Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

UK Uses CCTV, Terrorism Laws, Against Pooping Dogs

ScuttleMonkey posted more than 6 years ago | from the let-this-be-a-lesson dept.

Privacy 303

An anonymous reader writes to tell us that it seems the UK is trying make up for their judicious use of surveillance cameras that, according to recent research, do not actually deter crime, by using the surveillance network to prosecute petty crimes. "Conjuring up the bogeymen of terrorists, online pedophiles and cybercriminals, the U.K. passed a comprehensive surveillance law, The Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act, in 2000. The law allows 'the interception of communications, carrying out of surveillance, and the use of covert human intelligence sources' to help prevent crime, including terrorism. Recent reports in the U.K. media indicate that the laws are being used for everything but terrorism investigations."

cancel ×

303 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Slippery Slopes (5, Insightful)

nurb432 (527695) | more than 6 years ago | (#23355986)

NOW do you believe us?

Re:Slippery Slopes (4, Funny)

urcreepyneighbor (1171755) | more than 6 years ago | (#23356032)

NOW do you believe us?
9/11!

Re:Slippery Slopes (4, Funny)

Big Boss (7354) | more than 6 years ago | (#23356066)

1984!

Re:Slippery Slopes (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23356092)

2001!

What are we playing?

Re:Slippery Slopes (5, Funny)

spun (1352) | more than 6 years ago | (#23356174)

2001!

What are we playing?
That's Numberwang!

Re:Slippery Slopes (5, Funny)

lazy_nihilist (1220868) | more than 6 years ago | (#23356074)

First they came for the communists,
Then they..

Damn, they got me with this. I didn't expect them to come after me First.

Re:Slippery Slopes (2, Funny)

mikael (484) | more than 6 years ago | (#23356466)

... came for the parents who tried to send their children to a school with a good reputation?

Re:Slippery Slopes (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23356540)

Then quit pooping on my lawn, you sick bastard!

Re:Slippery Slopes (4, Insightful)

FinchWorld (845331) | more than 6 years ago | (#23356080)

I hope more incidents like this happen, maybe it will piss off the rest of the UK population enough so that they might just take notice.

Re:Slippery Slopes (0, Redundant)

turgid (580780) | more than 6 years ago | (#23356680)

Have you seen the advert for Purina dog food with the dogs in 0-g in that space station? Could you imagine the poop? Yeuch.

Re:Slippery Slopes (5, Insightful)

Kugrian (886993) | more than 6 years ago | (#23356822)

maybe it will piss off the rest of the UK population enough so that they might just take notice.


And do what about it?

Re:Slippery Slopes (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23356094)

No. Now go pick up your dog poop.

Re:Slippery Slopes (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23356110)

Yeah, it sucks but what am I going to do? Organise a protest? Write a letter to Gareth Thomas?

Nah, got a nice glass of wine, good TV, live in an affluent area with a low crime rate. Who cares?

Re:Slippery Slopes (2, Informative)

mikael (484) | more than 6 years ago | (#23356510)

Sign a Downing Street E-petition?

Science and Technology [pm.gov.uk]

Education [pm.gov.uk]

Sounds like slippery slopes are what they want to (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23356254)

prevent. Have you ever slipped on a grassy slope that's just been, er, lubircated by a K-9? Not nice.

This is a good idea... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23356406)

FOR ME TO POOP ON! Thank you Triumph for your contribution to society.

Re:Slippery Slopes (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23356568)

Slopes are a lot more slippery when they're coverd with dog shit!

Re:Slippery Slopes (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23356864)

Innocent dogs have nothing to hide!

THIRSTY FOR A FIRSTY (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23355990)

GNAA PWNZ J00 [zoy.org]

Finally a use I can get behind (5, Insightful)

MightyYar (622222) | more than 6 years ago | (#23356012)

I hate it when dogs piss and poop right in the middle of the sidewalk.

By the way, the summary is wrong - that study the other day did not say the crimes didn't deter crime... only that they don't help much in SOLVING street robberies. Big difference, that.

Re:Finally a use I can get behind (5, Interesting)

the 99th penguin (1453) | more than 6 years ago | (#23356548)

By the way, the summary is wrong - that study the other day did not say the crimes didn't deter crime... only that they don't help much in SOLVING street robberies. Big difference, that.

Speaking of which (cameras deterring crime), here is an interesting article from SFGate [sfgate.com]

From the article:

Using a complicated method, researchers were able to come up with an average daily crime rate at each location broken out by type of crime and distance from the cameras. They then compared it with the average daily crime rate from the period before the cameras were installed.

They looked at seven types of crime: larcenies, burglaries, motor vehicle theft, assault, robbery, homicide and forcible sex offenses.

The only positive deterrent effect was the reduction of larcenies within 100 feet of the cameras. No other crimes were affected -- except for homicides, which had an interesting pattern.

Murders went down within 250 feet of the cameras, but the reduction was completely offset by an increase 250 to 500 feet away, suggesting people moved down the block before killing each other.

