Control Freaks and Snoopers

Further to my remarks earlier today regarding government snooping on our electronic communications, we are given a prime example of just why this law enforcer’s wet dream is such a bad idea.

Chief Constable Mick Creedon, the national spokesman for serious organised crime, said officers should use the powers, aimed at serious crime and terrorism, to access the phone records of drivers who pose a risk.

Who pose a risk” –  not, “have committed crimes”, but “who pose a risk”. According to whom, one wonders? So there you have it, if the great and the good –  as decided by, er, well, the great and the good, one presumes –  you are deemed to pose a risk, well, you are to be spied upon and your life laid bare for their titillation scrutiny.

Let us remind ourselves what the home secretary et al are saying, shall we?

The government said that updated legislation to take account of new technology was vital in the fight against criminals and terrorists.

Yet this is being contradicted by a man who represents a private company (ACPO). Either that or drivers who pose a risk are indeed terrorists and criminals…

Mr Hogan-Howe warned in a national newspaper that police being able to access phone, email and internet records was a “matter of life and death”.

Well, yes, and if it saves only one life…

If you have been following the decline of liberty in our country as it is gradually eroded by the control freaks and their useful idiots, you may notice, like those who have been observing the tobacco control puritans, a theme that is all too familiar. We see the same tired clichés being trotted out to justify each turn of the screw –  and if you complain? Well, nothing to hide, nothing to fear of course.

Asked whether that would be proportionate, he said: “If I am driving on the motorway and I see someone on a phone and texting at 80mph that, for me, would pass the test immediately.”

That would be a “no”, then.

9 comments for “Control Freaks and Snoopers

  1. June 15, 2012 at 6:20 pm

    Welcome to the world of ‘pre-crime’. I am sure that a certain old chestnut will be rolled out with respect to those who oppose the general extension of snooping powers: if you have nothing to hide, why do you fear this? Well . . .

  2. Greg Tingey
    June 15, 2012 at 8:05 pm

    The answer to anyone who trots out “Nothing to hide” is …
    “And your teenage daugter’s phone number is … & her route to school is …..”

    • June 16, 2012 at 6:31 am


  3. john in cheshire
    June 15, 2012 at 8:46 pm

    So, who is originally asking for this kind of surveillance legislation? I am supposing it is coming from the police themselves. In normal times anyone who suggested this kind of thing would be ridiculed and have their career abruptly brought to a halt. That it is not only suggested, but is enacted would suggest that the MPs are too fearful of the civil servants and the police to vote against it.

    • June 16, 2012 at 6:32 am

      I doubt it’s coming from the bobby on the beat. Probably isn’t even coming from the CID guys in the office.

      But the ACPO top brass? Oh, yes. It’s coming from them.

  4. Bemused
    June 16, 2012 at 6:37 am

    They do say that people who crave power are by definition the very people that should never have it, under any circumstance. The lust for control and power is insatiable. Total airtight control of everyone and everything is impossible. Therefore the ever tightening screw will be ever tightened until breaking point is reached, then and only then will some semblance of sanity and freedom return. The price as always will be paid in blood and pain.
    Untill the breaking point is reached the common man will endure humiliation heaped upon humiliation without even realising he has sold his self respect for a few worthless pennies and a weekly dose of the cringe factor.

  5. June 16, 2012 at 6:38 am

    And over in the People’s Republic of Wales, the police have such a strong grip on the ear of the legislation-makers, they can apparently go for broke:

    “The move sees under-16s who are without an adult or parent being barred from the streets of Bangor, Gwynedd, between 9pm and 6am for six months.

    Police inspector Simon Barrasford said: “Dispersal orders have proved an effective weapon against anti-social behaviour in other parts of the force and can demonstrate how partnership working can be most effective.

    “Many people are working very hard to improve and regenerate the city centre as well as just wanting to enjoy their daily lives without being intimidated or harassed and I have no doubt dispersal orders areas will assist in that endeavour.

    “Drinking in public has an adverse effect not only on visitors’ perception but also on the quality of life of residents. Working closely with our partners in the local authorities I’m confident that we can have a positive impact on the area.”…”

    What’s the Welsh for ‘Papiere Bitte!’? I think they might soon need it if Barrasford isn’t slapped down, and slapped down hard.

  6. Greg Tingey
    June 16, 2012 at 12:42 pm

    And if they’ve been visiting friends, or been to a concert, or have worked late, and they NEED to pass through the town (Bangor) centre to get home ……

    This is just the N Welsh christians in the loose again, isn’t it?
    They had to be forced to allow Sunday pub-opening IIRC.
    Nasty little puritan control-freaks

  7. John
    June 17, 2012 at 8:59 pm

    What Chief Constable Creedon fails to mention is that the example he has given:
    a) Is illegal already.
    b) Would not be prevented by the change in law he proposes

    Clearly a bit of a fuckwitted answer then, Chief Constable. Would you be surprised if based on that statement members of the public might wonder if you had the intelligence to command in the Police force?

Comments are closed.