Turn on thread page Beta

Conservatives to introduce "snoopers charter" watch

    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    And this time, there will be no Liberal Democrats to block it. A sad day for democracy. I used to support spying but i've changed my mind after reflection.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Christ, how can people complain about this? Do you really think the government gives two ***** about you sending nudes to your boyfriend or what your darkest fetishes are? No, would be the correct answer.
    The only way this will effect you is if you have any intentions of carrying out acts of terrorism, which I hope you don't.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by the bear)
    i know that statement is false because i would not ever watch one of those vile films.
    Of course it's false, I didn't literally mean everyone, but I allowed myself to make this huge generalisation to emphasise the point that surveillance which imposes legal liability upon an individual is bad. I'm white Finnish Christian and I've watched Jihadi John, I don't want to be a terrorist - sooner would be a security agent, so did Obama, so did everyone else. We cannot prosecute people for this, or for anything else that I've stated in my previous post, through the use of 'snoopers charter' as it misses the prescribed objective of the law.

    The trouble is that there are so many gray areas so even if 'snoopers charter' was to be limited just to 'acts of terrorism' and 'organised crime' we would still prosecute trolls for sex chats, hardcore pornography or Islamophobia.
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by William Pitt)
    Of course it's false, I didn't literally mean everyone, but I allowed myself to make this huge generalisation to emphasise the point that surveillance which imposes legal liability upon an individual is bad. I'm white Finnish Christian and I've watched Jihadi John, I don't want to be a terrorist - sooner would be a security agent, so did Obama, so did everyone else. We cannot prosecute people for this, or for anything else that I've stated in my previous post, through the use of 'snoopers charter' as it misses the prescribed objective of the law.

    The trouble is that there are so many gray areas so even if 'snoopers charter' was to be limited just to 'acts of terrorism' and 'organised crime' we would still prosecute trolls for sex chats, hardcore pornography or Islamophobia.
    these terror chaps spoil the internet for everyone else
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    I'm not ok with this. Just because I've nothing to hide doesn't mean I want the government to spy on me. I don't care if they care what I'm looking at or not.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rakas21)
    The security services are not going to be bothered about your dodgy porn habits. They are far more concerned with the people who might be viewing ISIS videos or posting sympathetic messages for example.
    I watched the Nigerian pilot debacle [not a sympathiser of course]…time to emigrate :coat:
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Smash Bandicoot)
    I watched the Nigerian pilot debacle [not a sympathiser of course]…time to emigrate :coat:
    Unless you then followed a pattern of behavior of affiliating or sympathizing i would not worry.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The Wavefunction)
    Christ, how can people complain about this? Do you really think the government gives two ***** about you sending nudes to your boyfriend or what your darkest fetishes are? No, would be the correct answer.
    The only way this will effect you is if you have any intentions of carrying out acts of terrorism, which I hope you don't.
    wouldn't be surprised if they snoop on dark fetishes
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Smash Bandicoot)
    wouldn't be surprised if they snoop on dark fetishes
    Well, obviously if your thing is necrophelia or pedophilia then you will most likely get a knock on the door, but I meant more if its 'a legal fetish that you wouldn't reeky want your friends finding out about"
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The Wavefunction)
    Well, obviously if your thing is necrophelia or pedophilia then you will most likely get a knock on the door, but I meant more if its 'a legal fetish that you wouldn't reeky want your friends finding out about"
    I have had to do a quick minesweep of Google with my step mum coming around and Dad wanting to use the laptop for Skype, let's put it that way
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rakas21)
    As far as i understand it, these powers will be for the security services and things relating to terrorism rather than general police monitoring.
    But they used Blair era laws relating to terrorism to snoop on that one family they thought might be sending their kids to school in the wrong catchment area. I don’t trust them an inch and fear government snooping far more than terrorism. What about how the police routinely infiltrate perfectly innocent environmental pressure groups, trade unions, student activists etc? The establishment is beyond paranoid about these sorts of groups because they know their own narrative is *******s held together by string, hope, fear and a few strips of newspaper
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Smash Bandicoot)
    I have had to do a quick minesweep of Google with my step mum coming around and Dad wanting to use the laptop for Skype, let's put it that way
    Why doesn't the troglodyte have his own? Why don't you just give him a separate account?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MatthewParis)
    This is the one Conservative policy I actually support

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft_C...ions_Data_Bill

    It's a bit silly to call it a "snoopers charter"; it's giving our security agencies the powers they need to fight terrorism and organised crime.