And if it DID deter crime (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23356606)

Don't you think that they would have said so, rather than say it was used in 3% of convictions?

Re:Finally a use I can get behind (0, Redundant)

_KiTA_ (241027) | more than 6 years ago | (#23356850)

By the way, the summary is wrong - that study the other day did not say the crimes didn't deter crime... only that they don't help much in SOLVING street robberies. Big difference, that.
The difference being, of course, that you can actually measure the rate of solving street robberies, whereas determent rate is about as quantifiable as the atomic weight of angel farts.

What are they going to do, walk around with surveys asking anyone they think might commit crime if they decided not to because of the cameras?

1984 (4, Interesting)

ThePiratesWhoDontDoA (1113795) | more than 6 years ago | (#23356014)

Wasn't 1984 set in London? This seems awfully scary to me.

Re:1984 (5, Informative)

mbone (558574) | more than 6 years ago | (#23356068)

It was a bright cold day in April, and the clocks were striking thirteen.

Yes, it was set in London. And you can still see the building that suggested the Ministry of Truth to Orwell, just off Tottenham Court Road at UCL (University College London). During World War II it was the Ministry of Propaganda, and Orwell worked there.

Yay (1, Insightful)

TechyImmigrant (175943) | more than 6 years ago | (#23356028)

If it stop inconsiderate bastards leaving their dog's shit on the pavement, I'm all for it.

Re:Yay (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23356048)

Then they came for the dog owners,
And I didn't speak up because I was not a dog owner.

Re:Yay (1)

x_MeRLiN_x (935994) | more than 6 years ago | (#23356058)

I would say it has more to do with not wanting to tread in a stinking pile of shit.

Re:Yay (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23356134)

What, you can't walk around it? Are you fucking retarded or something?

Re:Yay (1, Interesting)

Gordonjcp (186804) | more than 6 years ago | (#23356300)

I *am* a dog owner, and I still fully support people using CCTV to catch stupid fucktard inconsiderate cunt bastard cretinous moron dog owners who seem to think it's acceptable to let their dogs piss and shit wherever they want, and then *leave* the shit for someone else to clean up.

Far worse is when these same pissfuck dipshit cuntflaps stop to let their dogs out and let them into fields full of sheep or cows, and then get all whiny and pissy when I shoot their dog.

Re:Yay (3, Insightful)

garett_spencley (193892) | more than 6 years ago | (#23356644)

I agree. I'm not a dog owner currently but I have nothing against dogs and if I did own one I would up my dog's shit because it pisses me off to no end as well.

But I still believe in due process and privacy and small government and limiting government's power over people's lives. I'm not a doom sayer conspiracy theorist who thinks that the British or Canadian government turning into Nazi Germany in my life time is a likely scenario (sorry for the Godwin) but there are still a lot of bullshit laws that IMO do more harm than good and democracy has this one downside where the majority (some times a rather large group of people which was demonstrated in the last 2 US presidential elections) gets consistently screwed over.

Government is force even when they are democratic and are doing their job and serving the will of the people. They exist solely for the purpose of exercising force. They can take away your freedom, your property. They can send you to your death. The control and moderate and arbitrate. They are force and authority by it's very definition. So while CCTV has some positive uses I don't favour it because I don't like giving force more force. I don't like the idea of living in a world where everyone is considerate just because they're afraid. I don't like being afraid of being caught on camera walking into an adult bookstore. I don't trust the government to keep data safe and I realize the same can be said about passports and census data etc. but the way I see it the less there is to be abused or breached the better.

While you have no reasonable expectation of privacy while in public I think that you *should*. To a much lesser extent then on your private property obviously but people need to know that they're not being followed and recorded everywhere they go and having everything they do stored to some hard drive that can be accessed later and used against them.

I'm not crying Orwell or Hitler and I'm not even saying "slippery slope". I just don't want video footage of me when I'm out and going about my personal affairs. I'm a private person who doesn't even like his picture being taken in family portraits. My worst nightmare would be for me to be a celebrity. Video surveillance makes me feel like one.

Re:Yay (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23356736)

You know, in some places that kind of language can get you arrested [freedomforum.org] . So watch your language in front of the CCTV!

Re:Yay (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23356740)

I just ask that you show the same consideration and please not get upset when I shoot your punk kids while they're trespassing as well.

Re:Yay (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23356696)

I was a cat owner, and I was happy!

http://german.about.com/library/media/sound/Deutschlandlied.mp3

Felines, felines
Over everything
Over every dog and rat
They're much cuter
And more cuddleable
And we don't know where they've shat!
They shit in private!
And they bury it!
We love them very much for that!
They shit in private!
And they bury it!
Can any stupid dog do that?

Re:Yay (5, Insightful)

Knave75 (894961) | more than 6 years ago | (#23356096)

If it stops inconsiderate bastards leaving their dog's shit on the pavement, I'm all for it.


