What's the first thing the Conservative Gov do?

[Heracles 417]

What exactly is to be drawn from those statistics when Britons are subject to more electronic and other surveillance than almost any other country?

We don't need compulsory ID cards, it's a waste of money at a time when the country is trying to stave off a huge financial crisis.

Stop trying to pretend that you know anything about Britain. You really don't have a clue.

You are right I don't know much. What I do know is that regardless of you not wanting to go there, there is an exodus of biblical proportion of Brits migrating to AUS.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

You pwned yourself with that one, BY.

60% of the time it works, everytime!

You are right I don't know much. What I do know is that regardless of you not wanting to go there, there is an exodus of biblical proportion of Brits migrating to AUS.

Show me where or why I should give a toss.

[Heracles 417]

Hmmm, the font in that graphic looks awfully familiar. Might that be from the Daily Mail?

I believe it has been shown that the drastic increase in the amount of CCTV image capture the average British resident is subject to on a daily basis has not resulted in any significant rise in public safety or crime detection.

Actually CCTV on public streets is exactly what the US needs. A hell of a lot of many crimes would be foiled with such surveillance.

Show me where or why I should give a toss.

Who gives a ###### what you think? It says something about the way things are run there.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Actually CCTV on public streets is exactly what the US needs. A hell of a lot of many crimes would be foiled with such surveillance.

Who gives a ###### what you think? It says something about the way things are run there.

who gives a #### what YOU think. You want people to believe that ever present CCTV surveillance would be beneficial to reduce crime in the US on the basis of "statistical evidence" that it has little impact on preventing crime in the UK.

That's reasoning that only you could come up with. what a dolt.

Edited May 12, 2010 by Its a MADHOUSE

[elmcitymaven 9,712]

Actually CCTV on public streets is exactly what the US needs. A hell of a lot of many crimes would be foiled with such surveillance.

Why exactly would it be a resounding success here when it has failed to do anything to curb or detect crime in the UK? At best, it has served as a sop to those who feel that at least something is being done; at worst it has been a massive waste of taxpayers' money, leaving aside civil liberties issues.

[Heracles 417]

Why exactly would it be a resounding success here when it has failed to do anything to curb or detect crime in the UK? At best, it has served as a sop to those who feel that at least something is being done; at worst it has been a massive waste of taxpayers' money, leaving aside civil liberties issues.

UK is a different country with different circumstances. We also know little about the system, how it's manned etc.

Just the other week, there was an attempted abduction of kids in the area. Camera surveillance of public streets would given police a head start in solving such crimes.

I cannot see how it would be a waste. Cameras allow police to monitor and record criminal activity; at the very least, aiding in apprehension and prosecution.

You want people to believe that ever present CCTV surveillance would be beneficial to reduce crime in the US on the basis of "statistical evidence" that it has little impact on preventing crime in the UK.

As per usual, you criticize and fail (epically) to provide an alternative of your own. Though, I am sure you will run on some broad-brushed model-esque socioenomics argument.

[Peikko 1,575]

The number of Britons migrating to Australia is around the 30,000 mark, the lowest number since before the first world war when typically around 300,000 people migrated there annually.. Not that it matters anyway without knowing the reasons for the migration - which I am sure are many and varied but have little to do with crime statistics in the UK, especially the massaged statistics that the Daily Mail is so fond of

Edited May 12, 2010 by Madame Cleo

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

CCTV has zero effect on prevention because there are so many camera feeds and so much streaming data that it is impossible, literally impossible to watch it in real time.

The system is run by computers that use algorthims to red flag suspicious activity for human operators to review. That could range from someone having a smoke in an alleyway to someone being murdered and noone would know until after the fact.

[elmcitymaven 9,712]

Furthermore, there is a strong argument that in order to man a significant expansion of CCTV in the US, there would have to be a corresponding expansion in government jobs for people to monitor, analyse and implement information from the cameras. Surely one expects those of a conservative bent to oppose such growth in government.

There is actually surprisingly a lot of information about the monitoring and usage of the UK CCTV system available to even laymen.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

As per usual, you criticize and fail (epically) to provide an alternative of your own. Though, I am sure you will run on some broad-brushed model-esque socioenomics argument.

Erm you aren't putting forward any ideas of your own. All you are doing is saying that comprehensive CCTV coverage is a good idea on the basis of evidence that shows it isn't.

Epic Fail? I'd say so.

[Heracles 417]

The number of Britons migrating to Australia is around the 30,000 mark, the lowest number since before the first world war. Not that it matters anyway without knowing the reasons for the migration - which I am sure are many and varied but have little to do with crime statistics in the UK, especially the massaged statistics that the Daily Mail is so fond of

Actually, 1,153,264 Australian residents were born in the UK.

CCTV has zero effect on prevention because there are so many camera feeds and so much streaming data that it is impossible, literally impossible to watch it in real time.

The system is run by computers that use algorthims to red flag suspicious activity for human operators to review. That could range from someone having a smoke in an alleyway to someone being murdered and noone would know until after the fact.

None whatsoever..

So images of the suspects are useless are they?

Erm you aren't putting forward any ideas of your own. All you are doing is saying that comprehensive CCTV coverage is a good idea on the basis of evidence that shows it isn't.

Nice deflection.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Britain's priority is economic stability, not someone's silly pet project.

[Heracles 417]

Britain's priority is economic stability, not someone's silly pet project.

What do you propose they do to attain economic stability?

[Peikko 1,575]

Actually, 1,153,264 Australian residents were born in the UK.

So what? The point is that to have any relevance to your point, you have to be able to prove that significant numbers of migrants currently leaving the UK are doing so based on their perception that crime in the UK is not being adequately dealt with and that was one of the main reasons for their migration to Australia. If it turns out the the majority of Brits migrate due to watching episodes of Home and Away and thinking it would be cool to live in a surfing village, the numbers of migrants has no relevance whatsoever.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Deflection? You mean like claiming large scale CCTV programs are a good idea without any shred of corroborating proof.

Yeah. Genius

What do you propose they do to attain economic stability?

Tangent Alert!