-foil hat on a bit too tight, but now I see he genuinely was giving us a hint of things to come.
It's so sad the changes that have been made in the name of the "War on Terror". A never ending war it will be - at what point do you declare "That's it! All terrorists have gone away!" so liberties sacrificed in its name will not return until we can wrest back some sanity into our political process. Let's hope we don't let it slide too far.
I agree with much of what you wrote there. Personally, I think it's long past time we simplified our traffic laws to about three offences: dangerous driving, inconsiderate driving, and failure to meet prerequisites (driving licence, tax, MOT, etc. as applicable). If a driver's behaviour isn't dangerous or inconsiderate, and the driver isn't dodging the regulations that apply to everyone else, why is the behaviour criminal?
Note that there is no problem with allowing the courts discretion to impose a wide range of penalties for these generic offences, as is the case with manslaughter, for example: drive intimidatingly around a learner, get a slap on the wrist; tailgate for extended periods at 100mph on the motorway, get banned for being in danger of causing a fatal accident.
Under such a simplified system, hopefully cases would only be brought against those who were genuinely not behaving properly on the roads, and when they were, the penalty could fit the circumstances, not some government playbook.
If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
We stood beneath an amber moon,
And softly murmured 'Some day soon'
We kissed and clung together
Then, tomorrow was another day
The morning found me miles away
With still a million things to say. . . .
Make love, not reality television.
The more surveillance data there is, the less time anyone has to look at it all... If the government is taking away your right to be a criminal, then that's fine by me.
Or maybe Slashdot already posted this story...
3 51243.
http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/04/02/2
Wanna know where I got that link? From the houstondemocrats.com link in your post!
Life has many choices. Eternity has two. What's yours?
The amount of times I've seen one truck trying to overtake another
(usually going uphill! Wtf?!) on a 2 lane road so causing hundreds of
metres of car traffic building up behind I've lost count of. What
exactly is the point of overtaking another truck if you're only going
0.5 mph faster? I mean really , what is the point? If I was of a paranoid
nature I'd say the truckers did it on purpose just to piss off the car
drivers.
Dude! I like the way you're thinking! :-D
Where there is no police, there is no speed limit. Any driver that tells you they never speed is lying to you, regardless of whether their speeding is intentional or accidental.
My understanding is that most states allow you to walk down the street with a handgun holstered on your hip in broad view. The trouble comes when you try to hide it. And, since there's not always reciprocity in the laws, it's possible to have a concealed carry license in Ohio and get arrested in several other states on a routine traffic stop.
This sig has absolutely no significance and serves only to take up screen space and waste the time of the reader.
For one, privitization seldom involves competition. Generally one company is assigned. Therefore, we have a monopoly. And, well, companies don't exist to provide services; they exist to make a profit. I don't know about you, but I prefer everything essential to remain in the hands of the government, who's willing to throw money at a problem to be sure that my electricity stays on, that my mail gets delivered, that the roads are safe, rather than subsidizing a company who sees no problems with providing service at or below minimums because it's cheaper. Theoretically, they ought to be bound by contracts but a) wording a contract to avoid loopholes is extremely difficult and b) most companies see fines and penalties as just part of the cost of doing business. Even if there were competition in privitization, who's going to be able to stick around longer? A company which provides all of the services for $15 million? Or the other company which fiddles with records and shorts service and comes out only costing $5 million until the erroneous bookkeeping is found? And how much damage will be done by the time things are found out?
As for real-life examples, how well did privitization of electricity go in California?
This sig has absolutely no significance and serves only to take up screen space and waste the time of the reader.
Is this really what we, the people, want? A society where the police and the government monitors our every little move in the hopes to stave off some crime? Should we not be concerned about the potential abuse or overzealous use of such systems?
If extensive monitoring is really the goal, why not implant a small RFID tag into everybody at birth (and retrofit the rest of the population) and have corresponding readers everywhere? Especially at every entrance to offices, shops and private homes.
Such a system would enable the police to know the whereabouts of everybody at any time and would thus really help stop crime.
A Police Officer, "We would like to question you about the untimely death of Justine Aphtermath as you were in her house with three other suspects on the evening of her murder."
Another Police Officer, "You are under arrest for suspected terrorism, sir, as you were in the same apartment as three known Al Qaeida sympathizers for three hours last Saturday evening!"
A letter from The Police: You are hereby fined £100 for littering on Meander Close, Friday 4 November 2005 at 2101 hours. The act was caught on CCTV and your ID scanned by the reader.
Another letter from The Police: Our scanners showed you were a front seat passenger in the Trabant, license number AA 00, owned by Mr. Phastcar, when the car last Thursday on three separate occasions exceeded the speed limits. As it is an offence not to prevent drivers from speeding, you are hereby fined three times £50.
Helpful Police Officer on the phone, "Mr. Abercrombie gone missing -- just a moment, Mrs. Abercrombie, while I check our system ... Ah, did you perchance check Miss Phinnaggle's apartment?"
The list is endless and the advantages obvious, so why not take the ultimate step now?
SPECS cameras take photos of the front of the vehicle. Motorcycles don't have front plates...
Never mind Spamassassin. When's Spammerassassin coming out?
And it is blatantly obvious to us in countries with looser gun laws that restricting the honest from having guns does nothing to help them, and might hurt.
Criminals can get guns. The AK-47 was designed so that any BC blacksmith can repair it. (though it would be expensive, they didn't know how to work with iron like we do now). You can make one yourself with hand tools. In fact people do - though you need some skill. (I'm not sure how you drill the barrel for instance)
All gun laws do it keep guns out of the hands of the honest. There is no evidence that they have any effect on crime. (in fact studies that don't claim everything is lost in statistical noise show a decrease in crimes against people, when people own guns)
I didn't even see that little "SLASHDOT" in that article. My mistake.
But, that original OFFTOPIC rating was still BS. It was more ontopic than most of the posts in that thread.
Your thin skin doesn't make me a troll
Well then you won't mind if we come round and install cameras and microphones in every room of your home. We'll also need to put them in your vehicle. And we'll have someone follow you around with a mobile unit.
You don't mind of course because you have nothing to hide.
If you're into having the government spy on you please move to a proper authoritarian police state where you belong. You'll even be able to get rewards for ratting out your neighbours. Hitler and Stalin loved people like you.
As you say it relies on the existence of competition. It is easy to privatise an airline because multiple companies making use of the skies and airport facilities is fairly easy to implement, but if you want to privatise water supply, electricity supply, telecommunications and railways you have to insure that the basic infrastructure remains the property of the general public. We can't exactly have competitors laying competing railway lines everywhere.
Privatising healthcare and such is pretty much guaranteed to raise, not lower prices, because medical services are a basic requirement and there really is no need to actually compete with your neighbours. Your customers can hardly shop around for the best value-for-money hospital and ambulance service.
And things get very dangerous if you privatise the police or prison services. US forfeiture laws effectively gave narc squads a profit motive and there has been rampant abuse of those laws - the main problem is that the law doesn't require a conviction to steal an accused's property, but imagine what would happen if the police earned income based on number of arrests and on number of convictions. Planting evidence and framing would become an integral part of basic training.
I just glanced at this article title on the right sidebar, and it showed that there were 666 comments. Spooky, considering it is an article about vehicle tracking. Hmmmmm.
This sig is a test. If this had been an actual sig, you would be reading something quite a bit wittier than this now.
Someone once said that when we have more laws than anyone can enforce much power is given to the authorities to decide which laws to enforce. And when. And against whom.
*wry grin* I suspect it's a bit like how her ein the Columbus, OH area, it's been ruled that it's not illegal for women to be topless in any area where men are allowed to be topless. Sure, it's not technically illegal, but there's a good chance of being cited for a public disturbance if you're not real careful about how you go about it.
This sig has absolutely no significance and serves only to take up screen space and waste the time of the reader.
Privatising healthcare and such is pretty much guaranteed to raise, not lower prices, because medical services are a basic requirement and there really is no need to actually compete with your neighbours. Your customers can hardly shop around for the best value-for-money hospital and ambulance service.
/lot/ of competition between medical practices here--commercials (TV and radio), tons of billboards, newspapers, etc. I think it's much more the fault of insurance companies in regards to high prices: there's so much potential for lawsuits they're trying extra hard to cover their asses. Not that insurance companies are fair at all, but all of the extra litigation certainly wasn't going to lower their rates. My old doctor had said she paid something like between $1-200,000 per year for insurance. Ridiculous.
Actually, that's not entirely accurate. When you get picked up in an ambulance here (South Eastern part of Pennsylvania in the US), they ask what hospital you want to go to. Granted, I live within 20 minutes of at least 3 hospitals, probably 7-10 within 40 minutes, so it's quite practical. There's a
Can you gimme some links to US forfeiture laws? I didn't know we had any privatization in police, except bounty hunters. I'm curious.
We now have confirmed reports from an informed Orange County minister that Ethel is still an active communist.
Just quit speeding! If people don't speed, cops don't get paid, cameras don't get maintained, etc. Just watch how fast the cameras come down if you can get 95% of the speeders to quit in your city!
The Christian religion has been and still is the principal enemy of moral progress in the world. -- Bertrand Russell