I guess it depends on where you feel public resources should be allocated. Dog poop certainly annoys me, but I do not want millions of taxpayers dollars to be used dealing with that problem. I'd rather they spend it on free breakfasts for schoolchildren or going after drunk drivers.

The point is, there are finite dollars to throw at a relatively large number of potential issues, and every dollar spent enforcing dog poop laws is one less dollar that will be spent on some other public good.

Oh, and using terrorism to justify spending any large amount of money is also annoying. But that is another issue.

Re:Yay (3, Funny)

Hektor_Troy (262592) | more than 6 years ago | (#23356430)

The point is, there are finite dollars to throw at a relatively large number of potential issues, and every dollar spent enforcing dog poop laws is one less dollar that will be spent on some other public good.
That's almost true, but with the current exchange rates [yahoo.com] we keep getting more and more dollars ...

Re:Yay (3, Insightful)

johnlcallaway (165670) | more than 6 years ago | (#23356502)

I got pulled over in Phoenix a couple of weeks ago for not fully stopping at a stop sign. They had two motorcycle police officers monitoring the intersection.

Some may think 'what a waste of tax payer money, pulling people over for not making a complete stop at the stop sign'. But I decided instead of whining to talk to the police officer. Know what I found out??

They were there BECAUSE SOMEONE HAD COMPLAINED PEOPLE WERE SPEEDING DOWN THE STREET. In other words, they were doing exactly what the citizens who pay taxes asked for. Just not the ones that were speeding down the street.

Why did I not stop fully?? Because there were several kids hanging around the street and I was paying more attention to them than the stop sign. My fault, I paid the ticket.

But the police were hoping to slow people down so that none of these kids get hit because some moron is speeding down the street.

So .. the next time you think police have something better to do, the answer is yes. And if everyone would obey the 'not important' laws, like speeding or stopping at stop signs or not letting their dogs poop on the sidewalk, maybe they would have more time to do it.

All laws have to be enforced (or eliminated), otherwise people learn very quickly which ones they can get away with. When people learn they don't get stopped for speeding, they start to go faster. When they learn they can let their dogs poop anywhere, they will do that to.

So ... shut up, pick up your poop, and let the police officers get back to important work instead of having to babysit your ass.

Re:Yay (3, Funny)

Worthless_Comments (987427) | more than 6 years ago | (#23356796)

They were there because someone had complained people were speeding down the street.
Police officers never lie. Fact.

Re:Yay (5, Insightful)

Corpuscavernosa (996139) | more than 6 years ago | (#23356142)

I, good sir, refuse to sell my liberty for a shit-free sidewalk.

What liberty? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23356278)

Which liberty?
The right to not clean up your dog doo?
The right to get away with it if nobody's looking?
The right to not be seen in PUBLIC?
It's calling wolf like this that desensitizes people to real civil liberties violations.

Re:What liberty? (1)

Vectronic (1221470) | more than 6 years ago | (#23356630)

Yes, and its the people who ignore these smaller impediments to liberties that allow the larger ones to happen.

Fuck you (0, Troll)

nunyadambinness (1181813) | more than 6 years ago | (#23356162)

I'm not picking up dog shit. It's idiots like you who decided the appropriate place for dog shit was in a bag being toted around the city instead of on the fucking ground.

I don't handle shit. EVER. You don't like it? Great, but I don't care what the fuck you like.

Re:Fuck you (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23356378)

Cool; I hope everyone else gets your refreshing attitude Mr. Troll. Because then you'll sure step in it. EVERYWHERE. You don't like it? Great, but I don't care what the fuck you like.

Re:Yay (3, Insightful)

SMS_Design (879582) | more than 6 years ago | (#23356396)

Man, civil rights sure do go cheap these days.

Re:Yay (1)

Kugrian (886993) | more than 6 years ago | (#23356890)

I remember this joke about how if your dog craps up on the pavement and a cop comes by, you should just squat over it as the fine for indecent exposure is less than the fine for allowing your dog to mess a public highway. Was a while ago though.. anyone know if it still works out cheaper?

Is anyone surprised by this ? (4, Insightful)

mbone (558574) | more than 6 years ago | (#23356036)

Anyone who is surprised by this doesn't understand either the police, or politics.

Judicious? (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23356038)

I think "pervasive" is the word. "Judicious" is a word you use to imply a good thing, not the mark of a police state.

Petty crimes? (1, Insightful)

RecoveredMarketroid (569802) | more than 6 years ago | (#23356040)

I, for one, don't consider allowing your dog to shit without cleaning it up, to be a petty crime... Have you seen the size of some of those reeking piles??...

Re:Petty crimes? (5, Insightful)

nurb432 (527695) | more than 6 years ago | (#23356120)

Its not about dog poo. its about private citizens being spied on with the assumption they are guilty and the loss of reasonable privacy.

I bet you buy the 'its for the children' nonsence too.

