UK Politics

[jerseydevil]

Originally Posted by sun-star

Well, James I didn't like it back in 1604 But seriously (speaking from complete ignorance), maybe we haven't been aware of the dangers of smoking for very long. Advances in medical knowledge have over time revealed more accurate causes of death, I assume.

I'm not too sure of that - there is a letter that Churchills mother wrote to him when he was 15 or 16 when he started smoking - telling him how deadly it was and that she wished he would stop. We've known for a VERY long time that smoking kills - maybe not all the damage it does, but I think that hardly matters.

[Dwarven Sen]

Congrats on post quota.

That was pretty much all I did understand of the last post. Sorry, I may enjoy watching and learning about US politics, but most of it is still beyond me. Besides this is a UK politics thread. If you're going to criticise anyone, criticise us.

[sun-star]

Well, like I said I'm speaking from medical ignorance. I know that smoking has often been considered a "filthy habit", definitely not something to do in front of the ladies, and not something real gentleman did either (I'm mainly talking 19th century here). People may well have distrusted it - whether they knew the precise health risks is another question. Maybe inked will know the answer.

[Dwarven Sen]

I was told in A level biology that it's only because people have been living longer that we've noticed the long term effects that their lifestyle can have, ie, cancer. Personally I don't want to live beyond 60, so I'm just going to light up...

[sun-star]

Originally Posted by inked

Yes, well, as an unreconstructed Southerner in the USA, I can tell you by cultural witness that the most dread words in America are "We are from the government and we are here to help you!" Their imposition of of Reconstruction and its aftermath were once reason for Woodrow Wilson's opposition to the draconian measures of vengeful Europe after WWI. Even Churchill noted the fact, IIRC. Not that that stopped the vengeance. And what'd you get? Hitler and the Third Reich! Fortunately the lessons were learned better 2nd time around! Why Germany's division into Russian and American and French and British sectors even slowed the process down until the fall of the Berlin Wall! How's it doing now?

Okay... You're saying Woodrow Wilson wanted to reconstruct Germany and Europe peacefully because of a history of state interference in the US?

(NB: vengeful France, if you please, not the whole of Europe. Lloyd George sided with Wilson as far as he was politically able)

NOTE: 400th post, let's all go off to the Teacup Cafe for a nooner recap of brekker, eh?

If it's still there It's nearly dinner time for me, but have fun with your party (they throw good parties over there)

[jerseydevil]

Originally Posted by Dwarven Sen

Congrats on post quota.

That was pretty much all I did understand of the last post. Sorry, I may enjoy watching and learning about US politics, but most of it is still beyond me. Besides this is a UK politics thread. If you're going to criticise anyone, criticise us.

Well yes it is the UK thread - but then the discussion had gone onto smoking and stuff. I didn't mean to sound mean - it's just that I hear it all the time where people say the US had a "democratic government" or a "Republican government". We don't - the president is only one small part of our government. He has his administration - that is all - which is made up of his cabinet. So right now - it can be called a "Republican Administration" - during Clinton - it was a "Democrat Administration". Hope this helps and sorry if I sounded mean.

Here's something I criticise the UK for - your damn surveillence cameras on the streets. Talk about the beginnings of big brother.

[inked]

I wasn't trying for quota, but just happened to notice it when earlier today I reminded Nurv of my location!

Now, the world's (not just the UK, but the entire world's) problems are all due to one, and only one cause. LIFE.

LIFE is a 100% terminal SEXUALLY-TRANSMITTED disease.

If the governments of GB et alia can eliminate sex, within one generation they will have eliminated poverty, war, crime, disease, and the whole host of problems associated with verminous humans. Such a solution would be the ultimate in
EQUALITY - social/political/gender/legal/et cetera ad nauseum discriminations
would be eliminated;
JUSTICE - same principle applied to everyone ('course the next generation won't gripe 'cause it won't exist);
LIBERTY - all existent humans will be able to choose their final destination
(pardon me for suggesting there are two!).

So, eh? Shall we have GB apply the concept first and observe? Surely someone in your nanny-state will see the proposal and seek to act on it?

[jerseydevil]

Originally Posted by inked

So, eh? Shall we have GB apply the concept first and observe? Surely someone in your nanny-state will see the proposal and seek to act on it?

Might I suggest France instead - we sort of need Britain in our fight against terrorism. Let's do the experiment in a country that always gives us problems instead.

[Nurvingiel]

Originally Posted by jerseydevil

Here's something I criticise the UK for - your damn surveillence cameras on the streets. Talk about the beginnings of big brother.

Why don't you like the surveillence cameras JD? There are already cameras in many different kinds of stores. And people can already see you when you're outside. If they were in people's homes (ie. a private place as opposed to a public place) then there would be a problem.

