day one in the big brother house

its getting a joke i feel we live in one big brother house being watched every step we take

in my opinion if your not a criminal you have nothing to worry about.

that is true but its become a joke that it has had to get to this stage

The biggest joke is that it's become necessary.It seems that unless there are several squeaky clean independent witnesses to every incident,the villain will be allowed to slither off to continue to be a b***** nuisance.

Cracking idea ! I think every copper should have one.

me wrote:
<b> in my opinion if your not a criminal you have nothing to worry about.</b>

So "me" (second comment) would you be fine with the police putting a camera in your home/bathroom/bedroo
m?

Don't you think people have a right to privacy over surveillance?

Personally, I think the police need to have a camera on them to collect evidence.

What I don't agree with is having security cameras everywhere. The British have sleepwalked in to a surveillance society, and violent crime is still on the increase.

Britain has more security cameras per person than any other country in the world. Do you really think we need them?

Lets all take photo's of them filming us.
Most mobile phones have the facility so why not use it?
They won't like being recorded but there is nothing they can do about it!

Daisy wrote:
The biggest joke is that it's become necessary.It seems that unless there are several squeaky clean independent witnesses to every incident,the villain will be allowed to slither off to continue to be a b***** nuisance.

Interesting to note that approximately 40/50,000 Man Utd and Chelsea fans travelled to Moscow without incident - why? Because they knew that the cops over there do not take any bull and that the judicial system is harsh. No appeals - just go to the gulag! We could learn a lot from the Russians.

you are so right mark crosby erosion of right sbecause it is best for us "for your safety and security" yeah right! just wait for ID cards stalin and Hitler had nothing on where this country is heading where is the land of the free?

Steve wrote:

Daisy wrote: The biggest joke is that it\'s become necessary.It seems that unless there are several squeaky clean independent witnesses to every incident,the villain will be allowed to slither off to continue to be a b***** nuisance.

Interesting to note that approximately 40/50,000 Man Utd and Chelsea fans travelled to Moscow without incident - why? Because they knew that the cops over there do not take any bull and that the judicial system is harsh. No appeals - just go to the gulag! We could learn a lot from the Russians.

Steve

you are spot on mate, our soft Liberal Elitist Government have turned our Police into Social workers, NOT LAW ENFORCERS!!! and possible strikers!!

After todays by-election result the time is coming!!!

It might have had something to do with the cost of visiting Moscow, not many Yobboes could afford to go, ((2002 world cup situation).

Also, many known Cat C Hooligans were served banning orders.

If you had RESEARCHED the situation, you would discover that the football hooligan problem in Russia is very bad.

If you want to get an idea of what Russian hooligans are like just go to YouTube and type in: "Russian football hooligans".

Which kind of defeats your argument about the fear of severe law and order just a "tad".

Camperman wrote:
Lets all take photo's of them filming us. Most mobile phones have the facility so why not use it? They won't like being recorded but there is nothing they can do about it!

People are always filming plod on there mobile phones. Its got so common they dont give a hoot.
What you want to bear in mind though Magnus is that if you film them while an offence is being committed your phone can be seized as evidence.

Good time to invest in some Infra-red LEDs then?

It's possible to "jam" CCTV cameras using a high intensity Infra-red light.

Just point your TV Remote at your digital camera or mobile phone camera and you will see that digicams don't filter IR, so with a higher output light source you can magically jam the cameras.

The Victorinox Alchemist jacket, has LEDs in the hood, by changing them to IR emitting LEDs, your face becomes invisible!

Dave the Rave wrote:
Good time to invest in some Infra-red LEDs then?

It's possible to "jam" CCTV cameras using a high intensity Infra-red light.

Just point your TV Remote at your digital camera or mobile phone camera and you will see that digicams don't filter IR, so with a higher output light source you can magically jam the cameras.

The Victorinox Alchemist jacket, has LEDs in the hood, by changing them to IR emitting LEDs, your face becomes invisible!

Oh well said moron! here they are, blaming the labour government when in reality it is no brains like you that are causing the problems on our streets. Well, I hope you like the feel of the taser in you when you start playing with your toy's! Perhaps some of us are on the side of law and order, but thick heads like you will never get it will you?

devil's Advocate wrote:

Dave the Rave wrote:
Good time to invest in some Infra-red LEDs then?