Re:Petty crimes? (3, Funny)

calebt3 (1098475) | more than 6 years ago | (#23356180)

I bet you buy the 'its for the children' nonsence too.
After all, they walk on sidewalks, too.

Re:Petty crimes? (5, Insightful)

iamwithstupid (908895) | more than 6 years ago | (#23356448)

Pavement

Re:Petty crimes? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23356690)

No, streets are paved with asphalt, therefore pavement. Sidewalks are generally concrete.

Re:Petty crimes? (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23356858)

As far as I can tell it all looks like tarmac

What do you mean, privacy? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23356220)

Cameras in public, recording what anyone standing on the street would see, have nothing whatsoever to do with privacy.

These cameras are recording what people choose to do in full public view. If you break the law in public, any witness could report it and testify. At trial you have the right to confront your accuser and cross examine any witnesses. Recorded evidence from these cameras is used in essentially the same way. Where's the assumption of guilt?

Big Brother looked right into people's homes. There's a tremendous difference.

Re:What do you mean, privacy? (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23356308)

Big Brother looked right into people's homes. There's a tremendous difference.
As far as you know.

Re:Petty crimes? (1)

Deanalator (806515) | more than 6 years ago | (#23356498)

The UK is a democratic society isn't it? I was under the impression that people voted for the CCTV to be there, and if enough people cared, they could vote it away as well.

Who are you to impose your view of an ideal society on these people?

The notion that CCTV will spread and take over the world is absurd, because when CCTV moves in, people opposed enough will move out. Even in the most extreme cases, you will always end up with ares where most of the population is opposed to CCTV, and the legislation will never pass there.

If one city does not install CCTV, and the crime rate spikes, then that's too bad for them, and if another city invests so much in CCTV that it breaks their local economy causing an increase in crime, that's too bad as well.

Like everything else in the world, CCTV networks are a tool that works in some places, and will never work in others. The people who are best to decide that are the people that live there.

Hot Fuzz (4, Funny)

pete-classic (75983) | more than 6 years ago | (#23356052)

Until I read this article, I thought that Hot Fuzz [imdb.com] was a comedy.

-Peter

Waitasec... (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23356056)

It's one thing to argue that the new laws were unnecessary, but are you really saying it's a bad thing to use them to solve other crimes? Yes, they may be trivial crimes listed, but they are still crimes. If the ability is there to solve them, why shouldn't they? I don't want to dodge dog shit every time I walk down the street, and if there was a camera pointed at the area, I think police should look at the footage to see who is doing it.

Re:Waitasec... (4, Interesting)

_Sprocket_ (42527) | more than 6 years ago | (#23356358)

It's one thing to argue that the new laws were unnecessary, but are you really saying it's a bad thing to use them to solve other crimes? Yes, they may be trivial crimes listed, but they are still crimes.
I believe the point is that these powers were sold as necissary to battle dire threats. If it turns out that they're only useful for solving petty crime then it raises the question of whether the trade of civil liberty was really worth it.

Sure - police using the tools they have available to deal with all manner of crime makes sense. Whether they should continue to have access to those tools is the question.

Re:Waitasec... (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23356504)

are you really saying it's a bad thing to use them to solve other crimes?

Sure, you can put it that way.

However, I think the point of the article is more like you spending hundreds of thousands of dollars on a souped up ferrari, only to drive it off the lot and discover that it has had a limiter installed that keeps you from driving more than 25 MPH... Sure, you can use it to drive over to the grocery store, but more likely you're going to be pissed off.

Now, how muany of UK's tax dollars went into chasing down dogs, again?

Is This News? Most people are aware of Bush's (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23356084)


blind allegiance to BP ... I mean Tony Blair.

John McCain - The Next War-Monger President of the United Gulags of America

North Vietnam would have done U.S. democracy a favor had they shipped this blathering blob of protoplasm to the Soviet Union for PERMANENT residence.

Cordially,
K.

Won't someone please think...... (4, Funny)

Nonillion (266505) | more than 6 years ago | (#23356088)

of the anonymous flaming dog shit bags!!!!!

Re:Won't someone please think...... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23356194)

"of the anonymous flaming dog shit bags!!!!!"

Sorry I thought your place was old man Wilson's. My bad.

May not deter crime, but... (1, Insightful)

chrb (1083577) | more than 6 years ago | (#23356090)

I hate to be the one to say it, but CCTV has been shown to reduce the severity of crime - reducing the police response time to muggings, for example, leading to less severe injuries to the victim. CCTV has also been invaluable in tracking perpetrators of serious attacks after the attacks have occurred - David Copeland and the 7/7 bombers being two prominent examples. The bottom line is that CCTV, like any tool, has some good uses, and some bad. The issue isn't as black and white (hoho) as people make out.

Re:May not deter crime, but... (4, Insightful)

Dan667 (564390) | more than 6 years ago | (#23356152)

Please send me all of your important info including passport, etc so that I might make sure that you are safe and nothing bad happens. I promise not to abuse it.

Re:May not deter crime, but... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23356388)

Please don't do anything illegal in public view and then get pissed off about it when you get caught.

