Omega Owners Forum

Chat Area => General Discussion Area => Topic started by: Nickbat on 25 January 2010, 16:50:10

Title: A surveillance step too far?
Post by: Nickbat on 25 January 2010, 16:50:10
"Police in the UK are planning to use unmanned spy drones, controversially deployed in Afghanistan, for the ­"routine" monitoring of antisocial motorists, ­protesters, agricultural thieves and fly-tippers, in a significant expansion of covert state surveillance."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2010/jan/23/cctv-sky-police-plan-drones

 :o :o
Title: Re: A surveillance step too-far?
Post by: kevinminton on 25 January 2010, 17:01:42
Cheaper than helicopters = efficient use of public money. Seems like a good idea to me.

Regarding drones monitoring antisocial motorists, isn't that already being done by some OOF members?

K
Title: Re: A surveillance step too-far?
Post by: Dishevelled Den on 25 January 2010, 17:06:50
It's the next logical step after this;



Average speed cameras could be installed on all the country's motorways to cut carbon emissions under proposals drawn up by the Government's environmental advisers.


Read more:  http://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring/news/7066376/Average-speed-cameras-could-be-used-on-all-motorways.html


(Has nothing to do with environmental concerns of course - think more of surveillance and revenue gathering)
Title: Re: A surveillance step too-far?
Post by: Dishevelled Den on 25 January 2010, 17:11:34
Quote
Cheaper than helicopters = efficient use of public money. Seems like a good idea to me.

Regarding drones monitoring antisocial motorists, isn't that already being done by some OOF members?

K



Nice to see you on again K  8-) :y
Title: Re: A surveillance step too-far?
Post by: Chris_H on 25 January 2010, 17:30:00
Probably giving the only known benefit to living on the flight path of a busy airport.

Cue imports of surface-to-air missiles for everyone else.  :D
Title: Re: A surveillance step too-far?
Post by: Debs. on 25 January 2010, 17:38:43
.......is there no end to this Government`s superintendence. >:(
Title: Re: A surveillance step too-far?
Post by: Dishevelled Den on 25 January 2010, 17:51:11
Quote
.......is there no end to this Government`s superintendence. >:(



In short D, I'm afraid not. :(
Title: Re: A surveillance step too far?
Post by: Kevin Wood on 25 January 2010, 18:56:38
I guess this explains the recent push to try and force all private aircraft (including gliders, baloons, microlights, etc.) to carry mode-s radar transponders at a cost of several grand an aircraft. >:(

Cheaper for them, perhaps.

I can see that drones are excellent in a war zone. Can't see there being much public support for them in otherwise relatively "safe" airspace. When has that ever stopped them, though?

For the uses to which the Police put helicopters (following assailants in vehicles or on foot, largely) I can't imagine that a drone would be much use compared with a human pilot.

.. and since when has there been an offence of "Antisocial Motoring"?

Kevin
Title: Re: A surveillance step too far?
Post by: kevinminton on 25 January 2010, 18:57:26
On again, off again I'm afraid, Zulu77. But thank you for the courteous greeting.

I look forward to the opportunity to have a rational, progressive and informative discourse at some future time.

(How do you do that box - thing with a quote from an earlier post?)
Title: Re: A surveillance step too far?
Post by: hotel21 on 25 January 2010, 19:09:17
Quote
On again, off again I'm afraid, Zulu77. But thank you for the courteous greeting.

I look forward to the opportunity to have a rational, progressive and informative discourse at some future time.

(How do you do that box - thing with a quote from an earlier post?)

Top right corner of the post that you posted - 'quote'....   :y
Title: Re: A surveillance step too far?
Post by: kevinminton on 25 January 2010, 19:17:14
Quote
Quote
On again, off again I'm afraid, Zulu77. But thank you for the courteous greeting.

I look forward to the opportunity to have a rational, progressive and informative discourse at some future time.

(How do you do that box - thing with a quote from an earlier post?)

Top right corner of the post that you posted - 'quote'....   :y


ta - daa! thanks!
Title: Re: A surveillance step too far?
Post by: STMO999 on 25 January 2010, 19:19:05
Quote
"Police in the UK are planning to use unmanned spy drones, controversially deployed in Afghanistan, for the ­"routine" monitoring of antisocial motorists, ­protesters, agricultural thieves and fly-tippers, in a significant expansion of covert state surveillance."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2010/jan/23/cctv-sky-police-plan-drones

 :o :o

When one fails over a densely populated area, that will be the end of them.

PS. Hope it's Birmingham.
Title: Re: A surveillance step too far?
Post by: Dishevelled Den on 25 January 2010, 19:25:40
Quote
Quote
On again, off again I'm afraid, Zulu77. But thank you for the courteous greeting.

I look forward to the opportunity to have a rational, progressive and informative discourse at some future time.

(How do you do that box - thing with a quote from an earlier post?)

Top right corner of the post that you posted - 'quote'....   :y


Thank you B :y
Title: Re: A surveillance step too-far?
Post by: waspy on 25 January 2010, 19:26:23
Quote
It's the next logical step after this;



Average speed cameras could be installed on all the country's motorways to cut carbon emissions under proposals drawn up by the Government's environmental advisers.


Read more:  http://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring/news/7066376/Average-speed-cameras-could-be-used-on-all-motorways.html


(Has nothing to do with environmental concerns of course - think more of surveillance and revenue gathering)

Only a completely inept government will introduce specs on all motorways.
Think about it- You speed, you use more fuel & so spend more which is good for them.
If we ALL stuck to speed limit, because we had to. They'd lose millions every year. No one would be able to speed if they wanted to, because they'd soon catch someone up doing 60-70mph.

They couldn't give a flying kcuf about the environment. They care about money.
Title: Re: A surveillance step too far?
Post by: Brick Tamland on 25 January 2010, 19:26:26
Quote
Quote
"Police in the UK are planning to use unmanned spy drones, controversially deployed in Afghanistan, for the ­"routine" monitoring of antisocial motorists, ­protesters, agricultural thieves and fly-tippers, in a significant expansion of covert state surveillance."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2010/jan/23/cctv-sky-police-plan-drones

 :o :o

When one fails over a densely populated area, that will be the end of them.

PS. Hope it's Birmingham.

A V-1 rocket in waiting :o
Title: Re: A surveillance step too far?
Post by: sassanach on 25 January 2010, 19:32:41
all  they will achieve is to force more motorists to run dodgy number plates.
Title: Re: A surveillance step too far?
Post by: STMO999 on 25 January 2010, 19:40:27
Quote
Quote
Quote
"Police in the UK are planning to use unmanned spy drones, controversially deployed in Afghanistan, for the ­"routine" monitoring of antisocial motorists, ­protesters, agricultural thieves and fly-tippers, in a significant expansion of covert state surveillance."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2010/jan/23/cctv-sky-police-plan-drones

 :o :o

When one fails over a densely populated area, that will be the end of them.

PS. Hope it's Birmingham.

A V-1 rocket in waiting :o


I dont remember the V1's, just the V2's. ;D
Title: Re: A surveillance step too far?
Post by: Martin_1962 on 25 January 2010, 20:32:44
Quote
all  they will achieve is to force more motorists to run dodgy number plates.


A lot more I think

Shall we all run V6 OOF or S4 OOF for Tunny