Like the Police take ANY notice of the law....
....seriously can we send some chief constables to jail for a month or two for this sort of thing.
How is the DNA retention going? Still breaking the law on that?
Two police forces used lawful surveillance powers to spy on journalists' confidential sources without getting a judge's approval, according to the Interception of Communications Commissioner's Office (IOCCO) latest report. The 52 page report (PDF) reveals the negligible effect of the Data Retention and Investigatory Powers Act …
Well at least we can rest secure in the knowledge that all of our personal data that they hoover up will be treated with the utmost respect and stored on secure systems, I mean it's not like they're going to store it on ageing, unsupported infrastructure... what's that you say? Windows Server 2003 and Windows XP? Hmm...
Because the fekker GOT CAUGHT!!!
As to the plebs dropping a piece of orange peel, driving 1mph over the limit, having the temerity to challenge a copper's knowledge of the law, having your dna recorded because the copper in question didn't have enough arrests for the week.
YOU'RE NICKED SONNY...
The 'penalty' for the law-breakers in question will no doubt be something along the lines of: cessation of biscuit rations and a slap on the back all round...
/rant
In light of the recent article on Leicestershire Constabulary using facial recognition tech at the Download festival I'd certainly like to see someone senior being held to account for such abuses.
Couple a police force with a flagrant disregard for privacy and a disdainful attitude to the public they are supposed to serve with a government (any party) who've a penchant for creating nebulous, ill-defined laws (especially laws targeting abstract concepts) and we'll all be potentially guilty of thought crime.
> Couple a police force with a flagrant disregard for privacy and a disdainful attitude to the public they are supposed to serve with a government (any party) who've a penchant for creating nebulous, ill-defined laws (especially laws targeting abstract concepts) and we'll all be potentially guilty of thought crime.
I'm interested - why have you used the future tense instead of the present?
"Re: And we're to trust them with facial recognition tech?
LOL my bad, forgot we're already living in the brave new world. Note to self: go to local cop shop and hand self in for psych-profiling just in case"
Maybe the ideal situation would be:
Record DNA at birth (together with any available parent)
Scan fingerprints regularly.
Scan retina regularly.
Regular mugshots.
CCTV wherever possible.
In the future we can hope to perfect gait analysis.
...?
Big light in sky slated to appear in East.1
This is the police we're talking about here...what did you expect?
(Whazzat? You expected the police to follow the same laws they expect us to follow? Shirley, you jest! What planet are you from, anyway?)
1 Ob Firesign Theater reference...
Isn't evidence gathered outside the law inadmissable? Surely that u is the whole point of a warrant, to fairly evaluate whether the particular action which would in other situations be illegal should be deemed lawful as an exceptional circumstance, the judgement by someone independent and competent.