Before I start; I am a nub on law and debating...and typing and spelling and grammar and, and... whatever... Also! I cba reading any of the linked articles, the Slashdot summaryt pissed me right off.
So first off, if I apply for a passport, what forms do I need to fill in? Where on those forms does it say "You must give up your bank, tax, blah details." In addition to this point, what's stopping the powers that be from investigating dodgy applicants? In other words, why cant they use the RIP (can't remember the acronym) legislation that came into effect not so long ago. Old news? The powers that be already have access to your bank account, benefits and tax details. I honestly believe you a bit daft to think otherwise. If you already bypass measures against abuse in this area, you have nothing to worry about not getting a passport.
To the best of my knowledge, there's no system in place at the minute to record car travel movement in the UK. Sure, there's lots of talk about it (maybe even a few trials that I might not know about), but it tends to lean towards insurance companies tracking high risk drivers. As for speed/traffic cameras that's a totally different topic.
We 'Brits' may be the most spied on nation in Europe. But honestly, I don't walk out the house, looking over my shoulder thinking "omg, I'm being watched."
This may be totally unrelated but hey nevermind...
I was listening to the radio in the car today and there was a discussion about publishing soliciters names (lawyers - any difference?) that have had complaints brought against them. Granted - as the discussion progressed it appeared to me that the complaints would generally consist of a financial nature - where the soliciter in question was struggling for cash and was dragging the case along. Other arguments for complaining against soliciters was the so called "accident chasers" - 'nuff said there I think.
Anyway, I'm not sure how the US works with regards to official watchdogs (nor the UK for that matter heh). Is there any benefit of naming and shaming rogue soliciters/lawyers? Is this treading a dark path to naming and shaming any other 'profession'? Or should we just hope and wait for the professional bodies to become aware of any problems?
Slashdot Mirror
Before I start; I am a nub on law and debating...and typing and spelling and grammar and, and ... whatever ... Also! I cba reading any of the linked articles, the Slashdot summaryt pissed me right off.
So first off, if I apply for a passport, what forms do I need to fill in? Where on those forms does it say "You must give up your bank, tax, blah details." In addition to this point, what's stopping the powers that be from investigating dodgy applicants? In other words, why cant they use the RIP (can't remember the acronym) legislation that came into effect not so long ago. Old news? The powers that be already have access to your bank account, benefits and tax details. I honestly believe you a bit daft to think otherwise. If you already bypass measures against abuse in this area, you have nothing to worry about not getting a passport.
To the best of my knowledge, there's no system in place at the minute to record car travel movement in the UK. Sure, there's lots of talk about it (maybe even a few trials that I might not know about), but it tends to lean towards insurance companies tracking high risk drivers. As for speed/traffic cameras that's a totally different topic.
We 'Brits' may be the most spied on nation in Europe. But honestly, I don't walk out the house, looking over my shoulder thinking "omg, I'm being watched."
Long time reader, none time poster
:P
This may be totally unrelated but hey nevermind...
I was listening to the radio in the car today and there was a discussion about publishing soliciters names (lawyers - any difference?) that have had complaints brought against them. Granted - as the discussion progressed it appeared to me that the complaints would generally consist of a financial nature - where the soliciter in question was struggling for cash and was dragging the case along. Other arguments for complaining against soliciters was the so called "accident chasers" - 'nuff said there I think.
Anyway, I'm not sure how the US works with regards to official watchdogs (nor the UK for that matter heh). Is there any benefit of naming and shaming rogue soliciters/lawyers? Is this treading a dark path to naming and shaming any other 'profession'? Or should we just hope and wait for the professional bodies to become aware of any problems?
p.s. yes yes, my english sucks