It's possible to "jam" CCTV cameras using a high intensity Infra-red light.

Just point your TV Remote at your digital camera or mobile phone camera and you will see that digicams don't filter IR, so with a higher output light source you can magically jam the cameras.

The Victorinox Alchemist jacket, has LEDs in the hood, by changing them to IR emitting LEDs, your face becomes invisible!

Oh well said moron! here they are, blaming the labour government when in reality it is no brains like you that are causing the problems on our streets. Well, I hope you like the feel of the taser in you when you start playing with your toy's! Perhaps some of us are on the side of law and order, but thick heads like you will never get it will you?

And how exactly am I causing the problems on our streets then? By pointing out information that is freely available?

As for the "Moron"/"thickhead" comment, you need to take a look in the mirror. A Penny gets you a pound that I am more intelligent and wealthier than you. (Probably a lot better looking too).

As for a Taser, they are also able to be circumvented. The information is freely available if you would care to RESEARCH it! Here's a clue, it's a special fabric, called G2.

I was just making the point that CCTV is not the panacea to crime, we now have more CCTV cameras than anywhere else in the world.

You may want to consider that CCTV is NOT ALWAYS on the side of those who are on the side of Law & Order!

Now run along and if you can't say anything nice then don't say anything at all.

Dave the Rave wrote:

devil's Advocate wrote:

Dave the Rave wrote:
Good time to invest in some Infra-red LEDs then?

It's possible to "jam" CCTV cameras using a high intensity Infra-red light.

Just point your TV Remote at your digital camera or mobile phone camera and you will see that digicams don't filter IR, so with a higher output light source you can magically jam the cameras.

The Victorinox Alchemist jacket, has LEDs in the hood, by changing them to IR emitting LEDs, your face becomes invisible!

Oh well said moron! here they are, blaming the labour government when in reality it is no brains like you that are causing the problems on our streets. Well, I hope you like the feel of the taser in you when you start playing with your toy's! Perhaps some of us are on the side of law and order, but thick heads like you will never get it will you?

And how exactly am I causing the problems on our streets then? By pointing out information that is freely available?

As for the "Moron"/"thickhead" comment, you need to take a look in the mirror. A Penny gets you a pound that I am more intelligent and wealthier than you. (Probably a lot better looking too).

As for a Taser, they are also able to be circumvented. The information is freely available if you would care to RESEARCH it! Here's a clue, it's a special fabric, called G2.

I was just making the point that CCTV is not the panacea to crime, we now have more CCTV cameras than anywhere else in the world.

You may want to consider that CCTV is NOT ALWAYS on the side of those who are on the side of Law & Order!

Now run along and if you can't say anything nice then don't say anything at all.

Dave the Rave wrote:

And how exactly am I causing the problems on our streets then? By pointing out information that is freely available?

As for the "Moron"/"thickhead" comment, you need to take a look in the mirror. A Penny gets you a pound that I am more intelligent and wealthier than you. (Probably a lot better looking too).

As for a Taser, they are also able to be circumvented. The information is freely available if you would care to RESEARCH it! Here's a clue, it's a special fabric, called G2.

I was just making the point that CCTV is not the panacea to crime, we now have more CCTV cameras than anywhere else in the world.

You may want to consider that CCTV is NOT ALWAYS on the side of those who are on the side of Law & Order!

Now run along and if you can't say anything nice then don't say anything at all.

Dave my stunningly good looking friend; You are causing problems on our streets by encouraging the yob culture to find ways to prevent our law officers keeping the peace that most citizens desire. I am not sure if your motives are born out of paranoia or a wish to keep the opposition to law and order in ferment! Whatever, you obviously suffer from a narcissistic problem the cure for which is freely available on the web!
Oh, and one last thing I do not indulge in gambling either.

And how exactly am I "encouraging yob culture"? Please tell me, or find one quote of mine that could reasonably be construed as encouraging yob culture. If you can't then have the guts to apologise.

