FAQ |
Members List |
Calendar |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
Serious Debates & News Debate and discussion about political, moral, philosophical, celebrity and news topics. |
Reply |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
18-05-2012, 10:41 AM | #1 | ||
|
|||
Senior Member
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-18102793
Quote:
So it's a from me ..... |
||
Reply With Quote |
18-05-2012, 10:46 AM | #2 | |||
|
||||
Likes cars that go boom
|
Im really torn on this, it is an invasion yes...However in the interests of public safety or counter terrorism...I dunno
__________________
|
|||
Reply With Quote |
18-05-2012, 11:07 AM | #3 | ||
|
|||
Senior Member
|
Quote:
If, say, your local force performs similar extraction 1000 times a year, they would be holding data on, say, 200,000 people (probably less) - if there are 20 police forces performing similar extraction they would be holding data on 4,000,000 people (probably less) - in a few short years, the police could be holding (very) personal data on just about everybody ..... |
||
Reply With Quote |
18-05-2012, 11:13 AM | #4 | |||
|
||||
Likes cars that go boom
|
I was under the impression that data could only be stored for a specific time?
__________________
|
|||
Reply With Quote |
18-05-2012, 11:24 AM | #5 | ||
|
|||
Senior Member
|
Apparently not .....
Last edited by Omah; 18-05-2012 at 11:39 AM. |
||
Reply With Quote |
18-05-2012, 02:55 PM | #6 | ||
|
|||
oh fack off
|
This better not be happening. What a ridiculous breach of civil liberties.
|
||
Reply With Quote |
18-05-2012, 03:59 PM | #7 | |||
|
||||
It's lacroix darling
|
If you've got nothing to hide, the you've got nothing to worry about.
__________________
|
|||
Reply With Quote |
18-05-2012, 04:04 PM | #8 | |||
|
||||
Senior Member
|
|
|||
Reply With Quote |
18-05-2012, 04:06 PM | #9 | |||
|
||||
It's lacroix darling
|
__________________
|
|||
Reply With Quote |
18-05-2012, 04:10 PM | #10 | ||
|
|||
oh fack off
|
|
||
Reply With Quote |
18-05-2012, 04:12 PM | #11 | |||
|
||||
It's lacroix darling
|
Take up the problem with the IPCC?
__________________
|
|||
Reply With Quote |
18-05-2012, 04:23 PM | #12 | |||
|
||||
Senior Moment
|
Oh **** they will known I've only ever made one call on my phone, **** **** **** **** ****
__________________
|
|||
Reply With Quote |
18-05-2012, 05:47 PM | #13 | |||
|
||||
שטח זה להשכרה
|
|
|||
Reply With Quote |
18-05-2012, 05:53 PM | #14 | |||
|
||||
All hail the Moyesiah
|
Couldn't you use that to justify pretty much any invasion of privacy though, why not have cameras in everybody's home, after all if you've got nothing to hide than you've nothing to fear
I'm not comfortable with the ever increasing power being put into the hands of the state when it comes to people's private lives. Like Jack said, what if it gets into the wrong hands, who guards the guards Last edited by MTVN; 18-05-2012 at 05:55 PM. |
|||
Reply With Quote |
18-05-2012, 05:59 PM | #15 | |||
|
||||
שטח זה להשכרה
|
Quote:
Last edited by Livia; 18-05-2012 at 05:59 PM. |
|||
Reply With Quote |
18-05-2012, 06:05 PM | #16 | |||
|
||||
All hail the Moyesiah
|
I'm not saying it but you could use that principle to justify almost any invasion of privacy could you not? It's what they said with ID cards, it's what they said with CCTV cameras, it's what they said with closer Internet monitoring etc etc. You can still be uncomfortable about the authorities having access to your private life without that meaning you must have something illegal to hide
|
|||
Reply With Quote |
18-05-2012, 06:17 PM | #17 | ||
|
|||
Remembering Kerry
|
I'm not exactly sure I could go along with the if you have nothing to hide, then you have nothing to worry about, the point is there are some things that people should have the right to say they do not want available to anyone never mind just the police.
The Police have problems with leaks and lost materials too and unless someone is heavily suspected of possibly being involved in or have committed wrong then their private affairs should remain that, 'private'. Not a question of hiding anything,just plain human decency and respect that should be a right for people not free for authorities or anyone else to go poking into. Innocent people have suffered at the hands of the law before.This proposal is wrong in my opinion. Last edited by joeysteele; 18-05-2012 at 06:21 PM. |
||
Reply With Quote |
18-05-2012, 06:19 PM | #18 | |||
|
||||
All hail the Moyesiah
|
Quote:
Last edited by MTVN; 18-05-2012 at 06:21 PM. |
|||
Reply With Quote |
18-05-2012, 06:47 PM | #19 | ||
|
|||
Senior Member
|
|
||
Reply With Quote |
18-05-2012, 06:50 PM | #20 | ||
|
|||
Senior Member
|
Quote:
|
||
Reply With Quote |
18-05-2012, 07:59 PM | #21 | |||
|
||||
Likes cars that go boom
|
They will not be interested in joe bloggs phone or his sext to his bit on the side...It will be those suspected of certain crimes, terrorism..Trafficking..
In such cases I guess the human rights of the victims/potential victims outweigh the accused?...
__________________
|
|||
Reply With Quote |
18-05-2012, 08:03 PM | #22 | |||
|
||||
R.I.P Kerry x
|
Seems ridiculous really. Someone once told me they felt like having a mobile was like being tagged, looks like this could be coming true and to an extent it already is.
__________________
|
|||
Reply With Quote |
18-05-2012, 10:19 PM | #23 | ||
|
|||
Senior Member
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
Reply With Quote |
Reply |
|
|