+ Post New Thread
Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 61 to 75 of 80
IT News Thread, Put young children on DNA list, urge police in Other News; Originally Posted by jcollings But you can be asked to prove who you are now or risk fines etc - ...
  1. #61

    localzuk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Minehead
    Posts
    18,157
    Thank Post
    522
    Thanked 2,552 Times in 1,981 Posts
    Blog Entries
    24
    Rep Power
    877
    Quote Originally Posted by jcollings View Post
    But you can be asked to prove who you are now or risk fines etc - no difference. You see the assumption is there again that there will be a new law making you produce it on demand.
    A police officer can only demand your identity in the following circumstances:

    1. You are the driver of a car
    2. An order has been made to cover a certain area under the terrorism laws of the last few years.
    3. The officer believes you have or are engaged in criminal activity. Even then, they can only arrest you and hold you in order to find out who you are - there is no criminal offence involved.

    Of course it makes sense - people should and are able to protest at will.

    We live in one of the most liberal countries in the world - spend time in China, Zimbabwe,Iraq, Iran et al - they understand what repression is.
    Yes, and we are saying that the introduction of these systems is a step towards those oppressive regimes. People are no longer able to protest at will - I just explained the legislative changes to the law covering protest above. Ignoring it seems a bit strange.

    Quote Originally Posted by jcollings View Post
    I do know law and find you to be patronising.
    How do you know the law will be different with ID cards? They may only be asked for if you are suspected of something.
    Sorry, but you don't seem to know the law. Both Witch and myself have shown that you don't, so it is not patronising.

    Of course the BNP can break laws to protest - it's called freedom of speech.
    Huh? That's a contradiction.

    I spend a great deal of time in politics so won't be sleepwalking anywhere. Some laws such as ASBO law is very useful and helps control problems.

    Please don't talk down to me in future.
    You may spend a lot of time in politics, but you seem to have some very strange views. Accepting systems and ideas which simply don't have any evidence to support them (eg. ASBO law, ID cards and CCTV) seems strange too. Have you read any of the laws involved here? Seen the bits of them that can be and are widely abused?

  2. #62

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Kendal
    Posts
    1,555
    Thank Post
    112
    Thanked 177 Times in 144 Posts
    Rep Power
    72
    Giving your name and address - generally the police don’t have the right to demand your name and address apart from in certain circumstances. For example if they have reason to believe you are or were acting in an antisocial manner. If you then refuse to tell them, you are committing an offence and could be arrested, and they could go on to search you.

    And yes - I have read ASBO laws etc. Do I want the police to be able to move on groups of boozed up kids terrorising neighbourhoods - dead right I do. Of course in your view it would infringe their civil rights but what of the civil rights of the folks in that area - should they have to put up with anti-social behaviour. I think not.
    Last edited by jcollings; 6th April 2008 at 05:52 PM.

  3. #63

    localzuk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Minehead
    Posts
    18,157
    Thank Post
    522
    Thanked 2,552 Times in 1,981 Posts
    Blog Entries
    24
    Rep Power
    877
    Quote Originally Posted by jcollings View Post
    Giving your name and address - generally the police donít have the right to demand your name and address apart from in certain circumstances. For example if they have reason to believe you are or were acting in an antisocial manner. If you then refuse to tell them, you are committing an offence and could be arrested, and they could go on to search you.
    Not even in an anti-social manner. PACE only provides for demanding details from those engaged in an actual criminal offence. But this is in a very specific set of circumstances.

  4. #64

    witch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Dorset
    Posts
    11,243
    Thank Post
    1,461
    Thanked 2,524 Times in 1,757 Posts
    Rep Power
    756
    That's it - I'm out of here. I can't discuss anything with someone who makes a statement like this!
    Quote Originally Posted by jcollings View Post

    Of course the BNP can break laws to protest - it's called freedom of speech.
    Please note this definition of 'freedom of speech'
    "Freedom of speech is the concept of the inherent human right to voice one's opinion publicly without fear of censorship or punishment."

    If you break a law then you WILL be punished, won't you? So if the law states that you cannot protest then your right to freedom of speech has been broken.

