The silly-season (usually the summer recess when the only politics to happen is that of personal skullduggery) often kicks off with a very silly event. This year we had BULS’ favourite silly person David Davis cause a by-election because he’s anti-democracy.
I cast my mind back to this silly occurence because it came to me that I never really heard Cameron denounce Davis’ belief that CCTV is bad. Have I missed something during the time of by-election when I simply didn’t care? Please inform me if I’ve made a mistake but if Cameron supported Davis’ campaign then surely that means the Tories are all anti-CCTV and therefore pro-criminals.
It’s only stating facts to point out that under the Tories you had less chance of being caught perpertrating a crime and more chance of being a victim. We know now exactly whose side the Tories are on. They simply must come clean and set out their vision for the future of CCTV cameras and other crime-stopping/solving technology.
CCTV- for our protection, or to watch us?
I know some who would strongly argue the latter. Yes, there may have been some success, but if you are watching everywhere all of the time, it is odds on you will find something. It’s all the other people who are, by implication, being accused of being suspect who have a problem with the vast amounts of cameras pretty much everywhere.
Do you really think there’s enough man power being employed to watch all that footage? It is reassuring to think that if you get mugged, there’s a fair chance they can wind the tapes back, see who did it and trace where they went afterwards, or if you are working in a vulnerable place, such as behind a till containing thousands of pounds, that there is indeed someone watching you- making it far less likely you will be held up.
Cameron’s position is more difficult than most people realise.
ttp://news.bbc.co.uk/1/low/uk_politics/vote_2005/frontpage/4522075.stm
exagerating your CV can come back to haunt you.
Ha ha ha ha! Awesome find Nathan cheers