Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Facial recognition cameras in a police state

I haven't followed all the 15minute cities stuff.

I do know people who are in the conspiracy end of things.

Would not say they are all far right. Came more obvious during pandemic. On some of it I think they have a point.

A more sceptical view of the state does not necessarily mean one is a conspiracy loon.
agree...which is why there mustn't be kneejerk reaction regarding surveillance and ID cards being a right-wing concern
 
Why would I bother explaining why you're wrong when you still haven't bothered to explain why you're right. You made the claim, you back it up.

The reason you're whinging at me about not providing evidence instead of providing any evidence yourself is that you don't have any evidence to support your claim. Because it was, and still is, bullshit.
There is of course a great ton of evidence. For starters there is the way in which the police response to the miners strike was organised, where aspects of the state not usually employed in industrial disputes were deployed against the miners (eg the benefits system) and where a manual of permitted tactics was used, a manual which has never received any democratic sanction via parliament. These means form the basis of national police organisation to this day. E2A and the normal freedom of movement across the country was abridged.

There is the use of surveillance, cctv, anpr, facial recognition. More than a decade ago surveillance scholars wondered if we'd sleep walked into a surveillance society. We're likely the second most surveilled society in the world, after China. And there is fuck all bar cops' consciences controlling the use made of information gathered by electronic surveillance. There's scanty statute law on the subject.

but a police state is not just unaccountable cops monitoring who they like, it's also people's everyday experiences. More than 30 years ago the Hackney community defence association said black communities already lived in a police state. What's happened since then is that it has enveloped the rest of us too. You almost never see cops actually doing anything about crime. Not burglary, not mugging, not the great shoplifting wave across the country - not vawg. What are the cops doing? What is the purpose of the cops if it not the prevention and detection of crime? For me what's happened is the rise of colonial policing in the metropole. The sort of policing formerly used in Hong Kong and Ireland but not here. The aim has shifted from the control of crime to the control of the population. This is why eg the vigil for Sarah Everard was attacked. Any connection between police activity and the solution of crime is purely coincidental. The expansion of police power and their pervasive influence across society - not simply in those sections which might be thought relevant - are what leads to my conclusion we live in a police state and against which your utterly pitiful objections of inefficiency and limited freedom of speech weigh as nothing.
 
We've been a police state for some time now
Usual vacuous drivel.

That's a fucking shoddy post and assumes on the basis of er no fucking evidence whatsoever that in a police state people pointing out it's a police state are nicked. I've asked you twice now - three times including this post - to explain why you disagree with me. It's really weak to post as you do and makes me think you've nothing to offer to this exchange which you started.
Nah - it's you that's as usual spouting a load of crap.
 
If concerns about private liberty include people concerned on the right then good, all the more chance we have of not becoming the tech-surveillance living nightmare that is China. Luckily there's still a lot of resistance to this kind of thing on the continent which gives some sliver of hope

I think the UK is amongst one of the highest countries in the west for state surveillance and we all know that will increase now the government has the excuse to roll out extra powers thanks to these fuckwits.
 
What do you think they do about half brained antisemitic knobs like you?
What a condescending supercilious cunt you are and a liar into the bargain.

You promised me faithfully you would no longer engage with me and here you are again insulting as ever.

Perhaps you have been taking lessons from that arsewipe Pickman's model.
 
What a condescending supercilious cunt you are and a liar into the bargain.

You promised me faithfully you would no longer engage with me and here you are again insulting as ever.

Perhaps you have been taking lessons from that arsewipe Pickman's model.

Antisemitic idiots aren't tolerated here and am quite happy to give it back to you until you are fucked off from here.

I promise you nothing but grim tidings until you're gone.

Every single day. If needs be.
 
What a condescending supercilious cunt you are and a liar into the bargain.

You promised me faithfully you would no longer engage with me and here you are again insulting as ever.

Perhaps you have been taking lessons from that arsewipe Pickman's model.
you're super silly and not in a good way
 

Antisemitic idiots aren't tolerated here and am quite happy to give it back to you until you are fucked off from here.

I promise you nothing but grim tidings until you're gone.

Every single day. If needs be.
For some reason the truth of my posts on certain subjects appears to unduly annoy you.
 
There is of course a great ton of evidence. For starters there is the way in which the police response to the miners strike was organised, where aspects of the state not usually employed in industrial disputes were deployed against the miners (eg the benefits system) and where a manual of permitted tactics was used, a manual which has never received any democratic sanction via parliament. These means form the basis of national police organisation to this day. E2A and the normal freedom of movement across the country was abridged.

There is the use of surveillance, cctv, anpr, facial recognition. More than a decade ago surveillance scholars wondered if we'd sleep walked into a surveillance society. We're likely the second most surveilled society in the world, after China. And there is fuck all bar cops' consciences controlling the use made of information gathered by electronic surveillance. There's scanty statute law on the subject.

but a police state is not just unaccountable cops monitoring who they like, it's also people's everyday experiences. More than 30 years ago the Hackney community defence association said black communities already lived in a police state. What's happened since then is that it has enveloped the rest of us too. You almost never see cops actually doing anything about crime. Not burglary, not mugging, not the great shoplifting wave across the country - not vawg. What are the cops doing? What is the purpose of the cops if it not the prevention and detection of crime? For me what's happened is the rise of colonial policing in the metropole. The sort of policing formerly used in Hong Kong and Ireland but not here. The aim has shifted from the control of crime to the control of the population. This is why eg the vigil for Sarah Everard was attacked. Any connection between police activity and the solution of crime is purely coincidental. The expansion of police power and their pervasive influence across society - not simply in those sections which might be thought relevant - are what leads to my conclusion we live in a police state and against which your utterly pitiful objections of inefficiency and limited freedom of speech weigh as nothing.

TLDR

Not least because it's from the same poster who not that long ago was trying to convince me that Russia isn't a police state.
 
Wasn't Wayne Couzens identified as Sarah Everards killer because of CTTV coverage? Perhaps he would have killed again without it?
 
However you and perhaps others have referred to CCTV as a part of the issue. See #32.
And yeh it is part of the issue. But cctv is never used to stop a crime - as opposed to an incivility - in progress, it is there in practice in part to deter and in part as evidence. But facial recognition is being used in part to apprehend people who haven't done anything yet.
 
And yeh it is part of the issue. But cctv is never used to stop a crime - as opposed to an incivility - in progress, it is there in practice in part to deter and in part as evidence. But facial recognition is being used in part to apprehend people who haven't done anything yet.
So you have no objection to the widespread deployment of CCTV?
 
I remember when I was scoping out Vancouver in 2010 with an old friend who's a political activist. We were walking down Commercial Drive and he goes 'make a guess what's missing'. Took me a moment but it was CCTV cameras.

I'm not in anyway saying Canada is perfect. The Mounties aren't far off a paramilitary unit and it's one of the Five Eyes. But there is a lot less overt surveillance here than the UK.
 
CCTV and facial recognition go hand in hand you clown and I can't understand why a boring old fart such as you should be against it.
Not entirely hand in hand. There are some cctv schemes which use facial recognition but as a proportion of cctv they are almost infinitesimally small. The far greater - 99.9%+ - simply records and is periodically recorded over. Cop use of fr uses vans rather than street cctv cameras on poles. The list of things you can't understand vastly exceeds the list of things you can.
 
Back
Top Bottom