Slashdot Mirror
UK Government Plans 10-Year Database of Citizens' Travel
moderators_are_w*nke writes "The UK government is planning yet another database to track its citizens, this time keeping track of their movements in and out of the country for ten years. Just like all their other databases, this one 'is essential in the fight against crime, illegal immigration and [of course] terrorism.'" I'd be very surprised if the US is not already doing this, and just not making a point to let anyone know.
You have had this for years. The government holds your travel records for the last 30 years, then they are moved to the national archives where they are public domain. They are often used when you apply for dual citizenship.
rather, people don't disappear in large numbers, yet. There are the occasionally reported cases of people being detained for periods of time widely considered unreasonable for criminal investigations.
Likewise, people aren't assaulted in large numbers. That doesn't mean the police limit themselves to levels of force widely held to be acceptable.
And then there's the participation in rendition programs that do nothing other than make people disappear.
It's sad that people actually think even the UK is a police state, they obviously have not read much about what being in a real police state is like, or travelled to some truly controlled parts of the world (like Zimbabwe, which I have been to).
It cheapens the term when you abuse it like that.
Agreed
I live in the UK, and I'm rather appalled that people talk of our being or becoming a police state.
It seems to me some people are desperate to prove a police state exists in a nice safe (and entirely free) country so they can get all annoyed about it and not have to deal with the real ones, or the potential dangers of protesting an actual police state.
Last I checked people weren't being dragged from their beds in the night and improsioned/shot/beaten, and we have a legal system which apportions everyone legal rights that the police cannot avoid. I can't be bothered to refute this any more though, its too nonsensical for that.
A learning experience is one of those things that say, 'You know that thing you just did? Don't do that.' - D. Adams
An project open to the public is hereby initiated to track and publish the movements of ALL GOVERNMENT STAFF from ALL branches and departments of ALL governments in ALL countries around the world. No government business is to be carried out unless all participants are video recorded and broadcast LIVE to the public around the world. No business of the public is valid unless it's public! Track all government officials, staff, employees. Record when they are with you and publish on the web. Develop and design tracking systems to monitor all communications of all government operatives anywhere and anywhen, anyhow. Their work is not valid public business unless it's fully PUBLIC!
Little Brothers Unite Against the Oppressive Big Brothers.
SuperKendall, why do you buy into this argument? I see it a lot on Slashdot, and everywhere else I go!
It goes like this:
"X is bad."
"Y is worse than X, X isn't bad at all."
His argument was actually "It's not a police state, calling it that weakens the criticism." Which I think is valid. Saying "The government keeps a log of when I leave the country... POLICE STATE BIG BROTHER!!!" is somewhat overstating it. I know I roll my eyes when I hear that term, because it gets thrown around so often. It immediately reduced my interest in this issue.
It seems to just be cynicism trying to pass itself off as wisdom. "I knew this would happen, after all, we do live in a police state." It just sounds like arrogance to me. I'm not impressed, we don't live in a police state, quit being overly dramatic. There is work to be done, but not on /.
It not really a police state, more like an open prison where the police have more power than the citizens they are suppose to serve.
The police can carry guns, citizens cannot.
The police can break the laws of road safety, speeding, over taking.
The police can kill people without being prosecuted.
The police can stop and search you but you cannot stop and search them, i have meet some seriously dodgy police officers but you try getting them prosecuted
The government is full of idiots with a self serving agenda, thay are not accountable, and are ruled by the house of lords in other words you common vote counts for shit, at the last election more people did not vote than actually vote for are current government and nobody voted the "one eyed Scottish idiot" as prime minister.
Welcome to are open prison, and you really want to move here ffs.
You really want to bring you children up in a prison as you are living in one ruled by a bunch of idiots so what does this make us, England will not revolt as we are like the Americans idiots a bunch of spineless whelps that only care about feeding are addictions.
I feel sorry for the children aka "Emotional Void fillers" that are being dragged up into this mess, really can anyone consider them self a good parent if they are willing to bring a child into the mess of a world.
Canada has been for years, yes. The only time I have not had my ID scanned when returning to Canada was on a tour bus where the guard just looked at my passport. The US guards are particularly anal. Last time I crossed into the US, the guard accused me of trying to move there because I had crossed a week earlier. Although there is one crossing where I've never had trouble -- because there is no guard.
Be relentless!
Using facebook, twitter and all that crap, we practially give away our privacy... so why blame the government for just downloading what is publicly available?
We all notice what is going on. And we all care... for about 5 seconds. And then we're distracted again.
I'm sure I care about my privacy... but I just don't spend enough time on it to really get involved in any revolt against the police state. Unless you can really revolt using twitter or facebook. I fear that a proper revolt is still done with barricades and burning trashcans, not with facebook and blogging.
So, will there be an end to the loss of privacy? Will people care? Yes.
Will they do something about it? Not a chance.
Allowing Workers to freely migrate within the EU was a big mistake and will drive wages down.
Wages in the UK and EU are going down because there is lots of cheap labor available overseas.
Closing the borders to people or goods makes the situation worse, not better. If you stop people from coming, the same people are going to work elsewhere for less.
