Surveillance Society

[Richard Mason]

Originally Posted by Lazlo

Laws are like weapons. There's never been one made that hasn't been used ... and abused.

42 days anyone?

As you may know, I have worked in Councils all my life both here and in the UK, much of my work involves enforcement and investigation, in public health & environmental management.

I honestly cannot think of anything I do that is so important as to warrant those kind of intrusive powers - sometimes I think you just have to be philosophical & say, as a matter of principle, that there are some people some of the time who are doing naughties that we just aren't able to catch.

I'd rather a few got away than have to resort to that sort of sh!tty behaviour investigatinf potentially innocent people and delving into their private lives. Yep, murderers, kiddy fiddlers, major embezzlers etc - well if we are talking serious crime then all's fair in love & war, (to a certain extent) but fortune tellers and people alleged to be fraudulently claiming residence in a school catchment area? Give me a break, that's just bollox.

And the more people able to do this, the more who will abuse it.

[Lazlo]

Originally Posted by Richard Mason

As you may know, I have worked in Councils all my life both here and in the UK, much of my work involves enforcement and investigation, in public health & environmental management.

I honestly cannot think of anything I do that is so important as to warrant those kind of intrusive powers - sometimes I think you just have to be philosophical & say, as a matter of principle, that there are some people some of the time who are doing naughties that we just aren't able to catch.

I'd rather a few got away than have to resort to that sort of sh!tty behaviour investigatinf potentially innocent people and delving into their private lives. Yep, murderers, kiddy fiddlers, major embezzlers etc - well if we are talking serious crime then all's fair in love & war, (to a certain extent) but fortune tellers and people alleged to be fraudulently claiming residence in a school catchment area? Give me a break, that's just bollox.

And the more people able to do this, the more who will abuse it.

We find ourselves in agreement (to a certain extent ).

[StuartC]

Originally Posted by Rydive

I asked the guy on the checkout why he needed my address and postcode, he said "it's for warranty puposes". I told him that I didn't want to give hime it because I didn't want junk mail, but he was unable to put the printer through the till without it. So I gave him a made up address and postcode.

There is absolutely no need for them to have my name and address unless I want/need them to have it. You get funny looks from the other people behind you, like your some kind of wierdo who's just being a pain in the ass.

had the same myself and the reason I was given was to understand the distribution of their customers.
So I only gave them my postcode and said that's all you need to do that.
I agree it seems unecessary and makes you feel awkward by not complying.

There is also the bit about it being a contract between them and you, and if you don't like their terms and conditions (i.e. they want your postcode and house number for "survey" purposes) then you don't have to shop there.

It's more common to be asked for this when doing an exchange/refund of goods, and I can understand this as a check against possible fraud by employees.

[MarkP]

Originally Posted by Richard Mason

You know it's bad when you read this.

My favourite bit was one of the uses: "identify an alleged bogus faith healer."

What I really would like the council to tell me is how it differentiates between "bogus" and bona-fide "faith healers".

Oh, perhaps I do know - the bogus faith healers are medically trained to administer tested and proved drugs when necessary.

[Richard Mason]

Originally Posted by MarkP

My favourite bit was one of the uses: "identify an alleged bogus faith healer."

What I really would like the council to tell me is how it differentiates between "bogus" and bona-fide "faith healers".

Oh, perhaps I do know - the bogus faith healers are medically trained to administer tested and proved drugs when necessary.

What I would like to know is what the f--k it's got to do with the Council anyway?

[Lazlo]

Originally Posted by MarkP

My favourite bit was one of the uses: "identify an alleged bogus faith healer."

What I really would like the council to tell me is how it differentiates between "bogus" and bona-fide "faith healers".

Oh, perhaps I do know - the bogus faith healers are medically trained to administer tested and proved drugs when necessary.

"Bogus" - sweet . It's just one of those newspaper conventions, I think. Like how there's always a "fury" over something or other.

'We are recognised as an exemplar of national best practice in this area, using it only when necessary and proportionate.

'We are committed to putting citizens first and will use whatever powers exist, where appropriate, to catch rogue traders, doorstep criminals and scam artists who prey on some of the most vulnerable in our society.'

Nice, and who gets to decide when it's "neccessary and proportionate". That'd be you. Who gets to decide what's "appropriate". That'd be you again.

As usual, the real problem is not that people took advantage of a bad law, but that a bad law was created in the first place. Moral of the story? Avoid knee-jerk reactions.