Re:May not deter crime, but... (2, Insightful)

chrb (1083577) | more than 6 years ago | (#23356414)

I fail to see what identity theft has to do with CCTV coverage. If you are suggesting that my government can't be trusted with my info, then I can assure you that my government already knows every detail printed in my passport. If you're suggesting that the government could abuse CCTV - well, we live in a democracy and can vote them out with little effort. Sure, the government controls the army and police, but we control the government.

There seems to be this pervading Slashdot meme that British people are dumb privacy hating idiots... yes, the majority of people in Britain support the CCTV cameras. No, there have been no major abuses yet. Yes, potentially, a CCTV network with facial recognition would be quite useful to a hypothetical future fascist government. But really, if Britain has already elected a fascist government, then we have already lost...

Re:May not deter crime, but... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23356854)

How do you know there haven't been any major abuses?
See, that's the point. They are looking at you, and you can't look at them. Whoever "they" are. (And no, the 22 yo blond they use in front of the TV cameras to placate the public doesn't count)

Re:May not deter crime, but... (2, Informative)

pembo13 (770295) | more than 6 years ago | (#23356350)

Few ever say that CCTV fails at its advertised goal. Its the unadvertised goals we are worried about.

just watch the smoke, never mind the fire (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23356128)

let your conscience be your guide. you can be more helpful than you might have imagined. there are still some choices. if they do not suit you, consider the likely results of continuing to follow the corepirate nazi hypenosys story LIEn, whereas anything of relevance is replaced almost instantly with pr ?firm? scriptdead mindphuking propaganda or 'celebrity' trivia 'foam'. meanwhile; don't forget to get a little more oxygen on yOUR brain, & look up in the sky from time to time, starting early in the day. there's lots going on up there.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071229/ap_on_sc/ye_climate_records;_ylt=A0WTcVgednZHP2gB9wms0NUE
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20080108/ts_alt_afp/ushealthfrancemortality;_ylt=A9G_RngbRIVHsYAAfCas0NUE
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/31/opinion/31mon1.html?em&ex=1199336400&en=c4b5414371631707&ei=5087%0A

is it time to get real yet? A LOT of energy is being squandered in attempts to keep US in the dark. in the end (give or take a few 1000 years), the creators will prevail (world without end, etc...), as it has always been. the process of gaining yOUR release from the current hostage situation may not be what you might think it is. butt of course, most of US don't know, or care what a precarious/fatal situation we're in. for example; the insidious attempts by the felonious corepirate nazi execrable to block the suns' light, interfering with a requirement (sunlight) for us to stay healthy/alive. it's likely not good for yOUR health/memories 'else they'd be bragging about it? we're intending for the whoreabully deceptive (they'll do ANYTHING for a bit more monIE/power) felons to give up/fail even further, in attempting to control the 'weather', as well as a # of other things/events.

http://video.google.com/videosearch?hl=en&q=video+cloud+spraying

dictator style micro management has never worked (for very long). it's an illness. tie that with life0cidal aggression & softwar gangster style bullying, & what do we have? a greed/fear/ego based recipe for disaster. meanwhile, you can help to stop the bleeding (loss of life & limb);

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/12/28/vermont.banning.bush.ap/index.html

the bleeding must be stopped before any healing can begin. jailing a couple of corepirate nazi hired goons would send a clear message to the rest of the world from US. any truthful look at the 'scorecard' would reveal that we are a society in decline/deep doo-doo, despite all of the scriptdead pr ?firm? generated drum beating & flag waving propaganda that we are constantly bombarded with. is it time to get real yet? please consider carefully ALL of yOUR other 'options'. the creators will prevail. as it has always been.

corepirate nazi execrable costs outweigh benefits
(Score:-)mynuts won, the king is a fink)
by ourselves on everyday 24/7

as there are no benefits, just more&more death/debt & disruption. fortunately there's an 'army' of light bringers, coming yOUR way. the little ones/innocents must/will be protected. after the big flash, ALL of yOUR imaginary 'borders' may blur a bit? for each of the creators' innocents harmed in any way, there is a debt that must/will be repaid by you/us, as the perpetrators/minions of unprecedented evile, will not be available. 'vote' with (what's left in) yOUR wallet, & by your behaviors. help bring an end to unprecedented evile's manifestation through yOUR owned felonious corepirate nazi glowbull warmongering execrable. some of US should consider ourselves somewhat fortunate to be among those scheduled to survive after the big flash/implementation of the creators' wwwildly popular planet/population rescue initiative/mandate. it's right in the manual, 'world without end', etc.... as we all ?know?, change is inevitable, & denying/ignoring gravity, logic, morality, etc..., is only possible, on a temporary basis. concern about the course of events that will occur should the life0cidal execrable fail to be intervened upon is in order. 'do not be dismayed' (also from the manual). however, it's ok/recommended, to not attempt to live under/accept, fauxking nazi felon greed/fear/ego based pr ?firm? scriptdead mindphuking hypenosys.

consult with/trust in yOUR creators. providing more than enough of everything for everyone (without any distracting/spiritdead personal gain motives), whilst badtolling unprecedented evile, using an unlimited supply of newclear power, since/until forever. see you there?

