New speed cameras?

jclegs

Bigbrotheriswatching wrote: »

Oh really

Well i hate to bring you this news but thats the problem, there are no procedures in place. Perhaps you could enlighten me if you know otherwise.

And can you explain how it is that when we are law abiding citizens and the police then as you say have no interest in us. Why on earth would they feel the need to forcible keep a log of our every movement for 5 years?

How do you know there are no procedures in place, do you have access to the PSNI service policy on ANPR? Why would you think they would need to store records, have you ever thought of how Police investigations work? Do you think all crimes are reported straight away and all evidence gathered in a few days? Complex cases can take years to unravel. For example if information comes to light regarding a registration of a vehicle seen in the area where a serious crime has occurred, would you like to be the one to tell the victim "oh sorry we are not allowed to store ANPR information, we don't know where the vehicle went". Police have better things to do than see where Joe Bloggs has been today, if they are not involved in criminal activity.

There is a fine line between privacy which every citizen is entitled to under Article 8 Human Rights Act and what is needed to help Police keep citizens safe and ANPR is a proportionate tool to do this.

D.A.

jclegs wrote: »

Police keep citizens safe and ANPR is a proportionate tool to do this.

Show me ANY evidence of where ANPR has PREVENTED any crime.

Bigbrotheriswatching

jclegs wrote: »

How do you know there are no procedures in place, do you have access to the PSNI service policy on ANPR? Why would you think they would need to store records, have you ever thought of how Police investigations work? Do you think all crimes are reported straight away and all evidence gathered in a few days? Complex cases can take years to unravel. For example if information comes to light regarding a registration of a vehicle seen in the area where a serious crime has occurred, would you like to be the one to tell the victim "oh sorry we are not allowed to store ANPR information, we don't know where the vehicle went". Police have better things to do than see where Joe Bloggs has been today, if they are not involved in criminal activity.

There is a fine line between privacy which every citizen is entitled to under Article 8 Human Rights Act and what is needed to help Police keep citizens safe and ANPR is a proportionate tool to do this.

So what you are saying is that every legal motorist on the roads today is suspected of committing a crime. They must forfit their right to privacy and have their each and every journey in detail stored on a police database without their permission.

Somehow i think the fine line has been crossed as this is very disproportionate.

Incidentally yes i do have access to the PSNI policy derective on ANPR. Only existing procedures not specific to ANPR are in place. Namely, Artical 8 of the ECHR and Section 32 of the Police (Northern Ireland) act.

And you think the police have better things to do than use computers to spy ect? I think you better think again......

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1371833/20-police-officers-dismissed-using-force-spy-neighbours-partners.html

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1326619/Female-PCSO-trawled-police-records-check-potential-lovers.html

http://mail.thenewspaper.com/news/22/2265.asp

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1285801/Pc-Haydn-Evans-faces-sack-illegally-using-police-check-gay-lovers.html

http://www.bigbrotherwatch.org.uk/home/2011/03/lancashire-police-officers-dismissed-for-breaching-data-laws.html


This would also prove beyond any doubt that the current procedures in place are at best weak and are certainly completely useless regarding the use of ANPR.


A inquiry in to anpr in Australia in 2008 found that the current procedures in place were unacceptable.


Among other things it recommended for implementation where..



Access to data collected by ANPR devices is restricted
to authorised agencies and users;

The collection and retention of personal information is
limited to that which is necessary to achieve clearly
articulated purposes;

Data relating to vehicles not found to be committing an
offence shall be cleansed nightly from devices to
minimise the possibility of security breaches;

Data shall be transported securely between devices and
repositories and stored with high-security encryption and
digital signatures;

Security systems shall be subject to regular audits to
ensure they are adhered to;

Should additional and compelling public interests be
served in the future by new applications of ANPR, these
should only be pursued after public consultation and
scrutiny by Parliament;

The misuse of ANPR data attracts severe penalties;

Affected individuals have access to a complaints
scheme to seek redress if their rights are abused


Would you not agree that these procedures are common sense and people should be entitled to these safeguards or should we just use the current method with no safeguards in place specific to anpr?

jclegs

Ok there is no point even trying to explain this to you, no amount of reasoning is ever going to get you to change your mind. No Police service is ever going to tell a member of the public how ANPR is used to detect and prevent crime for the simple reason that no matter what they say, the media and people like you will twist it to suit their own agenda. As a member of the public, I am happy that the information is stored securely, as per the Data Protection Act.