  5. #65

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Kendal
    Posts
    1,555
    Thank Post
    112
    Thanked 177 Times in 144 Posts
    Rep Power
    72
    FAQs and Myths - Identity and Passport Service

    Item 2 - Myth: The police can demand to see your card

    Answer: The police have no new powers associated with the scheme and they will not be able to stop you and demand to see your card.

  6. #66

    localzuk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Minehead
    Posts
    18,157
    Thank Post
    522
    Thanked 2,552 Times in 1,981 Posts
    Blog Entries
    24
    Rep Power
    877
    Quote Originally Posted by jcollings View Post
    FAQs and Myths - Identity and Passport Service

    Item 2 - Myth: The police can demand to see your card

    Answer: The police have no new powers associated with the scheme and they will not be able to stop you and demand to see your card.
    Yes, I already know they won't be able to initially. But that is not how legislation works. The progressive introduction of powers reduces liberties. An example being the progressive increase in the time the police can hold you when arrested.

  7. #67

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Kendal
    Posts
    1,555
    Thank Post
    112
    Thanked 177 Times in 144 Posts
    Rep Power
    72
    Quote Originally Posted by localzuk View Post
    Yes, I already know they won't be able to initially. But that is not how legislation works. The progressive introduction of powers reduces liberties. An example being the progressive increase in the time the police can hold you when arrested.
    Agreed but there isn't a huge amount you can do to stop it is there. If the government decide they want a law passed they will pass it. We can only deal with the here and now and right now an ID card doesn't give the police any more power than they already have which is what I've said all along.

    To change things needs mass protest where so many people object there is no choice but to change the law e.g poll tax riots.

  8. #68
    torledo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    2,928
    Thank Post
    168
    Thanked 155 Times in 126 Posts
    Rep Power
    48
    Quote Originally Posted by jcollings View Post
    Giving your name and address - generally the police donít have the right to demand your name and address apart from in certain circumstances. For example if they have reason to believe you are or were acting in an antisocial manner. If you then refuse to tell them, you are committing an offence and could be arrested, and they could go on to search you.

    And yes - I have read ASBO laws etc. Do I want the police to be able to move on groups of boozed up kids terrorising neighbourhoods - dead right I do. Of course in your view it would infringe their civil rights but what of the civil rights of the folks in that area - should they have to put up with anti-social behaviour. I think not.
    generally the police don't have the right to demand you're name and address apart from in certain circumstance, eh ?

    Like for example if you happen to be black. That seems to be a very good 'reason' the police are particularly fond of. So much for each individuals rights being protectedd by the authorities you so admire.

    You mean to say the police weren't able to move teenagers on before asbo's ? I'm no expert on ASBO's and they're effect good or bad....i happen to suspect 'cos they're a pet project and the only idea the govt. have thought of to mend anti-social behaviour they'll gloss over any failings,

    but it appears persistent offenders have scant regard for ASBO's just like they have scant regard for police, PCSO's and the community. And no doubt scant regard for carrying ID cards. But wait will they have to carry one, and at what age ?

  9. #69

    localzuk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Minehead
    Posts
    18,157
    Thank Post
    522
    Thanked 2,552 Times in 1,981 Posts
    Blog Entries
    24
    Rep Power
    877
    Quote Originally Posted by jcollings View Post
    Agreed but there isn't a huge amount you can do to stop it is there. If the government decide they want a law passed they will pass it. We can only deal with the here and now and right now an ID card doesn't give the police any more power than they already have which is what I've said all along.

    To change things needs mass protest where so many people object there is no choice but to change the law e.g poll tax riots.
    Yes, we can oppose the introduction of these systems. Protest in the public. Complain to our MPs (they do worry about being re-elected and will change their views if enough of their constituants complain).

    There is a lot we can do. We can take the government to european courts etc...

    We don't just sit there and say 'but what can we do?'...

  10. #70

    localzuk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Minehead
    Posts
    18,157
    Thank Post
    522
    Thanked 2,552 Times in 1,981 Posts
    Blog Entries
    24
    Rep Power
    877
    Quote Originally Posted by jcollings View Post
    And yes - I have read ASBO laws etc. Do I want the police to be able to move on groups of boozed up kids terrorising neighbourhoods - dead right I do. Of course in your view it would infringe their civil rights but what of the civil rights of the folks in that area - should they have to put up with anti-social behaviour. I think not.
    What about those who aren't being 'anti-social'? ie. The majority. They all get affected by these things. The thing is, the police could move groups of kids who were breaking the law on before the ASBO legislation came in.