"If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land."

meanwhile, the life0cidal philistines continue on their path of death, debt, & disruption for most of US. gov. bush denies health care for the little ones;

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/10/03/bush.veto/index.html

whilst demanding/extorting billions to paint more targets on the bigger kids;

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/12/12/bush.war.funding/index.html

& pretending that it isn't happening here;

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article3086937.ece
all is not lost/forgotten/forgiven

(yOUR elected) president al gore (deciding not to wait for the much anticipated 'lonesome al answers yOUR questions' interview here on /.) continues to attempt to shed some light on yOUR foibles. talk about reverse polarity;

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article3046116.ece

Actually.. (5, Insightful)

wellingtonsteve (892855) | more than 6 years ago | (#23356138)

Actually I'm all for executing* people who don't clear their dog poop :-) As a dog owner I'm fed up of being tarred with the same brush..

*For those with a sense of humour failure, this is a "joke" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joke [wikipedia.org]

Re:Actually.. (0, Flamebait)

Maljin Jolt (746064) | more than 6 years ago | (#23356318)

Actually I'm all for executing* people who don't clear their dog poop :-) As a dog owner I'm fed up of being tarred with the same brush..

Actually, I am for executing all dog owners. As a cat owner, I do not see any excuse why anyone should poop in the public in human cities...

Re:Actually.. (1)

digitalhermit (113459) | more than 6 years ago | (#23356656)

I have a neighbor who walked her dog across the street to let it crap on my lawn. I was standing fifteen feet away from her. When I yelled at her, she said, "Sorry," then started to walk away leaving the stinking pile of shit on my lawn. So I hollered at her some more until she went back in her house to get a bag to clear it up. These are the kinds of people in the world.

I don't really blame the dog so I wouldn't execute it.

But the owner... hmmm.

OK OK I kid. People shouldn't be executed for petty things like leaving potentially disease carrying fecal matter all over someone else's property. But I should be able to fine her. Maybe $50 per instance would be a good deterrent. Give it to a city beautification project (like a park, for example) for all I care.. but make them pay something for their disregard.

Either that or turn on my sprinklers when she walks by...
Or really loud sirens..

I miss the days (4, Insightful)

geekoid (135745) | more than 6 years ago | (#23356172)

When I could sit in front of my computer and feel smug when this happened in other countries.
Hopefully when Bush and his cronies are out of office we can repair the damage and I can once again feel a smug attitude about my country.

Re:I miss the days (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23356236)

When I could sit in front of my computer and feel smug when this happened in other countries.
Hopefully when Bush and his cronies are out of office we can repair the damage and I can once again feel a smug attitude about my country.

Whomever succeeds Bush will undoubtably deploy more, not less, surveillance and use it for a much wider range of purposes. I just wish that it could have been Hillary, since her paranoia and willingness to do anything to stop her enemies exceeds even that of Nixon.

It will be a cause of great delight and merriment for me when the same people who scream their hatred of Bush and his supposed "attacks on freedom" start looking back in nostalgia at the freedom they enjoyed during his presidency.

Often the very best punishment is to be given exactly what one asks for.

Whoa (3, Insightful)

copponex (13876) | more than 6 years ago | (#23356320)

How's the koolaid these days?

Since when is suspending habeas corpus, destroying congressional oversight, and wiretapping phones without permission from any legal authority constitute freedom?

Or is this the crazy part of American culture where abortion is murder and war is heroic?

Re:I miss the days (5, Interesting)

bsDaemon (87307) | more than 6 years ago | (#23356310)

In my current job, I've met over 50 Republican members of Congress and leaders of the "vast right-wing conspiracy," all the way back to the source of it all -- Richard Viguerie.

I remember being a kid and watching Ruby Ridge, Waco, et cetera. I remember going to gunshows with my dad and stocking up on stuff, coming home and watching Red Dawn. I remember hating Bill Clinton and Janet Reno with a passion.

I most certainly did not feel SMUG about being an American before Bush -- but I can tell you, I did feel PROUD.

That is now long gone. Between the antics of Bush et al, and the bullshit, lies, half-truths and innuendos I have to endure at work, I am now perhaps the least "conservative" person I deal with on a daily basis anymore.

I am leaving my job and leaving Washington to go back to school for mechanical engineering (I had started out as a comp sci and bio double the first time, ended coming out with a BA in English 'cause my heart wasn't in it at the time) and doing school right this time.

I now hate politics with a passion and I can pretty much guarantee that I hate those in power now more than you ever will. I wanted to buy what they were selling before, but now not only do I want my money back, I want to sue for damages.