Jon_C

Of course ANPR can't prevent a crime that has already happened but it can help police catch the perpetrators who (more than likely in the case of car crime) may otherwise commit further crime - therefore keeping the public safe.

I understand some people's concerns about the right to privacy but I've nothing to hide and couldn't care less about whether the police and security services know where I've been going for the past five years.

I respect the views of others who think differently but the way I see it, if someone steals my car I'd rather the police have ANPR as a tool with which to locate it before the thief driving it ploughs into somebody and kills them.

Bigbrotheriswatching

Jon_C wrote: »

Of course ANPR can't prevent a crime that has already happened but it can help police catch the perpetrators who (more than likely in the case of car crime) may otherwise commit further crime - therefore keeping the public safe.

I understand some people's concerns about the right to privacy but I've nothing to hide and couldn't care less about whether the police and security services know where I've been going for the past five years.

I respect the views of others who think differently but the way I see it, if someone steals my car I'd rather the police have ANPR as a tool with which to locate it before the thief driving it ploughs into somebody and kills them.

If someone steals your car then anpr has not stopped that crime. It will also be of little value in catching the person safely and it most certainly will not stop them from crashing. Therefore there is little benefit to be had from using anpr or not.


Heres an example of how anpr really works....


http://www.thenorthernecho.co.uk

Full report by police complaints commission

http://www.policeprofessional.com





Oh and then there was the other fine example of anpr not working posted on this very thread..

http://www.cambstimes.co.uk



Its funny, i have been extensively researching anpr and asking the police for situations where anpr has actually prevented a crime and as yet i have found or heard Nothing.

Indeed just two weeks ago at a tribunal regarding disclosure of anpr camera locations in Devon, the police were ordered to disclose them all within 35 days. One of the factors that lead to this decision was that they could not provide any information at all as to whether these cameras actually even work. They had no statistics and not one shred of evidence.

Surely with a database of over 8 billion peoples journeys stored you would think they would have an idea how its working wouldnt you?

BigAl94

Perusal of this thread might be of some help here http://www.simonpreacher.com/blog/proclivity/never-argue-with-a-fool/ - then move on - life's too short!

Bigbrotheriswatching

BigAl94 wrote: »

Perusal of this thread might be of some help here http://www.simonpreacher.com/blog/proclivity/never-argue-with-a-fool/ - then move on - life's too short!

What i read in that is a classic wide brush excuse to never debate with anyone if you yourself dont have the intellect and knowledge to make your point against them. Its weak. It implies that violence will ensue if you debate with someone. Its quite frankly for school children and does not belong in an adult context.

I see no fools here. Just two different view points. If you cant see that yourself then your the fool.

And your right. Life is to short. Far to short to allow your freedoms and liberties to be trampled on. Men died day and daily in wars trying to keep them in this country. Men are still dieing as we speak in countries around the world trying to restore them yet it seems here that some people are more than willing to allow elements of theirs disappear in a whim because the very thing that is actually taking freedoms away from them is being implemented in the guise of being for their "personal safety"


Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.

BigAl94

Thank you for so eloquently proving my point!

Bigbrotheriswatching

BigAl94 wrote: »

Thank you for so eloquently proving my point!

I am amused. You obviously think i am a fool, thats fine, to be honest your opinion of me is meaningless. But i found this funny.

In the drivil you posted it says...


"If you feel tempted to answer to a fool, don’t do it. Ignore them, even if you feel like screaming to them. Your silence will prevent you from converting to their cult of foolishness"


Now you either did not read what you posted or you dont believe what you read. And if i am a fool why did you respond to me?


And tell me, the MPs and Councilors that stand and support me on anpr. Are they also fools? When they ask questions in parliament about anpr are they fools?