  11. #71

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Kendal
    Posts
    1,555
    Thank Post
    112
    Thanked 177 Times in 144 Posts
    Rep Power
    72
    Quote Originally Posted by torledo View Post
    Like for example if you happen to be black. That seems to be a very good 'reason' the police are particularly fond of. So much for each individuals rights being protectedd by the authorities you so admire.

    You mean to say the police weren't able to move teenagers on before asbo's ? I'm no expert on ASBO's and they're effect good or bad....i happen to suspect 'cos they're a pet project and the only idea the govt. have thought of to mend anti-social behaviour they'll gloss over any failings,

    but it appears persistent offenders have scant regard for ASBO's just like they have scant regard for police, PCSO's and the community. And no doubt scant regard for carrying ID cards. But wait will they have to carry one, and at what age ?
    I'm not suggesting the police are perfect by nay means - there is racism in the police just as anywhere but I don't think they are as bad as painted. On the whole I think they do a good job.

    ASBO's aren't a cure all or magic formula but they give some leverage and it is part of a process.

    So do you not want them to be able to remove undesirables from the street? Do you not see youth antisocial behaviour is a major issue at the moment?

    My son's friend was kicked and beaten to death a while back in what police described as one of the most horrendous attacks they had seen - why? Because the lads didn't like what she was wearing! Now said gang of lads had been running wild for a long time but the police struggled to nail them cos their "civil liberties" were protected - with more power a lovely young woman could have still been enjoying her life but hey it's ok - the lads civil liberties weren't infringed so it's doesn't matter.

  12. #72

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Kendal
    Posts
    1,555
    Thank Post
    112
    Thanked 177 Times in 144 Posts
    Rep Power
    72
    Quote Originally Posted by localzuk View Post
    What about those who aren't being 'anti-social'? ie. The majority. They all get affected by these things. The thing is, the police could move groups of kids who were breaking the law on before the ASBO legislation came in.
    By that logic we don't need most legislation - after all the majority don't do it.
    Legislation only exists to act against the minority!

  13. #73

    localzuk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Minehead
    Posts
    18,157
    Thank Post
    522
    Thanked 2,552 Times in 1,981 Posts
    Blog Entries
    24
    Rep Power
    877
    Quote Originally Posted by jcollings View Post
    I'm not suggesting the police are perfect by nay means - there is racism in the police just as anywhere but I don't think they are as bad as painted. On the whole I think they do a good job.
    Like the Manchester police being described as 'institutionally racist'?

    So do you not want them to be able to remove undesirables from the street? Do you not see youth antisocial behaviour is a major issue at the moment?
    Not if it means the police have the power to move on *all* groups regardless of whether or not they have actually done anything wrong. And no, I don't see youth anti-social behaviour as a major issue. I see it as a normal issue that has been the same for the last several generations. I see it as an issue which the media is blowing out of proportion and is scaring people more than reality.

    My son's friend was kicked and beaten to death a while back in what police described as one of the most horrendous attacks they had seen - why? Because the lads didn't like what she was wearing! Now said gang of lads had been running wild for a long time but the police struggled to nail them cos their "civil liberties" were protected - with more power a lovely young woman could have still been enjoying her life but hey it's ok - the lads civil liberties weren't infringed so it's doesn't matter.
    A terrible situation that shouldn't have happened, but these sort of things happened in the past, and were dealt with without ASBOs, ID cards or DNA databases. (eg. my ex was beaten up quite savagely when she was in school as the attackers saw her as a 'goth'. And this was 12 years ago). The police *could* have done something, if they had put their minds to it, and had the funding, rather than having it directed at pointless pet projects of our government, such as those fake cops who have no real use.

    Quote Originally Posted by jcollings View Post
    By that logic we don't need most legislation - after all the majority don't do it.
    Legislation only exists to act against the minority!
    Huh? I don't understand. The legislation we were discussing gives the police power to move *all* people on, regardless of their behaviour. That is not the same as legislation which, say, could have allowed the police to move on groups who had been reported as having been abusive, or those who were drinking etc...