Please take 5 minutes to RESEARCH the definition of the word encourage in any dictionary, when you have come back and apologise! Using words like narcissistic, (Which again, I would suggest you RESEARCH the meaning of). does not make you clever.

Are you saying that if I hadn't posted that CCTV can be jammed then they would not have thought to do a search in google?

Are you suggesting that these yobs all come on the Evening Echo website to get tips from me? Now who is being narcissistic?

Now jog on, unless that is, you want to continue demonstrating your ignorance.

PS, (No need to paste cut & paste my comment, just use the button at the bottom marked QUOTE.)

I also understand that it is possible to split the atom and release a huge amount of energy. Apparently the calculation is e=mc2. I hope no yobboes or other undesirables read my post and get ideas.

OK.
Encourage:Give patronage to, foster.
You do that by publicly pointing out to any reader ways to defeat the cameras.
No apology due there then!


nar·cis·sism
ˈnär-sə-&
#716;si-zəm
Function:
noun
Etymology:
German Narzissismus, from Narziss Narcissus, from Latin Narcissus
Date:
1822

1 : egoism, egocentrism 2 : love of or sexual desire for one's own body
— nar·cis·sist ˈnär-sə-s
ist noun or adjective
— nar·cis·sis·tic Listen to the pronunciation of narcissistic ˌnär-sə-&
#712;sis-tik adjective

The way you modestly describe yourself would certainly fit the adjective I used then would you not think?

Perhaps you would care to apologise for your obvious errors with definintions,

One last thing, when I made an attempt at humour which was open to misinterpretation on these pages I immediately and unreservedly apologised and felt sad that I made a mistake but, in your case, I think I have been way beyond tolerant.
Why don't you try supporting our police force and making this a better place for all of us?

Publicising a fact that is freely available on the internet IS NOT ENCOURAGING crime. If you had a modicum of intelligence you would be able to recognise that.

I did not say, nor would I encourage anyone to break the law. I do not, nor have I ever encouraged any kind of yobbism. I merely pointed out that the use of CCTV cameras gives an illusion of security.

Explain to me how I encouraged anyone (by your definition) to break any law.

If I said that you can use a magnetron to evade speed cameras would that be encouraging people to break the law? No, it would be pointing out that the devices are not infallible.

I worry about your sanity

Er a magnetron to defeat a camera? Surely not! maybe the old radar traps maybe, but, just in case, I phoned my cousin who maintains Gatsgo, Nah!
I used to work with magnetrons many years ago so I worry about my sanity too! In fact anybody working on radar could, like me,have deep fried brains! Anyway, I have to go on shift now, so I 'll try and catch you later pal! Keep thinking, you will twist your way out of this sooner or later!

devil's Advocate wrote:
OK. Encourage:Give patronage to, foster. You do that by publicly pointing out to any reader ways to defeat the cameras. No apology due there then! nar·cis·sism &#712;när-s&#601;-& #716;si-z&#601;m Function: noun Etymology: German Narzissismus, from Narziss Narcissus, from Latin Narcissus Date: 1822 1 : egoism, egocentrism 2 : love of or sexual desire for one's own body — nar·cis·sist &#712;när-s&#601;-s ist noun or adjective — nar·cis·sis·tic Listen to the pronunciation of narcissistic &#716;när-s&#601;-& #712;sis-tik adjective The way you modestly describe yourself would certainly fit the adjective I used then would you not think? Perhaps you would care to apologise for your obvious errors with definintions, One last thing, when I made an attempt at humour which was open to misinterpretation on these pages I immediately and unreservedly apologised and felt sad that I made a mistake but, in your case, I think I have been way beyond tolerant. Why don't you try supporting our police force and making this a better place for all of us?

Perhaps you would care to apologise for your obvious errors with definintions.

You my friend made a very BIG obvious error with your "definition" of someone that you interpreted as an insult to her gender.

Do you remember that ?

No apology there, and she didn't deserve what you said, I know, I lived with her for four years.

devil's Advocate wrote:
Er a magnetron to defeat a camera? Surely not! maybe the old radar traps maybe, but, just in case, I phoned my cousin who maintains Gatsgo, Nah!
I used to work with magnetrons many years ago so I worry about my sanity too! In fact anybody working on radar could, like me,have deep fried brains! Anyway, I have to go on shift now, so I 'll try and catch you later pal! Keep thinking, you will twist your way out of this sooner or later!