I used to be a Ron Paul fan, but even in the last few months I've become so fed up that frankly, I don't want to have anything to do with any of those "let the market sort it out" people who only care what happens to you until you're born, then throw you to the wolves.

Oh, by the way, they're the wolves.

The corner stone of the whole operation, the lynch pin, the original vampire, is the National Right to Work foundation. They operate front groups, pimp fake economic numbers, et cetera.

They're the ones that need to go down first, because they're the ones that have been pushing this crap since the 60s.

Anyway... sorry for the rant. It's been a long week.

It's about time (3, Funny)

NotBornYesterday (1093817) | more than 6 years ago | (#23356196)

Thank got they got their dog poop crime spree under control.

what about good old bill clinton? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23356230)

everytime i see his hillbilly ass on the tv he's bitching at someone like the old guy down the street telling the kids to keep off his lawn. what an uptight bitch. i guess that's what happens when you're a supporter of the common faggots.

Good strategy (3, Interesting)

iosmart (624285) | more than 6 years ago | (#23356272)

It is thought that punishment of petty crimes deters the more violent and dangerous crimes. The reason is that if people see that they can get away with small stuff, they will push the boundaries and see all what else they can get away with. If small crimes are prosecuted, they won't dare try to commit a serious crime. This has been studied with strict treatment of graffiti artists in NY during the 1980s and 1990s. See this book for more information: http://www.gladwell.com/tippingpoint/index.html [gladwell.com]

Re:Good strategy (1, Insightful)

Dunbal (464142) | more than 6 years ago | (#23356364)

The reason is that if people see that they can get away with small stuff, they will push the boundaries and see all what else they can get away with.

      Are you sure about this theory of yours? Because although I have smoked marijuana in the past, some 20 years ago, and gotten away with it; I haven't really felt the need to kill or rape anyone so far...

Re:Good strategy (1)

mark_hill97 (897586) | more than 6 years ago | (#23356788)

Good point, on the other hand, obviously you were inclined to harm seven puppies during the making of your post. I can see his slippery slope argument making more sense now!

Taking Liberties documentory (4, Informative)

QX-Mat (460729) | more than 6 years ago | (#23356292)

Available at http://www.noliberties.com/ [noliberties.com]

and if you're a UK view, for free here,

http://www.channel4.com/video/true-stories-taking-liberties/catchup.html [channel4.com]

(WMP11 unfortunately)

For anyone who's studied the UK constitution, and in particular, Lord Nicholls' dicta in Belmarsh, it is frightening to see so obviously what one Government has done to the UK in a way that will effectively bind successive governments: not for want of power, but for want of justification should they revoke popularist statues that give the illusion of service.

Matt

On, a, tangent (2, Funny)

93 Escort Wagon (326346) | more than 6 years ago | (#23356306)

I just wanted to point out that the editors could have inserted several more commas into the title given to this submission, if they'd really tried.

Re:On, a, tangent (3, Funny)

6Yankee (597075) | more than 6 years ago | (#23356610)

NO! It is the BAD kind of puppy!

So, are you gonna clean that shit up, or sit around here whingeing about commas? :)

At the least... (2, Funny)

actionbastard (1206160) | more than 6 years ago | (#23356328)

It will keep them off my damn lawn!

Privacy VS. Security (5, Informative)

silentcoder (1241496) | more than 6 years ago | (#23356344)

It's interesting how attitudes differ. People (including in the UK) seem to think the CCTV there is a terrible violation of privacy and the justifications for it, even if true, would be weak. In South Africa, CCTV is profligating faster than that and our tech is actually MORE advanced now. Here, it has gotten nothing but praise. People just don't care about privacy. There is a twofold reason for that I think. The first is that just a generation ago we were living under what was little less than a military dictatorship. A dictatorship that had propaganda SO effective that some people to this day yearn for their rule ! What's worse, people here seem to chaos and order as a black/white thing. Either everybody does what they are told all the time, nothing more, nothing less- or you have complete chaos. The idea of a free society in between those extremes, where the individual's rights matter is basically non-existent. Throw in a massive crime wave, and putting up CCTV will get you hailed as heroes, with nobody wondering if it may be abused. It is scary to see the same thing happening in the UK though - because it removes from the rest of us yet another example of liberty being respected - if the UK with their relatively small crime problems lose it... how will we with a crime wave possibly convince people that the little extra security you may or may not get out of CCTV may not be worth the incredible price we are paying ? We already live in a country where it is now a crime for teenagers under the age of 16 to HUG OR KISS. How long before we have teenagers arrested for making out - and CCTV used to find them/as evidence ? It's no less of a minor crime than dogpoop (of course, the kissing should never have been a crime at all but at least it's classified as minor). The biggest irony of all is, even in South Africa the camera's have not actually had a real positive effect, the criminals simply moved to other neighbourhoods. So the cycle ends up with every street everywhere being under surveillance in the end. 1984 Was not so far fetched.

Re:Privacy VS. Security (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23356856)

People just don't care about privacy.

