4 ms·

This is utterly unacceptable. Time for the electorate to put their foot down and set an example by disbanding the entire force and replace it with a new one. B

by Darthy 9y ago

This is utterly unacceptable. Time for the electorate to put their foot down and set an example by disbanding the entire force and replace it with a new one. But guess what the electorate will say? "They only came for the Socialists. I'm not a Socialist". Sad times.

droopyEyelids 9y ago
Actually the proper way to refer to people in GB is "subjects". Not Citizens, not "the electorate," rather "Her Majesty's Subjects". Edit- Superficially wrong about this (the requirement for this nomenclature changed, but it's still acceptable usage). However, I think I'm right in the effect, as: >The concept of a subject remains in the law, and the terms the Queen's subjects, Her Majesty's subjects, etc., remain in use in British legal discourse.
- blibble 9y ago
  this hasn't been true since 1983 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_subject#After_1983 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_subject#After_1983
sien 9y ago
The intelligence services have been doing this forever in most countries. If you don't know about it you're not paying attention. Here is PJ O'Rourke writing about this in the 1960s in the US. https://books.google.com.au/books?id=WEmN1ZKrYpsC&lpg=PA238&ots=cq0fdzd2DY&dq=pj%20orourke%20undercover%20police&pg=PA238#v=onepage&q=pj%20orourke%20undercover%20police&f=false https://books.google.com.au/books?id=WEmN1ZKrYpsC&lpg=PA238&... People don't just don't care that much. It is worth worrying about though. With the NSA and computer surviellance we've created a 'turn-key tyranny'. And people have been worrying about that since at least the 1970s: http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2012/04/influential-senator-warned-in-1975-the-national-security-agencys-capability-at-any-time-could-be-turned-around-on-the-american-people-and-no-american-would-have-any-privacy-left.html http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2012/04/influential-senator-w...
- fredley 9y ago
  What about Intelligence services? This is a local police force!
  - foldr 9y ago
    I guess you could technically call the Met a "local" police force, but remember that the UK doesn't have a local/federal distinction. The Met in some of its functions is roughly comparable to the FBI.
  - DanBC 9y ago
    Police have their own intelligence services in the form of "special branch". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_Branch https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_Branch
    - walshemj 9y ago
      There has always been a tension between the Met and the security service with the Met trying to get more powers in that area - even the Official Mi5 history comments on it.
- TheRealDunkirk 9y ago
  > People don't just don't care that much. While I concur that many people have the "but I'm not doing anything wrong" mentality, even if you do care, you have no influence on the situation. Both of our 2 parties are apparently happy to let the intelligence agencies trample the 4th Amendment. It takes an odd duck like Ron Paul (http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-06-11/ron-paul-warns-electronic-surveillance-back-1984 http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-06-11/ron-paul-warns-elec...) to actually stand up to such things. We need more of these kinds of voices in our political system, which is why I vote Libertarian in any race I can.
- ethics_gradient 9y ago
  >People don't just don't care that much. Well, it's not easy to understand. At times they've cared enough to extract meaningful change, so we shouldn't assume that that will never happen again. If you ask them privacy questions phrased in the right ways (I mean for clarity, not trick questions), they will often be pro-privacy. Also, as Schneier says, we're relatively new to the internet. Who says people won't come to understand it, and the privacy issues that come along with it, better? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0XF2EL43S8E https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0XF2EL43S8E
fredley 9y ago
Not "Socialists", "Saboteurs": https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C9wUH7PXkAUypzc.jpg https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C9wUH7PXkAUypzc.jpg

by Darthy 9y ago

droopyEyelids 9y ago

Actually the proper way to refer to people in GB is "subjects". Not Citizens, not "the electorate," rather "Her Majesty's Subjects". Edit- Superficially wrong about this (the requirement for this nomenclature changed, but it's still acceptable usage). However, I think I'm right in the effect, as: >The concept of a subject remains in the law, and the terms the Queen's subjects, Her Majesty's subjects, etc., remain in use in British legal discourse.

blibble 9y ago
this hasn't been true since 1983 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_subject#After_1983 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_subject#After_1983

sien 9y ago

The intelligence services have been doing this forever in most countries. If you don't know about it you're not paying attention. Here is PJ O'Rourke writing about this in the 1960s in the US. https://books.google.com.au/books?id=WEmN1ZKrYpsC&lpg=PA238&ots=cq0fdzd2DY&dq=pj%20orourke%20undercover%20police&pg=PA238#v=onepage&q=pj%20orourke%20undercover%20police&f=false https://books.google.com.au/books?id=WEmN1ZKrYpsC&lpg=PA238&... People don't just don't care that much. It is worth worrying about though. With the NSA and computer surviellance we've created a 'turn-key tyranny'. And people have been worrying about that since at least the 1970s: http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2012/04/influential-senator-warned-in-1975-the-national-security-agencys-capability-at-any-time-could-be-turned-around-on-the-american-people-and-no-american-would-have-any-privacy-left.html http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2012/04/influential-senator-w...

fredley 9y ago
What about Intelligence services? This is a local police force!
- foldr 9y ago
  I guess you could technically call the Met a "local" police force, but remember that the UK doesn't have a local/federal distinction. The Met in some of its functions is roughly comparable to the FBI.
- DanBC 9y ago
  Police have their own intelligence services in the form of "special branch". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_Branch https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_Branch
  - walshemj 9y ago
    There has always been a tension between the Met and the security service with the Met trying to get more powers in that area - even the Official Mi5 history comments on it.
TheRealDunkirk 9y ago
> People don't just don't care that much. While I concur that many people have the "but I'm not doing anything wrong" mentality, even if you do care, you have no influence on the situation. Both of our 2 parties are apparently happy to let the intelligence agencies trample the 4th Amendment. It takes an odd duck like Ron Paul (http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-06-11/ron-paul-warns-electronic-surveillance-back-1984 http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-06-11/ron-paul-warns-elec...) to actually stand up to such things. We need more of these kinds of voices in our political system, which is why I vote Libertarian in any race I can.
ethics_gradient 9y ago
>People don't just don't care that much. Well, it's not easy to understand. At times they've cared enough to extract meaningful change, so we shouldn't assume that that will never happen again. If you ask them privacy questions phrased in the right ways (I mean for clarity, not trick questions), they will often be pro-privacy. Also, as Schneier says, we're relatively new to the internet. Who says people won't come to understand it, and the privacy issues that come along with it, better? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0XF2EL43S8E https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0XF2EL43S8E

fredley 9y ago

Not "Socialists", "Saboteurs": https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C9wUH7PXkAUypzc.jpg https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C9wUH7PXkAUypzc.jpg