Blustering on about Magnetrons/cousins/G
ATSOs is not explaining how I ENCOURAGED criminal behaviour. Though I am touched that you even had to phone a cousin to ask about GATSO when I hadn't even mentioned them.

And you STILL have not explained how I ENCOURAGED criminal behaviour. Why not? Because you have realised that you are blustering. So I am not trying to "twist my way out" of anything. Put up or shut up being a good analogy.

As for Magnetrons, I never said it would work with GATSOs, I never even said it would work, I would re-read my post as the point of it has obviously evaded you. Although googling:

DEFEAT SPEED TRAPS MAGNETRON

gives some interesting results.

I am not sure what the issue with BEN is? Perhaps you should sort that out when you come "off shift".

Best look up the dictionary definition of A-P-O-L-O-G-Y

change of plan. I am on a late shift instead!
Ben:
I do not know the lady you spent 4 years with. I only know that I commented on someone on this site who inferred that women who spent their time at home instead of working, etc. (a category that my wife happens to fall into) were not doing the right thing and as such, being as I fully supported women who were primarily housewives and mothers, went on to make the statement that caused so much concern. I say again, I do not know this lady personally nor do I have any knowledge of her other than through her comments in these columns. Any judgement I made is based only on that. As such I reserve my opinion that the insult to "the housewife" was an insult to the vast majority of women who were in that category! If someone of sic "doubtful sanity" like myself can understand that, why can't you?

Dave,

"If I said that you can use a magnetron to evade speed cameras would that be encouraging people to break the law? No, it would be pointing out that the devices are not infallible."

The mention of speed cameras in your paragraph indicated to me that you meant speed cameras. I mentioned Gatsco as the make of speed camera that I can get information on. If you meant average speed then I doubt that you could blank those for the required distance. But anyway, as you are only using my comments to practice your vendettas on does what I write have any relevance to you? I pointed out that your suggestions would give the persons that the police would wish to film ideas on how to avoid being recognised. The rest of it you embellished!
your comment:
Good time to invest in some Infra-red LEDs then?
led your comment pointing to the way to achieve facial invisibility, thereby avoiding identity. Doing just that (avoiding giving police your identity) IS a criminal offence!

And please stop the throw away comments every time you write. It really is not helpful!

devil\'s Advocate wrote:
change of plan. I am on a late shift instead! Ben: I do not know the lady you spent 4 years with. I only know that I commented on someone on this site who inferred that women who spent their time at home instead of working, etc. (a category that my wife happens to fall into) were not doing the right thing and as such, being as I fully supported women who were primarily housewives and mothers, went on to make the statement that caused so much concern. I say again, I do not know this lady personally nor do I have any knowledge of her other than through her comments in these columns. Any judgement I made is based only on that. As such I reserve my opinion that the insult to \"the housewife\" was an insult to the vast majority of women who were in that category! If someone of sic \"doubtful sanity\" like myself can understand that, why can\'t you? Dave, \"If I said that you can use a magnetron to evade speed cameras would that be encouraging people to break the law? No, it would be pointing out that the devices are not infallible.\" The mention of speed cameras in your paragraph indicated to me that you meant speed cameras. I mentioned Gatsco as the make of speed camera that I can get information on. If you meant average speed then I doubt that you could blank those for the required distance. But anyway, as you are only using my comments to practice your vendettas on does what I write have any relevance to you? I pointed out that your suggestions would give the persons that the police would wish to film ideas on how to avoid being recognised. The rest of it you embellished! your comment: Good time to invest in some Infra-red LEDs then? led your comment pointing to the way to achieve facial invisibility, thereby avoiding identity. Doing just that (avoiding giving police your identity) IS a criminal offence! And please stop the throw away comments every time you write. It really is not helpful!

Your words were:

Why then do you pick on someone who does not go "clubbing" or get tangled up in sordid affairs or live on the social?