[Telcontar_Dunedain]

These tapes help solve crimes that otherwise wouldn't have been solved and some of these are extremly serious eg. murders

[jerseydevil]

Originally Posted by Nurvingiel

Why don't you like the surveillence cameras JD? There are already cameras in many different kinds of stores.

Stores are private property - but it is one of the reasons I have boycotted Wal-Mart for over 5 years.

And people can already see you when you're outside. If they were in people's homes (ie. a private place as opposed to a public place) then there would be a problem.

Soo - hmmm - how do you know they aren't looking through the windows? Or how do you know that there isn't someone in the control room that is for whatever reason - very interested in you and watches when you come and go outside your house, apartment, knows your license plate number, etc. Just becuase your visible outside - does not mean that cameras should be used like that.

[jerseydevil]

Originally Posted by Telcontar_Dunedain

These tapes help solve crimes that otherwise wouldn't have been solved and some of these are extremly serious eg. murders

Doesn't mean they should be on the street. As Bejamin Franklin said - "Those who would give up freedom for security deserve neither".

NOTE: i have no problem with private companies or businesses choosing to use cameras - I do have a problem with the government doing it. It's like those ridiculous speed trap things they have in france where there isn't even a cop - just a machine on the side of the road that records the speed and issues the tickets.

[Telcontar_Dunedain]

Yet with out them criminals would be more at large as there is less of a chance of catching them and having a posotive ID and solid evidence.

[jerseydevil]

Originally Posted by Telcontar_Dunedain

Yet with out them criminals would be more at large as there is less of a chance of catching them and having a posotive ID and solid evidence.

Well if that's the case - then why don't we let the government wire our houses and all businesses and then there won't be criminals abe to plan or anything that. What is the next step after the cameras on the streets?

[Telcontar_Dunedain]

Camera's aren't needed in houses as there are cameras in office blocks, car parks, shops etc. Most places are covered with some sort of security, usually cameras.

[jerseydevil]

Originally Posted by Telcontar_Dunedain

Camera's aren't needed in houses as there are cameras in office blocks, car parks, shops etc. Most places are covered with some sort of security, usually cameras.

Those are all private companies and businesses - I'm talking about the ones that just monitor sidewalks and things - that the government sets up. See that's the difference between the US and Europe - we value our freedom and privacy more I think. In Jersey City or one of New Jersey's northern cities - they had set up cameras to monitor this street corner - there was such a huge ourcry - they were forced to remove it.

With New Jersey's EZ-Pass system - it is written into the law that it can NOT be used for law enforcement or speed control. It would be very easy for them to calculate when a car enters a toll plaza and exits when they get off - and thus calculate their speed. It was a HUGE concern here and the citizens fought to have is stated that EZ-Pass can not be used in that way.

We do have cameras on highways that are STATIONARY which you can use to see how traffic is - basic webcams - I have no problems with those - they don't zoom in or out on license plates, they just monitor traffic.

BTW - I'm not necessarily talking about cameras in houses - what about just monitoring equipment to listen in on people's conversations. That way if a crime occurs - the police can be right there, or if someone discusses the crime - they'll be able to act. No where to run, no where to hide when big brother is looking over your shoulder 24/7.

[Telcontar_Dunedain]

Well I personally would prefer to lose the little privacy that you lose from CCTV camera's and feel safe than vice versa, I'm sure there are Brits that agree and some that disagree with me.

[jerseydevil]

Originally Posted by Telcontar_Dunedain

Well I personally would prefer to lose the little privacy that you lose from CCTV camera's and feel safe than vice versa, I'm sure there are Brits that agree and some that disagree with me.

My argument is what's the next privacy area or freedom you are willing to give up for a false sense of security? And I do think it's a false sense of security.

[Nurvingiel]

Originally Posted by jerseydevil

Stores are private property - but it is one of the reasons I have boycotted Wal-Mart for over 5 years.

But later you say that you don't have a problem with private businesses using cameras. (I don't have a problem with you boycotting Wal-mart, I'm just confused by the two statements.)

Originally Posted by jerseydevil

Soo - hmmm - how do you know they aren't looking through the windows? Or how do you know that there isn't someone in the control room that is for whatever reason - very interested in you and watches when you come and go outside your house, apartment, knows your license plate number, etc. Just becuase your visible outside - does not mean that cameras should be used like that.

We're talking about the government here. They already know your liscence plate number, age, income etc. etc. It's not wrong of them to know that, but it would be wrong if they used it to discriminate against you in some way.
Similarly, it would be wrong if the cameras were pointed into people's windows, but not if they automatically took a picture of anyone running a red light at an intersection, for example.

Are the cameras in Britain proposed or already in place? What are/will they be used for?

[sun-star]

Do you not trust your government, JD?