Car tracking

Donna · 11-06-2005, 04:40 AM

They do electronic tags of sex offenders you know.

It is to track their movements via Global Positioning Satellite.

The State proposes to tag everyone's cars.

Do you think you need your movements monitoring as though you were a sex offender?

Do you want every journey you ever made being available to Big Brother?

Have you never made a journey you would rather keep private? Will you never?

Can I (criminally - in the future of course) sell you a car-tracking spoofing system?

This is even worse than ID cards, and that made me throw up.

I am not the property of the state!

Best,
Donna

mkpdavies · 11-06-2005, 10:10 AM

Got no problem with criminals being tagged and monitored. You show contempt for others and society, you then deserve to lose the right to full liberty until society is happy you are reformed.

If you commit no crime, your business is your own.

Hudson · 12-06-2005, 12:09 AM

Quote:

If you commit no crime, your business is your own.

While I understand your sentiments, Matt, that kind of thinking is only a simdgin away from The innocent have nothing to fear, the mantra of dictators worldwide.

We must be very careful not to get drawn INTO phpbb_the ten minute hates caused by the purely coincidental rise in violent crime. If we support Ingsoc treatment for criminals then we all end up in the Ministry of Love.

mkpdavies · 12-06-2005, 12:22 AM

Yeah but I meant it.

Maybe it's just me, but I am happy to lose my libertarain values for criminals. They deserve to lose a few rights and freedoms.

However this means that people not commiting REAL crimes are always innocent unless PROVEN guilty, without a shadow of a doubt, using a jury.

Petty crime such as not paying T.V licence isn't a prison offence. Not paying the fine for it shouldn't be either. Slap a tag on them and make em do some community work, much better. If they refuse that, then prison it is.

I don't think you can rule stuff out because it sounds a bit big bro for criminals.

Intbel · 12-06-2005, 12:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hudson

While I understand your sentiments, Matt, that kind of thinking is only a simdgin away from The innocent have nothing to fear, the mantra of dictators worldwide.

We must be very careful not to get drawn INTO phpbb_the ten minute hates caused by the purely coincidental rise in violent crime. If we support Ingsoc treatment for criminals then we all end up in the Ministry of Love.

Agreed. Gotta disagree with Matt on this one.
One step away from telescreens it is.

Doubleplus ungood.

mkpdavies · 12-06-2005, 01:01 AM

I know I'm at odds with most liberals (I consider myself liberal in general), on the issue of crime and punishment.

Telescreens for criminals, fine, for the rest of society, no.

Hudson · 12-06-2005, 01:17 AM

I'm not concerned about seeming harsh on criminals, more that the acceptance of certain methods when applied to the proven guilty makes it far easier to introduce similar methods for the unproven. It's the Alberto Balsam effect; a gentle conditioner for frequent use.

How about tagging people before they committ a crime? What if 'expert psychologists' and demographic profilers create a 'foolproof' method of identifying criminals before they offend? Who could complain? After all, the innocent have nothing to fear.

It's a very steep and slippery slope. Presuming oneself innocent is no defence against a police state. No-one is innocent in a police state.

Intbel · 12-06-2005, 01:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mkpdavies

I know I'm at odds with most liberals (I consider myself liberal in general), on the issue of crime and punishment.
Telescreens for criminals, fine, for the rest of society, no.

Oh? And who, Matt, is not a criminal?
Everyone, unless they are superhuman will become criminals.
It is not you or I who decide who is or who is not a criminal.

If you break a law you are a criminal will be the logic.
Examples:

Exceeding a speed limit, no matter how inappropriate that limit may be.
Ignoring "Keep off the grass" signs.
Dropping litter - even a cigarette butt.
Failing to pay taxes on time.
Ever swear? Tut tut - guilty of using offensive language.
Still a member of UKIP? That is an illegal organisation. (Not the BNP though, for it poses no real threat)
Gay? Kissed your b/f in public? Sorry - act of indecency.
Parked illegally? Illegal = against the law = criminal behaviour.
Have a TV and no licence? Canna get a greater crime than that!
Smoke a bit o' weed to help with the migraine? Yep, you got it ...

I break some law every day and would be considered a criminal yet I harm no one. There is no victim. Except, mebbe, my bank balance if I am caught.

Already it is becoming increasingly difficult to live without offending against some law or other. We are being conditioned, set up. As we were set up with the vote on the Common Market back in the seventies.

Matt, you, I and everyone else will be deemed to be criminals.
The very fact that you campaign for a political party which seeks to undermine the government will be enough to criminalise you.