What gave you the right to insult my wife in this way or to decide, just because you chose it as a way of life, that all women should do what you do. You are an insult to your gender!

She didn't insult your wife and you know it, you just wanted to twist it, her argument was with someone else over an issue with children. She thought she was being mocked about being "at work", to which she retaliated with the "at home" comment.

Look, I may not be with Sherry anymore but I still care about her. I would give anything to be with her again but that won't happen. She has been through more than enough sh1t, your words just p1ssed me off.

So, I can categorically state that she has never lived on the social or had sordid affairs. She is not the person you portrayed her to be.

Which brings me to the conclusion that It does seem to be your forte to start up an argument based on something which you know nothing about.

I, for what It's worth, wanted to put the record straight...

Stating "A good time to invest in some infra-red LEDs" is not inciting or encouraging crime. Again, you are UNABLE to produce a single quote where I incite crime.

And yes you are right failing to inform a constable in the course of his duties of your identity when requested is a criminal offence. But use of Infra-red LEDs would probably not be illegal.

It would appear that you like to start arguments, narcissism maybe?

I think you need to take a step back and look at your actions, it would seem that after Sherry & Ben I am next on your list. Why this is, only you can answer.

If I was you I would apologise and go on my merry way.

I have no vendetta with you, it was you who started insulting me by using words like "moron" and "thickhead", it would seem that those in glass houses really should not throw stones.

Sorry Dave,as you well know,narcissism is really when someone is in love with their own beauty, as perceived by themselves. You waging that you are better looking than me without knowingly ever having seen me is, in my view, self love.

I have no argument with Sherry and normally like to read her comments. As I have stated in these comments more times than enough, her insult to my wife, my mother, my sister and my sister in law as people who stayed home and concentrated on bringing the children up, like thousands of other women was what led to my making that gender comment. At the time Sherry said her comments were personal and aimed at one female person. I accepted that and have said nothing further. Maybe,just maybe, my comment about your intelligence may have seemed somewhat over the top and seem undeserved to you. However, if you try to see my side of this discussion, where I say that, in my view, pointing the way to where scum can find the means of hiding their faces from the police amounts to supporting their activities. Think about the current terrorists and how they were guided to websites that showed them how to make bombs. Were the guides innocent? Plus I never knew of the LED devices until I read your comment wherein you pointed them out.The same applies to the taser. Would the yobs have know where on the web to look?

As I have a vested interest in the welfare of police officers I feel it my right to put forward my views and defend the people who have one of the toughest jobs in society. I also believe in respecting my fellow man and hope to receive the same respect back. Please try and understand the other persons point of view, please don't keep adjusting my words and see if we can't put our handbags away over this!

Ben,
I twist nothing. I am sorry I missed your post here the other day. I will answer it now.
I in no way inferred anything about Sherry with regard to clubbing or affairs nor living on the social.
That is a complete misinterpretation and you know it! The whole basis of my argument was that she offended women, like my wife, who did NOT follow Sherry's example and go out to work! She even called herself "Sherry at work" so how can you possibly translate that to read I meant Sherry was on the social? I repeat: I said Sherry went out to work! now twist that statement. It then follows that my argument was that women who went clubbing, got involved in sordid affairs and lived on the social were who Sherry should have a go at, not people like my wife. I also stated that, when Sherry replied that what she wrote was an attack on one particular woman, I understood that and left the whole thing alone. You are the one that keeps giving it an airing. I have also stated again that the gender thing was as a direct response to the slating she addressed to "women who sit indoors" and nothing else. I do not feel any apology from myself is required as I replied to the original statement and that statement alone. Any interpretation you have attempted to put on since is purely yours. For the last time, I do not know Sherry, and wished that she could understand that, as she retaliated to that woman and made a statement that was open to my interpretation, so she appears to misunderstand the statement I made in reply to hers.

Plus, for what it is worth, no I don't mind a little wind up now and again the same as anyone else here, but I do not want to cause hurt to anyone unless they try to hurt my family. I am sorry for your obvious grief regarding your life with Sherry and it is sad for me to witness it here.

