Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Police fine pedestrian for disorderly behaviour after he tried to cover his face

dailymail.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 190 posts

Re: Police fine pedestrian for disorderly behaviour after he tried to cover his face

#81

Post by StavrosK »

mises wrote: post #73
stavros wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm sorry if that offends you, but pick up a history book and read and you will see that I am correct. It doesn't offend me, it's just trivially wrong, as I know of many privacy-enhancing laws that got passed without a drop of blood being spilled (e.g. the GDPR).

This is part of why I object to the dilution of the term "right" with the modern, European concept of creating new rights to suit a political agenda. Basic liberties are a very narrow category as laid out in the Bill of Rights. "Owning your data" is not a right in the sense in which your parent comment was speaking, certainly not in the same way as the Right to Bear Arms. In other words, there is a big difference bet…

Are you saying that the social context when the bill of rights was drafted is the Only True Context and anything that happened before or after didn't actually lead to the need for more rights? Because you can't have a right to bear arms when no arms exist.

Re: Police fine pedestrian for disorderly behaviour after he tried to cover his face

#82

Post by mises »

ptah wrote: post #38
kypro wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What identification exactly? You don't have to own a passport or a drivers license in the UK, nor do we have ID cards.

most people here in the UK would have a credit or debit card on them. almost everyone have a driver's licence, but bank cards are a must even for those that dont

That does not mean they have to carry said stuff with them. Also, credit/debit cards do not store the same kind of information an ID card stores, particularly as there is no photo.

Do you really think we ought to have a society in which no one can leave his house without his dog tag?

Re: Police fine pedestrian for disorderly behaviour after he tried to cover his face

#83

Post by nabnob »

chuckgreenman wrote: post #51
turk73 wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because "doing something about it" requires violence. Americans have gone soft--we aren't demanding our rights be protected. Until we send a clear message, they will continue to walk all over us. Rights are won by force and no other way. I'm sorry if that offends you, but pick up a history book and read and you will see that I am correct. The above is why there is a full-court press to ban guns in the USA. They know…

This is inaccurate. Great strides in civil rights have been made through non-violent campaigns to change minds. We've had a slow, civil change to fighting our battles in the court of public opinion rather than on the dueling grounds. Appeals to tradition aren't effective, we don't need to make the same mistakes as our ancestors.

This isn't really true, a lot of the changes made by JFK and LBJ were in response to widespread rioting. The Civil Rights Act of 1968 was largely in response to the riots that happened after Martin Luther King Jr.'s assassination.

Re: Police fine pedestrian for disorderly behaviour after he tried to cover his face

#84

Post by moorhosj »

StavrosK wrote: post #36
lm28469 wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not everyday I quote Ted Kaczynski, but I think he had a valid point when, in his manifesto, he theorise that no amount of regulation is capable of making us safe from technological abuse. 125 - 135 from: https://www.josharcher.uk/static/files/2018/01/Industrial_So... . > It is not possible to make a LASTING compromise between technology and freedom, because technology is by far the more powerful social force an…

The issue is that, ultimately and generally, the government does what a majority of people wants (or at least tolerates). Why are we tolerating this loss of freedoms? The only answer I can arrive at is "because it doesn't inconvenience people enough to do something about it". Protesting against something takes a lot of energy, and inconveniencing you only a little (or very much but extremely rarely) doesn't make most…

==Why are we tolerating this loss of freedoms?==

Fear. Why do people think it is unsafe to walk outside when statistics show us we have never been safer? Why are people afraid of public places when crime is far more likely to happen in the home?

Re: Police fine pedestrian for disorderly behaviour after he tried to cover his face

#85

Post by ptah »

ptah wrote: post #38
kypro wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What identification exactly? You don't have to own a passport or a drivers license in the UK, nor do we have ID cards.

most people here in the UK would have a credit or debit card on them. almost everyone have a driver's licence, but bank cards are a must even for those that dont

I am not saying that the police requires people to carry them, just that you pretty much need them in every day life

Re: Police fine pedestrian for disorderly behaviour after he tried to cover his face

#87

Post by gph »

chuckgreenman wrote: post #53
DoofusOfDeath wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The above is why there is a full-court press to ban guns in the USA. I'm skeptical of this claim. I think many opponents of private gun ownership are motivated by concerns about their use for crimes against regular people, not because it lowers the ability to resist tyranny.

Exactly correct. I think most gun owners (or just people who have fired a fun) understand that they'd be dispatched quickly by anyone who's job is to be proficient with firearms. There are many more cops, sheriffs and other LEOs than sovereign citizen types. It would be a short battle.

Are cops in America really that proficient with guns tho? Most of them probably only spend as much time in a gun range as an average gun owner, and quite a few probably only spend whatever minimum time is required by their department. Also only a minority of them will ever fire their weapon in the line of duty, and unless they work in Baltimore or something it will probably only be once or twice in their entire career. Police involved shooting are actually quite rare, and half the time they're as likely to shoot each other along with everything else when they unload at whatever hostile they're confronting.

I'm not trying to denigrate cops over this, I don't particularly want a police force that's a trained paramilitary. And certainly sovereign citizen types wouldn't win in any kind of armed insurrection at this point, but I wouldn't put it down to LEOs weapons proficiency as the reason.

Re: Police fine pedestrian for disorderly behaviour after he tried to cover his face

#88

Post by ncr100 »

lm28469 wrote: post #30
StavrosK wrote: post #12

> The force had put out a statement saying “anyone who declines to be scanned will not necessarily be viewed as suspicious”. That's why it's called "erosion of rights" and not "outright nullification of rights". Unfortunately, it works, and it's entirely unsurprising that face surveillance will become normalized.

It's not everyday I quote Ted Kaczynski, but I think he had a valid point when, in his manifesto, he theorise that no amount of regulation is capable of making us safe from technological abuse. 125 - 135 from: https://www.josharcher.uk/static/files/2018/01/Industrial_So... . > It is not possible to make a LASTING compromise between technology and freedom, because technology is by far the more powerful social force an…

For those who don't know, Ted murdered people with improvised explosive devices.

Re: Police fine pedestrian for disorderly behaviour after he tried to cover his face

#89

Post by mrep »

ChuckNorris89 wrote: post #4

How do they enforce this on people wearing hijabs or other religios clothing that covers the face?

They can just make that illegal. Burqas have already been made illegal in many countries such as France and Denmark [0].

[0]: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hijab_by_country

Re: Police fine pedestrian for disorderly behaviour after he tried to cover his face

#90

Post by ptah »

OJFord wrote: post #57
ptah wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

most people here in the UK would have a credit or debit card on them. almost everyone have a driver's licence, but bank cards are a must even for those that dont

As true as it is that most people have them, they're not a form of identification...

yes, but that is up to the discretion of the police officer
Post reply on HN