If you stop good from coming, then people will need to buy UK goods for more money and their money will be worth less.
Face it, the prosperity of the late 20th century is over. The UK has little competitive advantage over India or China, and hence its standard of living is going to equalize. Protectionists measures only make things worse. And the same is true for the US and Europe.
I think you mean
The World is already overcrowded
I read this argument all the time but I've always received above average wages when working in another Country. Part of the reason I like to work in other Countries is because I want to compete and see how I can cut in in another economy. How does my Scottish education match up to others? Can I be better than I am? Can I learn new skills/methods?
Are you afraid to compete? Would you prefer a handout from the Government? How about a job for life and never having to better yourself?
Part of the reason the UK and other Countries allow/need this immigration is due to the constant need for growth in our economy. How can reducing the overall headcount help this?
I am a US Citizen and my partner is English. A lot of people may not know this, but when you fly into the UK and you are not a citizen, you are subjected to extremely close scrutiny. You are required to provide proof of onward travel. Every time I go there now, I am very nervous because I may be accused of overstaying my visa -- not necessarily in UK, but elsewhere, like Europe -- anything that may cast doubt on my tourist status while in UK. True, my partner is English and we are not married, but I am basically unable to travel to UK at the moment, because I have more UK and Europe stamps in my passport than US stamps. I will have to legitimize residency in Europe by getting employed or marrying my partner, before I can ever travel into the UK again.
This further tightening of travel restrictions for the UK only portends darker days to come. I always imagine the UK to be a very friendly, open society. But there are some really shady 1984-style things happening in the government there.
Powerbook G4/1.5GHz 12", Toshiba Satellite 1135-S1554
You might need that to do certain things, and do them by the book, but it seems to me that you can get away with what you like so long as you cover it up for a bit and then grant retrospective immunity to everyone involved. And if you think your government, with all it's DHA, TSA and other such stuff isn't keeping a record of everywhere you go, well... I disagree!
Keeping a record of everywhere I go doesn't violate my rights. I question why the government needs such a record but if you think this started with TSA you are sadly mistaken.
Surely the last government proved to you that the US executive can and will do whatever they like?
Actually, SCOTUS shot down several policies of the US executive so I think my underlying point still stands. The worst problem of the last eight years wasn't Bush (every single President since Washington has tried to expand executive power) but the manner in which the Congress rubber-stamped his policies for the first six years.
Also, who cares whether the calls were made to/from overseas places?
Historically the Government has had broader powers at the border and some of your rights may not apply when crossing that border. That doesn't mean I support all of those powers (if the call is between two Americans I don't think they have any right to be listening) but claiming that this is something new shows that you haven't really researched the topic as throughly as you should.
"Shouldna bin talkin' to them furr-ners anyway"?
Yes, any American that might see the historical basis for this kind of policy is automatically the stereotypical xenophobe and can be dismissed as such.
I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
Eh, you may have a point there, but the 2nd amendment raises an interesting issue. Historically the right to keep and bear arms came from the Common Law. In the UK you've allowed parliamentary supremacy to take away this time honored right. If they can do it to that right then why can't they take away your right to a trial by jury, your right against self-incrimination, or any of the other rights that you hold so dear?
As an American, I find that a little misleading. The second amendment is not going to do a jot for you if the feds decide its time to SWAT you out of existence. Its at best a palliative that gives us a false sense of security. As to the right to trial by jury, there are plenty of people our government is holding, who do not even "exist", let alone are ever tried, or tried by jury.
Say what you will about the United States but at least it takes more than a majority vote in the House of Representatives to start taking away our rights. You'd also need a majority vote in the US Senate, the signature of the President (or 2/3'rds vote in the aforementioned chambers), the acquiescence of the 50 States and the Federal judiciary.
Nice in theory, but doesn't work in practice. Frighten the congressmen/women enough, fool the people enough and you can make them dance any which way you want. Even allow the President to declare war on a neutral country in the name of national security, or pay billions to fight STDs in the name of economic stimulus.
The reason is that our media is a part of the establishment. Whether its CNN's love affair with the Democrats or Fox's marriage to the Republicans, an ignorant, naturally insular populace such as ours is ripe pickings for these charlatans who call themselves our leaders. We are pretty much as scr*w*d as the Brits are. Except that most them know it. We still are living in our fantasy land.
Would you have a link to a text version or transcript of that page?
If you are being held on suspicion of the preparation, instigation or commission of a terrorist act [note: no terrorist act need have taken place] under section 40 of the Terrorism Act 2000 the police can waive your right to a phone call to prevent you from alerting your fellow terrorists who may then be able to take evasive action of some kind. At least that was my understanding from what the police said.
Voters don't even know how to punch-out a chad*, how on earth would they handle a scoring system??? I don't think that would work. Maybe we could get away with Australian ballots, where you assign 1 for your favorite (McCain), 2 for your second favorite (Harry Browne), and so on, but that's about it.
*
*I think it was less stupidity, and more laziness. The instructions said to verify the holes were punched out of your ballot, prior to handing it in, but like a typical school student, SOME of the voters were too lazy to do that. If they care so little about their vote, why should the rest of us care?
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall