6 ms·

Personally, I find Australian censorship and UK surveillance have already crossed the line. I'm not convinced that censorship ever has benefits, so any cost see

Personally, I find Australian censorship and UK surveillance have already crossed the line. I'm not convinced that censorship ever has benefits, so any cost seems too much. Surveillance helps catch more criminals, but the US hardly has a problem finding people to put behind bars. I don't hate Australian gun control- it is a little overzealous but within reason imo. I'm not someone who values gun ownership, so others might disagree. In the UK, however, https://twitter.com/mayoroflondon/status/982906526334668800 https://twitter.com/mayoroflondon/status/982906526334668800 is a line crossed for me. Even if there is a slippery slope that just ends at those levels, I think we should be fighting it. And it's not clear to me whether the slope does actually stop there, and that the UK and Australia aren't still sliding.

barrkel 5y ago
What happens in practice, is that police stop investigating most crimes where there isn't good CCTV coverage. The cost-benefit tradeoff is much more favourable in surveillance conditions. After a while, the public learns that if they want the police to do something about thefts and robbery, they need to support more cameras. (Victim of one motorbike-jacking, one attempted motorbike jacking and 5 separate motorcycle thefts in London.)
- mikepurvis 5y ago
  I guess I've never been a victim of a major crime, but to the extent that I've been a victim of minor ones (like being harassed or swerved at by drivers while on my bike commute), I've never had success getting an action out of the police even when I can supply helmet cam footage clearly showing the incident. So I can imagine that a person without CCTV footage on their side might be especially inclined to despair, but these experiences have led me to question the worthwhileness of crime-reporting in general.
  - summm 5y ago
    This is a bit special, because you are not real traffic, and in general a nuisance to real traffic. Many police officials still hate bikes.
    - mikepurvis 5y ago
      Yeah, definitely. And a number of the cases I've tried to report have indeed been scenarios where a bike lane actually exists but cars are using it for various purposes— to park in, as a right-side passing lane, as a right-turn lane. Most of which I wouldn't even mind; it's actually correct behaviour to block the bike lane when making a right turn so that you don't accidentally clip a cyclist when making your turn— but it's not correct behaviour to honk at a bike in the bike lane to get out of the way so you can make your right turn, nor is it correct to drive one off the road so you can swerve into the bike lane and use it to pass a column of five cars before your right turn.
- vkou 5y ago
  > What happens in practice, is that police stop investigating most crimes where there isn't good CCTV coverage. The police straight-up don't investigate property crime committed against private individuals, regardless of whether or not CCTV was involved. They write you up a report that you can take to your insurer. This process saves everyone time and money - you, the cops, the courts, the criminal...
  - barrkel 5y ago
    Third party insurance, since theft insurance was too expensive. It's not like a claim would make the insurance cheaper. There's no upside in making the yearly premium £1000+ for a bike worth £2000 or so. It's not quite true that they did nothing. A couple of times they dusted for prints, leaving silvery powder residue. After they found some of my bikes, they moved them into compounds where I had to pay a vehicle transport to get them back. Mostly what they do is write up advice on how to contact Victim Support.
jodrellblank 5y ago
> "In the UK, however, https://twitter.com/mayoroflondon/status/982906526334668800 https://twitter.com/mayoroflondon/status/982906526334668800 is a line crossed for me." "“For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens 'as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone',”" - said UK Prime Minister David Cameron in 2016. ( https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/britain-too-tolerant-and-should-interfere-more-people-s-lives-says-david-cameron-10246517.html https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/britain-too-t... )
int_19h 5y ago
UK is far worse than that, actually: https://twitter.com/mpsregentspark/status/974645778558980096?lang=en https://twitter.com/mpsregentspark/status/974645778558980096... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Powers_of_the_police_in_England_and_Wales#Search_without_arrest https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Powers_of_the_police_in_Englan... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criminal_Justice_and_Public_Order_Act_1994#Key_measures https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criminal_Justice_and_Public_Or... https://www.bbc.com/news/explainers-47475566 https://www.bbc.com/news/explainers-47475566 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-social_behaviour_order https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-social_behaviour_order As for Australian gun control, they banned all semi-autos - that's hardly within reason. But even if it were, now the goalposts are being moved, and there's talk of banning lever-action and pump-action shotguns, on the basis that they're "almost assault weapons". If you want to see a country with reasonable gun control, take a look at Czechia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_law_in_the_Czech_Republic#Current_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_law_in_the_Czech_Republic#... And to be clear, the reason why I call it "reasonable" is not just because it's very liberal, but also because they don't have problems with gun violence regardless - which, IMO, shows just how much all the bans are security theater that doesn't actually address the root causes of such violence.
- nix23 5y ago
  Correct, the availability of guns does not equal violence with guns, one example is Switzerland where nearly every 18-30 yo male has a full automatic assault rifle (aka sturm-gewehr) under his bed, ammunition can be easily obtained at the shooting-range, and nearly no crime is done with it, the illegal obtained handguns are the much bigger problem, and talking about suicide (which i don't see as a criminal act, but a lost chance to help) i think it's much better to shoot you at home then to jump in front of trains.
  - mikepurvis 5y ago
    Switzerland is a common talking point, but the practice and culture of gun ownership there is very different, just one small example: "People who've been convicted of a crime or have an alcohol or drug addiction aren't allowed to buy guns in Switzerland. The law also states that anyone who 'expresses a violent or dangerous attitude' won't be permitted to own a gun. Gun owners who want to carry their weapon for 'defensive purposes' also have to prove they can properly load, unload, and shoot their weapon and must pass a test to get a license." https://www.businessinsider.com/switzerland-gun-laws-rates-of-gun-deaths-2018-2 https://www.businessinsider.com/switzerland-gun-laws-rates-o... https://www.csmonitor.com/World/Europe/2018/0307/Switzerland-has-lots-of-guns.-But-its-gun-culture-takes-different-path-from-US https://www.csmonitor.com/World/Europe/2018/0307/Switzerland... Do these sound like the kinds of regulations that the NRA and typical 2A types could get behind? If not, then it seems to me they're not really interested in following a "Swiss model" and are just making a bad-faith argument based on the top line numbers.