    The internet is the primary arena of modern warfare and crime, and if we want our security agencies to be able to fight effectively in that arena, then they need the right range of tools and sensors, in the same way that we install the right kind of radar on a fast jet.
    I support that too. Do you know what else I support?

    Bedroom tax
    Lowering taxes for the rich
    EU referendum- preferably leaving
    Extreme welfare cuts
    Forcing disabled and unemployed to work or face cuts in there benefits
    Reward hard working people
    Punish benefit scroungers
    English votes for English laws
    Scrapping of 1998 human rights act in favour of a british bill of rights
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    I agree with a lot of Conservative policies but I hate, hate this. And no I'm not a terrorist.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The two eds)
    I support that too. Do you know what else I support?

    Bedroom tax
    Lowering taxes for the rich
    EU referendum- preferably leaving
    Extreme welfare cuts
    Forcing disabled and unemployed to work or face cuts in there benefits
    Reward hard working people
    Punish benefit scroungers
    English votes for English laws
    Scrapping of 1998 human rights act in favour of a british bill of rights
    With all due respect, is this sarcasm?

    If so let me add my own: raising tuition fee's and making the future generation incur even more debt, while pretending to be a party of lowering debt and taxes - how clever!
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    The only way to guarantee the disabled/unemployed get jobs is to offer them public sector jobs. FWIW I can't remember the reasoning now (maybe someone who studies economics can help me), but 0% unemployment is apparently unachievable.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The two eds)
    Forcing disabled to work or face cuts in there benefits
    I think we should punish anyone who confuses "there" and "their". It's a shockingly unlettered blunder, if I were your parents I'd be demanding a refund of your school fees

    In any case, on the substance of your rant; how can you force disabled people to work? Will you starve a man in a wheelchair because he cannot work on the shopfloor of Sainsbury's?

    This is "compassionate conservatism"
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by redferry)
    As someone who works in the environment I'm worried it will be used against me as it has been on Canada.

    Ditto for my dad, who works for a trade union. As a child we always had a phone tap on our house phone, my dad had nothing to hide, and I bet they had fun listening to my gran prattle on for hours, but its not nice knowing you're under surveillance.
    I agree.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The two eds)
    It does not matter because at the end of the today you will be the one waking up to a Tory majority for the next 5 years and depending on how the referendum turns out, a potential union out outside the EU. It is quite possible hell for a Labour supporter and therefore heaven for me
    Is that an admission that you are completely incapable of defending the position you asserted so recently?

    In respect of hell for a Labour supporter, it makes no difference to me if the Tories are in power. I own my own house in central London; as they say, I'm alright Jack.

    I'm rather looking forward to the challenge of the next five years, that's what politics is all about. And it's going to be far from splendid for the Tories; you are obviously rather ignorant of British political history and don't know about the Maastricht rebels. With a very small majority, Cameron will be held to ransom by right-wing extremists.

    As we go up to and past the EU referendum, sensible free market liberals who vote Tory will see that the Conservatives have become an extremist party, and drift back to a New New Labour Party under Dan Jarvis.

    What is quite funny is that you seem to think that by the Conservatives winning, you personally have won a great victory. In reality, you're a nobody in the sticks. And from what we can see, you are purely interested in politics as a horse race rather than as a battle of ideas.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rakas21)
    The security services are not going to be bothered about your dodgy porn habits. They are far more concerned with the people who might be viewing ISIS videos or posting sympathetic messages for example.
    And even then, the Security Services are probably less bothered about people looking at that stuff as they are about people who are using the internet to actually communicate with ISIS, or plan terrorist attacks
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
Turn on thread page Beta
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: May 10, 2015

3,722

students online now

800,000+

Exam discussions

Find your exam discussion here

Poll
Should predicted grades be removed from the uni application process
Useful resources

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.