Conspiracy theory? I don't think so.
Read the constitution very carefully - never mind it is dead, it demonstrates the ideology. I suspect the constitution was never intended to be ratified, I suspect it was put out to test the waters.

mkpdavies · 12-06-2005, 01:30 AM

Quote:

How about tagging people before they committ a crime? What if 'expert psychologists' and demographic profilers create a 'foolproof' method of identifying criminals before they offend? Who could complain? After all, the innocent have nothing to fear.

No way, as I said before I draw the line at actual convicted criminals. Anything else is an infringment on civil rights. Your talking thought crime and I won't sign up to any of that. Even if it is a Tom Cruise movie.

Quote:

No-one is innocent in a police state

.
Which is why I will fight aqnything like thoughtcrime or any attack on civil liberties.

Intbel, I appreciate what you are saying. However, you are slipping towards the other side of the extreme. If you don't accept that society has to have some rules, then we are talking anarchy. We have to have a balance on what society deems exceptable, getting that balance is the key.

Making sure people are not put in prison unless absolutely necessary goes hand and hand with then punishing those that society deem criminals. You can't do one without the other, otherwise you could slide INTO phpbb_the police-state, which none of us want.

Anarchy may sound great, but Mad Max situations tend to come from it. No thanks.

Donna · 12-06-2005, 01:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mkpdavies

If you commit no crime, your business is your own.

Indeed it is.

It is most certainly not the State's.

I refuse to wear an electronic tag - I am not a criminal.

Best,
Donna

11-06-2005, 04:40 AM	#1 (permalink)
Donna Junior Member Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 33	Car tracking They do electronic tags of sex offenders you know. It is to track their movements via Global Positioning Satellite. The State proposes to tag everyone's cars. Do you think you need your movements monitoring as though you were a sex offender? Do you want every journey you ever made being available to Big Brother? Have you never made a journey you would rather keep private? Will you never? Can I (criminally - in the future of course) sell you a car-tracking spoofing system? This is even worse than ID cards, and that made me throw up. I am not the property of the state! Best, Donna

11-06-2005, 10:10 AM	#2 (permalink)
mkpdavies Uber Member Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Woking Posts: 31,158 Party: Libertarian Party	Got no problem with criminals being tagged and monitored. You show contempt for others and society, you then deserve to lose the right to full liberty until society is happy you are reformed. If you commit no crime, your business is your own. __________________ http://brits4ronpaul.blogspot.com/ http://wokinglibertarians.blogspot.com/ http://lpuk.org My ignore list Labour, Blue Labour, Lib Dems

12-06-2005, 12:22 AM	#4 (permalink)
mkpdavies Uber Member Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Woking Posts: 31,158 Party: Libertarian Party	Yeah but I meant it. Maybe it's just me, but I am happy to lose my libertarain values for criminals. They deserve to lose a few rights and freedoms. However this means that people not commiting REAL crimes are always innocent unless PROVEN guilty, without a shadow of a doubt, using a jury. Petty crime such as not paying T.V licence isn't a prison offence. Not paying the fine for it shouldn't be either. Slap a tag on them and make em do some community work, much better. If they refuse that, then prison it is. I don't think you can rule stuff out because it sounds a bit big bro for criminals. __________________ http://brits4ronpaul.blogspot.com/ http://wokinglibertarians.blogspot.com/ http://lpuk.org My ignore list Labour, Blue Labour, Lib Dems

12-06-2005, 01:01 AM	#6 (permalink)
mkpdavies Uber Member Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Woking Posts: 31,158 Party: Libertarian Party	I know I'm at odds with most liberals (I consider myself liberal in general), on the issue of crime and punishment. Telescreens for criminals, fine, for the rest of society, no. __________________ http://brits4ronpaul.blogspot.com/ http://wokinglibertarians.blogspot.com/ http://lpuk.org My ignore list Labour, Blue Labour, Lib Dems

12-06-2005, 01:17 AM	#7 (permalink)
Hudson Member Join Date: May 2005 Location: Staffordshire Posts: 270	Take two bottles INTO phpbb_the shower? I'm not concerned about seeming harsh on criminals, more that the acceptance of certain methods when applied to the proven guilty makes it far easier to introduce similar methods for the unproven. It's the Alberto Balsam effect; a gentle conditioner for frequent use. How about tagging people before they committ a crime? What if 'expert psychologists' and demographic profilers create a 'foolproof' method of identifying criminals before they offend? Who could complain? After all, the innocent have nothing to fear. It's a very steep and slippery slope. Presuming oneself innocent is no defence against a police state. No-one is innocent in a police state.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode