Turn on thread page Beta

Conservatives to introduce "snoopers charter" watch

    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    I don't know how I feel about this, I mean I understand why this charter is wrong in theory, but it's helpful and as people have already said, I am not a terrorist or a criminal, so I don't have anything to hide so I really couldn't care whether the government sees my emails or my TSR posts... but I understand why this is an invasian of privacy. Truth be told, they probably already snoop on us, whether we like it or not so whether this gets passed or not will make little difference...
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    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.
    For what purpose would it be "used against" you? Can you point to a single example of that happening before?

    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.
    How do you know your phone was tapped? And out of interest, what years (like 1995, 1996 etc) was this occurring?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by driftawaay)
    I don't know how I feel about this, I mean I understand why this charter is wrong in theory, but it's helpful and as people have already said, I am not a terrorist or a criminal, so I don't have anything to hide so I really couldn't care whether the government sees my emails or my TSR posts... but I understand why this is an invasian of privacy. Truth be told, they probably already snoop on us, whether we like it or not so whether this gets passed or not will make little difference...
    I suppose my take is that a lot of people with far-left or far-right views mistakenly think they are far more important than they actually are, and believe this will be used against them.

    While the programme does involve bulk collection, data will only be viewed when the Security Services have a reason to look. Even if MI5/GCHQ had ten times as many analysts as they do, they wouldn't have enough manpower to look through everyone's stuff. This is about providing the tools so that they are able to look at persons of interest in terrorism and counter-intelligence investigations.

    For the most part, MI5 does not care if you are a member of the Green Party or you watch gay wrestling porn or something like that. What they care about are things like people planning to set off a bomb in central London, or behead a soldier in a public street. They have limited resources, that is what they are focused on.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    how surprising, a silly nosey parker socialist approving of an invasion of privacy
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by interact)
    how surprising, a silly nosey parker socialist approving of an invasion of privacy
    So you would prefer the government didn't have the tools it needs to investigate and disrupt terrorist plots and espionage against the United Kingdom?
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    I've never quite understood the issues people have with this. GCHQ probably won't even have enough manpower to look into every single threat/alert that comes though, let alone snoop into random people's activities (and given the power these analysts will have, you can bet their activity on the system will be heavily monitored as well). If having this system, which frankly is needed to properly combat terrorism and organised crime, is going to help prevent future attacks and ultimately save lives, then I don't think the fact we're (theoretically) losing some privacy is much of an argument against having it.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MatthewParis)
    For what purpose would it be "used against" you? Can you point to a single example of that happening before?



    How do you know your phone was tapped? And out of interest, what years (like 1995, 1996 etc) was this occurring?
    So in Canada they've used it to pinpoint people speaking out against the tar sands mining, at which point they have been sacked/made redundant, or had gagging orders imposed upon them if they aren't employed by the government.

    It was back into he day when you could hear it when you picked up the phone. From the miners strike before I was born until 1997ish.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    And the despicable, diabolical New Labour defenestration of civil liberties continues.

    May should be sacked immediately.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MatthewParis)
    So you would prefer the government didn't have the tools it needs to investigate and disrupt terrorist plots and espionage against the United Kingdom?
    If it means less liberties for the rest of us, yes. And I am quite willing to expose myself to increased risk knowing that my freedom is secure.

    "Those who would sacrifice essential Liberty, to gain a little temporary safety, deserve neither Liberty nor safety."-Benjamin Franklin
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by redferry)
    It was back into he day when you could hear it when you picked up the phone. From the miners strike before I was born until 1997ish.
    And how do you know you were under surveillance? You say you could hear it, how? It's more likely that your phone had a line fault of some type. Telephone taps involve significant resources, in that you have to have engineers putting a tap on the line, regular changing of the tapes, and (most expensively) you need people to transcribe the tapes and then analysts to assess the material, which is then passed up the chain.

    Phone taps do not last for year after year on marginal targets like a trade union official; MI5 officers have budgets and they would be excoriated by management if they were throwing money down the drain on a wiretap that was producing nothing. Frankly it's a bit embarassing when people on the left assume they are more important in the scheme of things than they actually are. MI5 pretty much closed up the counter subversion shop in its F branch around 1991/92.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MatthewParis)

    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.
    Sensible free market liberals would never vote for a social democratic party, if they are indeed sensible free market liberals.

    UKIP is the most free-market alternative.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The Dictator)
    If it means less liberties for the rest of us, yes. And I am quite willing to expose myself to increased risk knowing that my freedom is secure.

    "Those who would sacrifice essential Liberty, to gain a little temporary safety, deserve neither Liberty nor safety."-Benjamin Franklin
    So where is the line? Do you believe the government should not be able to engage in any surveillance work or wiretapping?

    Realistically, the government doesn't care about your odd porn habits or your Skype conversations; they are concerned with people setting off bombs on the tube or engaging in espionage against the UK government. You might think you're willing to accept bombs going off weekly, but if it actually started happening you would beg for the government to intervene as you saw society begin to fray at the edges
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The Dictator)
    And the despicable, diabolical New Labour defenestration of civil liberties continues.

    May should be sacked immediately.
    What does that even mean? You think wiretapping and surveillance started under the Labour government?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MatthewParis)
    So where is the line? Do you believe the government should not be able to engage in any surveillance work or wiretapping?

    Realistically, the government doesn't care about your odd porn habits or your Skype conversations; they are concerned with people setting off bombs on the tube or engaging in espionage against the UK government. You might think you're willing to accept bombs going off weekly, but if it actually started happening you would beg for the government to intervene as you saw society begin to fray at the edges
    No, I would arm myself and organise my own security and that of my family.

    And bombs would not go off weekly, that's ridiculous.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MatthewParis)
    And how do you know you were under surveillance? You say you could hear it, how? It's more likely that your phone had a line fault of some type. Telephone taps involve significant resources, in that you have to have engineers putting a tap on the line, regular changing of the tapes, and (most expensively) you need people to transcribe the tapes and then analysts to assess the material, which is then passed up the chain.

    Phone taps do not last for year after year on marginal targets like a trade union official; MI5 officers have budgets and they would be excoriated by management if they were throwing money down the drain on a wiretap that was producing nothing. Frankly it's a bit embarassing when people on the left assume they are more important in the scheme of things than they actually are. MI5 pretty much closed up the counter subversion shop in its F branch around 1991/92.
    Maybe it wasn't for that long then, my dad told me about it and he knew because, well, he knows people.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The Dictator)
    And bombs would not go off weekly, that's ridiculous.
    Do you know how often the police disrupt terrorist plots? There are arrests every couple of weeks.

    And if the government had its powers to surveil and wiretap taken away, and as Islamists worked out that it was open season, every al-Qaeda type from here to Bucarest would come to the UK to plan attacks
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by redferry)
    Maybe it wasn't for that long then, my dad told me about it and he knew because, well, he knows people.
    It's highly unlikely that there was a leak from MI5 to a trade unionist that he was under surveillance.

    Many trade unionists who were active in the Thatcher years came to believe that the state was conspiring against them, and that they were under surveillance and the like.

    Undoubtedly a few trade unionists like Scargill might have been for short periods, say during the miners' strike, but for the most part they were not and there aren't really ways they would be able to find out if they were
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    The problem is the security services do not have a lot of oversight, so giving them new powers depends on how trusting you are. Some, particularly those in favour of big government, are quite happy with this, some of us don't have such blind faith in government organisations. We are talking about a security service that has a long history of spying on MPs.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    I will oppose this bill and if it does get introduced, protest it's introduction.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MatthewParis)
    MI5 pretty much closed up the counter subversion shop in its F branch around 1991/92.
    Out of interest, how do you know this? I doubt that this would be public information.
 
 
 
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

1,271

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.