Nonsense. People care a great deal about privacy. The reason why you don't see this come into conflict with CCTV is because there really is no conflict. You are deeply confused about what privacy is. You don't have privacy when you are walking down the street in a public place. Everybody can see you. People can follow you around and watch what you do if they wish. Cameras don't take away anything, you never had privacy in a public place to begin with.

Only Difference (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23356424)

The only difference between the UK and USA is the UK has the decency to get the police to lock you up, in the USA any major corporation has the power to spy on you and attack you so harshly you have no come back. Welcome to the Digital Millenium Gentlemen.

Poor summary, poor submission (4, Insightful)

MLCT (1148749) | more than 6 years ago | (#23356460)

Recent reports in the U.K. media indicate that the laws are being used for everything but terrorism investigations
"everything but" - well no, actually, that is tabloid style summary hyperbole - in fact it isn't even hyperbole, just plan rubbish.

The submitter should familiarise themselves with (off the top of my head) three ongoing terrorist trials where CCTV evidence is important to gaining a possible conviction. One in particular, that of the prosecution of associates of the 7th of July London bombers who travelled with them to London in advance to case targets, relies heavily on CCTV to link these people to the bombers, and will help obtain convictions (should that be what the jury decides).

That is just an ongoing trial, and is publicly known, "terrorism investigations" covers a multitude of unknown (to the public) current investigations - monitoring people who have warranted the attention of the intelligence community.

But god forbid the truth should get in the way of a hyperactive slashdot submission - desperate for 500 comments of "1984", "slippery slope" and every other cliché under the sun. There may be (and indeed I would personally say, are) valid criticisms of CCTV and how people are monitored in public places - but that debate is entirely short circuited and debased with juvenile submissions like this that are not interested in facts, only hyperbole.

Re:Poor summary, poor submission (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23356570)

Read the article jackass. They have some decent statistics in there.

Re:Poor summary, poor submission (1)

MLCT (1148749) | more than 6 years ago | (#23356646)

They have some decent statistics in there.
And none of them will say that CCTV is used for "everything but terrorism investigations", because that is demonstratively false - the entire point of my post.

Re:Poor summary, poor submission (1)

mobby_6kl (668092) | more than 6 years ago | (#23356638)

Ok, so with the tens thousands of cameras and billions of pounds spend, and all they can do is possibly link a bunch of guys who didn't actually do anything themselves to 7/7... after the fact?

I guess the only way not to get recorded all the time by CCTV is to be a Brazilian electrician. That's the only way to be safe.

Re:Poor summary, poor submission (2, Insightful)

MLCT (1148749) | more than 6 years ago | (#23356756)

a bunch of guys who didn't actually do anything themselves
Nope - a bunch of guys who (allegedly) knew what the 7/7 bombers were going to do in advance and (allegedly) actively helped them to do it. The parenthesised words can be removed if they are convicted.

I'm not going to stand here and "defend the camera's at all costs" - I don't want to, or believe that they are the all singing all dancing saviours of civil society. What I do want to point out, and did so in my post, was highlight that the reactionary, hyperbole filled junk that characterises so much of "anti-camera" brigade - and to their detriment, because by turning it into a game of "the scary cameras are watching you" they are preying on the same FUD philosophy that the CCTV-turfers prey on.

Remember (5, Interesting)

houghi (78078) | more than 6 years ago | (#23356478)

Remember, remember
the 5th of November.
The gunpowder, treason, and plot.
I know of no reason
why the gunpowder treason
should ever be forgot.

Yes, folks, it's in there (1)

netruner (588721) | more than 6 years ago | (#23356552)

Dog Fouling is in fact listed in the article. It's not just a creative Slashdot title. This has been a public service announcement.

Niggers Fuck My Bloody Anus Fuck You Cunt (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23356594)

I spread my anus wide,
for GNAA to poke inside,
their massive big black cock,
while your friends are jailed for smoking pot,
fuck you UK-USA,
both countries suck each others cock,
while the citizens rub their penises and clits,
in ignorance,
now you eat that dog shit,
while I rub my plastic Microsoft clit controller,
big oil microsoft riaa, they fuck you and you
laugh

it's sodomy

Invalid form key snliagsghedrot

Re: (1)

clint999 (1277046) | more than 6 years ago | (#23356666)

Am I the only one that is completely confused?

Metaironic (5, Insightful)

hacksoncode (239847) | more than 6 years ago | (#23356846)

People have skirted around this, but I find it interesting to note that the crimes which the UK appears to *actually* be these CCTV cameras against are, in fact, bigger problems for the citizenry than the terrorists and pedophiles which were used to sell it.

We need a new word for something that's ironic because it is designed to seem ironic but really isn't.

The meta-irony here comes through in the point that terrorists aren't really a danger to normal people (statistically speaking), and in fact are probably less of a hazard than slipping on dog poop on the sidewalk. But you can get CCTVs pushed through based on the former and not the latter because almost all people have extraordinarily poor risk assessment skills.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>