DA,

I guess we both misunderstood each other in some respects. The fact that I am still airing my view over the matter tells me I'm still cut up about my loss. Can't help it, I lost someone who turned heads, she picked me, I messed up, she pays the price, 'At Work' that's where she is, paying off my share of a mortgage, she meant nothing more than that by that remark. Fact is she would have been working in dubai now if it wasn't for me.

Hard to see her get on my train each morning and not be able to talk to her.

Just pent up anger with comments on here, if you can understand that? She wouldn't hurt anyone, I am the only one that's been guilty of that in the past.

Ben,
I guess you are right, and that must be an awful situation you are in. You really do have my sympathy there, and I wish you the best for the future! You are obviously caring people and as such, things will heal for you both one day. I will not use any clichés but I wish you and Sherry all the best for the future however it turns out.

devil\'s Advocate wrote:
Sorry Dave,as you well know,narcissism is really when someone is in love with their own beauty, as perceived by themselves. You waging that you are better looking than me without knowingly ever having seen me is, in my view, self love.

I have no argument with Sherry and normally like to read her comments. As I have stated in these comments more times than enough, her insult to my wife, my mother, my sister and my sister in law as people who stayed home and concentrated on bringing the children up, like thousands of other women was what led to my making that gender comment. At the time Sherry said her comments were personal and aimed at one female person. I accepted that and have said nothing further. Maybe,just maybe, my comment about your intelligence may have seemed somewhat over the top and seem undeserved to you. However, if you try to see my side of this discussion, where I say that, in my view, pointing the way to where scum can find the means of hiding their faces from the police amounts to supporting their activities. Think about the current terrorists and how they were guided to websites that showed them how to make bombs. Were the guides innocent? Plus I never knew of the LED devices until I read your comment wherein you pointed them out.The same applies to the taser. Would the yobs have know where on the web to look?

As I have a vested interest in the welfare of police officers I feel it my right to put forward my views and defend the people who have one of the toughest jobs in society. I also believe in respecting my fellow man and hope to receive the same respect back. Please try and understand the other persons point of view, please don\'t keep adjusting my words and see if we can\'t put our handbags away over this!

Your post rambles a bit and jumps from me to Ben to Sherry then back to me with little rhyme or reason.


Your "vested interest" maybe my "attack on personal liberty".

I speak as someone who is related to a serving Police officer, the use of CCTV is infringing the liberty of people.

We have ANPR that tracks which vehicle you drive and where it goes.

CCTV watches your movements, (The average UK citizen is observed 300 times per day).

Your mobile phone tracks your movements, as do your debit/credit cards.

Anyway take 5 minutes to check this out http://www.seered.co

.uk/cctv.htm and you will find that even senior police officers doubt the effectiveness of CCTV.

We are sleepwalking towards a totalitarian society

Dave,
I am reading your comments in your last post here and answering them as I go. This is what I have done with the whole page, which explains why I answer other people in the order that they appear. Perhaps that my seem to you to be "jumping about" but, I am afraid, not to me. My "Vested Interest" Is for my eldest son and my Daughter in law, both serving police officers.I know their characters and what they have tried to achieve in their profession.
"The use of CCTV is infringing the liberty of people." Not if that liberty is legal it isn't, they can hardly keep up with the scroats, never mind the innocent people."
Yes we have ANPR which will spot and report any registration that is flagged up for that purpose, if it passes a camera.
As long as the cctv cameras do not observe me in the loo or in my bedroom, make me a star by all means!

Yes, the phone companies can triangulate a phone by using the netting signals, even more so than is commonly known. But I can see no threat to my liberty here. Remember also, that is how they caught the Cambridge rapist! Was that not a case where the ends justify the means?

Credit cards/debit cards only inform the banking system where they are used. Unless you are in hiding, where is the problem?

Yes, but senior officers? You have relatives in the force. What should I say, that won't appear to "bring the force into disrepute?"

That is each of your paragraphs
answered in turn.
You will note that I answered you in all but the first comment in a civil manner. Now browse back to each of your riposte's and see if you think you aren't in the act of a little character assassination here?
I have already explained why I virtually (for me) exploded on my first comment to you.

Sadly, I think that will about do me for this particular page so I think we will call it a draw and have little doubt that we will chat again on other pages!