barrkel 5y ago

What happens in practice, is that police stop investigating most crimes where there isn't good CCTV coverage. The cost-benefit tradeoff is much more favourable in surveillance conditions. After a while, the public learns that if they want the police to do something about thefts and robbery, they need to support more cameras. (Victim of one motorbike-jacking, one attempted motorbike jacking and 5 separate motorcycle thefts in London.)

mikepurvis 5y ago
I guess I've never been a victim of a major crime, but to the extent that I've been a victim of minor ones (like being harassed or swerved at by drivers while on my bike commute), I've never had success getting an action out of the police even when I can supply helmet cam footage clearly showing the incident. So I can imagine that a person without CCTV footage on their side might be especially inclined to despair, but these experiences have led me to question the worthwhileness of crime-reporting in general.
- summm 5y ago
  This is a bit special, because you are not real traffic, and in general a nuisance to real traffic. Many police officials still hate bikes.
  - mikepurvis 5y ago
    Yeah, definitely. And a number of the cases I've tried to report have indeed been scenarios where a bike lane actually exists but cars are using it for various purposes— to park in, as a right-side passing lane, as a right-turn lane. Most of which I wouldn't even mind; it's actually correct behaviour to block the bike lane when making a right turn so that you don't accidentally clip a cyclist when making your turn— but it's not correct behaviour to honk at a bike in the bike lane to get out of the way so you can make your right turn, nor is it correct to drive one off the road so you can swerve into the bike lane and use it to pass a column of five cars before your right turn.
vkou 5y ago
> What happens in practice, is that police stop investigating most crimes where there isn't good CCTV coverage. The police straight-up don't investigate property crime committed against private individuals, regardless of whether or not CCTV was involved. They write you up a report that you can take to your insurer. This process saves everyone time and money - you, the cops, the courts, the criminal...
- barrkel 5y ago
  Third party insurance, since theft insurance was too expensive. It's not like a claim would make the insurance cheaper. There's no upside in making the yearly premium £1000+ for a bike worth £2000 or so. It's not quite true that they did nothing. A couple of times they dusted for prints, leaving silvery powder residue. After they found some of my bikes, they moved them into compounds where I had to pay a vehicle transport to get them back. Mostly what they do is write up advice on how to contact Victim Support.

jodrellblank 5y ago

> "In the UK, however, https://twitter.com/mayoroflondon/status/982906526334668800 https://twitter.com/mayoroflondon/status/982906526334668800 is a line crossed for me." "“For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens 'as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone',”" - said UK Prime Minister David Cameron in 2016. ( https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/britain-too-tolerant-and-should-interfere-more-people-s-lives-says-david-cameron-10246517.html https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/britain-too-t... )

int_19h 5y ago

UK is far worse than that, actually: https://twitter.com/mpsregentspark/status/974645778558980096?lang=en https://twitter.com/mpsregentspark/status/974645778558980096... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Powers_of_the_police_in_England_and_Wales#Search_without_arrest https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Powers_of_the_police_in_Englan... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criminal_Justice_and_Public_Order_Act_1994#Key_measures https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criminal_Justice_and_Public_Or... https://www.bbc.com/news/explainers-47475566 https://www.bbc.com/news/explainers-47475566 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-social_behaviour_order https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-social_behaviour_order As for Australian gun control, they banned all semi-autos - that's hardly within reason. But even if it were, now the goalposts are being moved, and there's talk of banning lever-action and pump-action shotguns, on the basis that they're "almost assault weapons". If you want to see a country with reasonable gun control, take a look at Czechia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_law_in_the_Czech_Republic#Current_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_law_in_the_Czech_Republic#... And to be clear, the reason why I call it "reasonable" is not just because it's very liberal, but also because they don't have problems with gun violence regardless - which, IMO, shows just how much all the bans are security theater that doesn't actually address the root causes of such violence.

nix23 5y ago
Correct, the availability of guns does not equal violence with guns, one example is Switzerland where nearly every 18-30 yo male has a full automatic assault rifle (aka sturm-gewehr) under his bed, ammunition can be easily obtained at the shooting-range, and nearly no crime is done with it, the illegal obtained handguns are the much bigger problem, and talking about suicide (which i don't see as a criminal act, but a lost chance to help) i think it's much better to shoot you at home then to jump in front of trains.
- mikepurvis 5y ago
  Switzerland is a common talking point, but the practice and culture of gun ownership there is very different, just one small example: "People who've been convicted of a crime or have an alcohol or drug addiction aren't allowed to buy guns in Switzerland. The law also states that anyone who 'expresses a violent or dangerous attitude' won't be permitted to own a gun. Gun owners who want to carry their weapon for 'defensive purposes' also have to prove they can properly load, unload, and shoot their weapon and must pass a test to get a license." https://www.businessinsider.com/switzerland-gun-laws-rates-of-gun-deaths-2018-2 https://www.businessinsider.com/switzerland-gun-laws-rates-o... https://www.csmonitor.com/World/Europe/2018/0307/Switzerland-has-lots-of-guns.-But-its-gun-culture-takes-different-path-from-US https://www.csmonitor.com/World/Europe/2018/0307/Switzerland... Do these sound like the kinds of regulations that the NRA and typical 2A types could get behind? If not, then it seems to me they're not really interested in following a "Swiss model" and are just making a bad-faith argument based on the top line numbers.