  14. #74

    GrumbleDook's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Gosport, Hampshire
    Posts
    9,992
    Thank Post
    1,359
    Thanked 1,828 Times in 1,135 Posts
    Blog Entries
    19
    Rep Power
    602
    I have kept out of this conversation for a number of reasons.

    Misconceptions, part-truths, clashes of ideology, and many more reasons.

    There are a number of members here who have already been down that ID card route, including where it is a punishable offence to refused to produced it when asked (please note ... asked) by those with authority to request you to produce it. This was a volountary scheme that was part of our contract of employment. We did not have to be employed by this employer ... but we chose it and all the stuff that went with it.

    I might even be fairly unique amongst members in being employed to request individuals to produce ID cards and subsequently dealing with those that refuse or prevent others from producing their ID.

    HM Forces and many sections of Govt employment require you to have an ID card. It is a recognised official form of ID and can be used in replacement of both Driving licence and passport when required. It is linked in with medical, financial and personal records of the holders.

    The main reasons why this differs from the 'National ID card' is that the latter is not by choice. That is pretty much it ... there are many laws in place already for authorised officials to request your identity. PACE puts the onus on the individual to prove their identity yet on gives the noted authority to pursue it further if there is evidence that activities have taken place, are in the process of taking place or are going to take place (the term 'going equipped' becomes relevant at this point). If there is no evidence that it should not be pursued.

    The main worries by those against the programme vary. I really do mean vary ....

    The main issue would appear to be the worry of abuse of data and information ... but this is a bit of a catch all.

    Let's look at profiling. The activity of identifying 'possible' suspects based on previous activities and 'background' factors. Those background factors vary from country to country but include socio-economic factors, racial factors, academic factors and peer factors (these four factors are usualyl broken down into many sub-factors). These obviously raise many concerns and they are presently used in anti-terrorist investigations and child exploitation investigations to mention just few areas. Whilst we would say that this is reasonable, it can lead to mistakes ... and many regard the risks to those who are innocent to be greater than the risks to potential victims. This analysis of risk is usually done behind closed doors, and if it is done for political reasons then there is always the concern that the executive principle comes into play (ie it is purely one person's decision ... and as we all know, to err is human!)

    We then move on to fraud.

    Can we honestly say that the system is not open to fraud. We all know that passports and driving licences are susceptible to fraud. This has not been addressed sufficiently to make many of the detractors feel assured that there are sufficient safeguards in place to ensure that an uber-database will not have the same issues ... or even worse, that it could make the system easier to break.

    Then we have civil rights. The arguement of if you have nothing to hide then you are ok ... It all depends on what you are hiding. Presently it is not illegal to be a carrier of defective genes that mean you are likely to pass on to your children ... what happens if this changes in the future? To give over *all* of your information (remembering that whilst the human genome may be mapped, we do not know if we are right about what things do with the things we do actually know about) seems a little extreme to some people. When you are applying for a mortgage do you really want the bank to know you had an overdraft as a student? You tend to give over the information that is needed and not a jot more. It is up to those asking for information to get what they need ... and showing need is important.

    I am sure that this conversation can go on ... and on ... and on .... and on ...

    For those that are anti-ID card then there are plenty of public groups out there that you can get involved in ... if you are pro-ID card there are also groups that meet your need too ...

    The only important thing that *both* groups need to remember is that we need to ensure that this is a *public* debate due to the fact that it involves us all ...

  15. #75

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Kendal
    Posts
    1,555
    Thank Post
    112
    Thanked 177 Times in 144 Posts
    Rep Power
    72
    Well I've had enough now - I think Tony's post is excellent and perhaps the right place to lock and end the thread?

SHARE:
+ Post New Thread
Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Very Young Edugeekers
    By witch in forum Comments and Suggestions
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: 17th December 2007, 01:54 PM
  2. Do it for the children
    By alexknight in forum Other Stuff
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 22nd May 2007, 08:42 AM
  3. Police and Justice Bill 2006
    By Geoff in forum School ICT Policies
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 12th November 2006, 08:04 AM
  4. Changes to the Police and Justice Bill
    By Geoff in forum School ICT Policies
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 1st February 2006, 12:47 PM
  5. Why do the good die young?!
    By Dos_Box in forum General Chat
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 30th August 2005, 08:18 AM

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •