UK Uses CCTV, Terrorism Laws, Against Pooping Dogs

An anonymous reader writes to tell us that it seems the UK is trying make up for their judicious use of surveillance cameras that, according to recent research, do not actually deter crime, by using the surveillance network to prosecute petty crimes. "Conjuring up the bogeymen of terrorists, online pedophiles and cybercriminals, the U.K. passed a comprehensive surveillance law, The Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act, in 2000. The law allows 'the interception of communications, carrying out of surveillance, and the use of covert human intelligence sources' to help prevent crime, including terrorism. Recent reports in the U.K. media indicate that the laws are being used for everything but terrorism investigations."

Slippery Slopes

[nurb432 (527695)]

NOW do you believe us?

Re:Slippery Slopes

[urcreepyneighbor (1171755)]

NOW do you believe us?

9/11!

Re:Slippery Slopes

[Big Boss (7354)]

1984!

Re:Slippery Slopes

[by Anonymous Coward]

2001!

What are we playing?

Re:Slippery Slopes

[spun (1352)]

2001!

What are we playing?

That's Numberwang!

Re:Slippery Slopes

[iminplaya (723125)]

1973 [www.iisg.nl]!

Re:9/11! not in UK

[teh kurisu (701097)]

It was so nice of the 7th of July London bombers to blow themselves up on a date that we could all agree on.

Re:Slippery Slopes

[lazy_nihilist (1220868)]

First they came for the communists,
Then they..

Damn, they got me with this. I didn't expect them to come after me First.

Re:Slippery Slopes

[Zemran (3101)]

Still bitter about Ken Livingstone

How could anyone be bitter, Boris is so much funnier :-)

Re:Slippery Slopes

[FinchWorld (845331)]

I hope more incidents like this happen, maybe it will piss off the rest of the UK population enough so that they might just take notice.

Re:Slippery Slopes

[Kugrian (886993)]

maybe it will piss off the rest of the UK population enough so that they might just take notice.

And do what about it?

Re:Slippery Slopes

[Kugrian (886993)]

Seriously though, what, if anything, can we do? I've signed a dozen or so petitions opposing laws being passed in the past decade, some with up to tens of thousands of signatures, and nothing changed. I've been on a handful of marches, and nothing has changed.

I live in the UK, and often many of our people are shocked when they realize how many CCTV cameras are on them at all times, let alone the other 'safety-procedures' put in place for our protection (DRM being a big one atm).

Re:Slippery Slopes

[teh kurisu (701097)]

You could go out and vote in the next general election.

I'd recommend voting Lib Dem, if only because the introduction of proportional representation to Westminster is a condition for entering into a coalition with them (in the event of a hung parliament). The current first-past-the-post system gives an unfair advantage to large parties and means that it's much easier for them to obtain a majority, even without a majority of votes. That in turn means that the smaller parties cannot get elected and means that voices like yours won't get heard if they don't conform to the party lines of the big three.

PR would mean that it's incredibly hard for governments to bludgeon on regardless through an entire parliamentary term with these kinds of idiotic policies.

Re:Slippery Slopes

[TapeCutter (624760)]

"I hope more incidents like this happen, maybe it will piss off the rest of the UK population enough so that they might just take notice."

Yes, lets hope the people rise up and smite them. Then we can all walk the footpaths of this great nation free from the fear of canine landmines.

As an aside I drove around the UK a couple of years ago and got to play crocidile dundee with some local vandals. Near Cambridge I was waiting in the car for the missus to come out of a shop when I noticed half a dozen 13-15yro kids around a telephone box. One of them started trying to rip the door off with all his might and was putting in quite a bit of time and effort. It was in broard daylight, there were people nearby pretending it wasn't happening.

Now I'm a rather large, middle-aged Aussie so I dragged my arse out of the car and walked up to within a meter or so of the kid bashing the door, folded my arms across my chest and waited till he turned around and caught my eye.

He and his mates froze, the converstaion went something like...
Me: "Is that yours?"
Kid:"No".
Me: "Then I suggest you fuck off now because I might want to use it."

I stayed in position waiting in silence for a few seconds. Some of them moved away faster than the others who were trying there best to stay composed. I can understand a woman or even a man on his own not wanting to takle half a dozen teenage kids but the shopping strip was packed and nobody was batting an eyelid!!!

Re:Slippery Slopes

[fredklein (532096)]

The people standing around ignoring the kids trying to pull the door off of the phone booth were trying not to become involved because they feared they would be attacked...and with good reason.

::whoosh::

That's the sound of the point flying far, far, over your head.

It is certainly true that if JUST ONE person stands up asgainst a gang of hooligans, they risk getting beat/killed.

But if ALL the people stand up against them, it is the gang that would be outnumbered, and would risk getting beat (possibly killed, depending) if they start something. But for that to happen, each individual in the crowd needs to make the decision to stand up to them.

With people like you saying "Your solution, while noble, is not an option...", that has a low probability of happening.

Re:Slippery Slopes

[Original Replica (908688)]

Yeah, it sucks but what am I going to do?

First, sign a petition like the reply before me has suggested. Then give the CCTV cameras the same treatment as speed cameras are getting. [speedcam.co.uk] Prove to the government that the presence of CCTV actually increases crime, mostly arson. [thenewspaper.com]

Finally a use I can get behind

[MightyYar (622222)]

I hate it when dogs piss and poop right in the middle of the sidewalk.

By the way, the summary is wrong - that study the other day did not say the crimes didn't deter crime... only that they don't help much in SOLVING street robberies. Big difference, that.

Re:Finally a use I can get behind

[the 99th penguin (1453)]

By the way, the summary is wrong - that study the other day did not say the crimes didn't deter crime... only that they don't help much in SOLVING street robberies. Big difference, that.

Speaking of which (cameras deterring crime), here is an interesting article from SFGate [sfgate.com]

From the article:

Using a complicated method, researchers were able to come up with an average daily crime rate at each location broken out by type of crime and distance from the cameras. They then compared it with the average daily crime rate from the period before the cameras were installed.

They looked at seven types of crime: larcenies, burglaries, motor vehicle theft, assault, robbery, homicide and forcible sex offenses.

The only positive deterrent effect was the reduction of larcenies within 100 feet of the cameras. No other crimes were affected -- except for homicides, which had an interesting pattern.

Murders went down within 250 feet of the cameras, but the reduction was completely offset by an increase 250 to 500 feet away, suggesting people moved down the block before killing each other.

Re:Finally a use I can get behind

[janrinok (846318)]

What makes you think that US data is applicable to UK crimes?

Murders went down within 250 feet of the cameras.

Murder is much less common in the UK than in the US, so much so that every murder is national news. Counting the murders that occur within 250 feet of a camera would probably result in a 0 count. [http://www.crimestatistics.org.uk/output/Page40.asp]. The total for 2005/2006 is 765 which includes the results of the terrorist attacks in London. Even in a small country like the UK it would be a rare event indeed for a murder to be carried out near to a camera.

The statistics used also refer to homicide, a term which includes a significant number of deaths that are not murder. For example, illegal immigrants who suffocated in the back of a lorry while travelling to the UK or who died while working illegally in the UK. e.g. the Morecambe Bay disaster in 2004.

1984

[ThePiratesWhoDontDoA (1113795)]

Wasn't 1984 set in London? This seems awfully scary to me.

Re:1984

[mbone (558574)]

It was a bright cold day in April, and the clocks were striking thirteen.

Yes, it was set in London. And you can still see the building that suggested the Ministry of Truth to Orwell, just off Tottenham Court Road at UCL (University College London). During World War II it was the Ministry of Propaganda, and Orwell worked there.

Is anyone surprised by this ?

[mbone (558574)]

Anyone who is surprised by this doesn't understand either the police, or politics.

Hot Fuzz

[pete-classic (75983)]

Until I read this article, I thought that Hot Fuzz [imdb.com] was a comedy.

-Peter

Waitasec...

[by Anonymous Coward]

It's one thing to argue that the new laws were unnecessary, but are you really saying it's a bad thing to use them to solve other crimes? Yes, they may be trivial crimes listed, but they are still crimes. If the ability is there to solve them, why shouldn't they? I don't want to dodge dog shit every time I walk down the street, and if there was a camera pointed at the area, I think police should look at the footage to see who is doing it.

Re:Waitasec...

[_Sprocket_ (42527)]

It's one thing to argue that the new laws were unnecessary, but are you really saying it's a bad thing to use them to solve other crimes? Yes, they may be trivial crimes listed, but they are still crimes.

I believe the point is that these powers were sold as necissary to battle dire threats. If it turns out that they're only useful for solving petty crime then it raises the question of whether the trade of civil liberty was really worth it.

Sure - police using the tools they have available to deal with all manner of crime makes sense. Whether they should continue to have access to those tools is the question.

Won't someone please think......

[Nonillion (266505)]

of the anonymous flaming dog shit bags!!!!!

Actually..

[wellingtonsteve (892855)]

Actually I'm all for executing* people who don't clear their dog poop :-) As a dog owner I'm fed up of being tarred with the same brush..

*For those with a sense of humour failure, this is a "joke" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joke [wikipedia.org]

I miss the days

[geekoid (135745)]

When I could sit in front of my computer and feel smug when this happened in other countries.
Hopefully when Bush and his cronies are out of office we can repair the damage and I can once again feel a smug attitude about my country.

Re:I miss the days

[bsDaemon (87307)]

In my current job, I've met over 50 Republican members of Congress and leaders of the "vast right-wing conspiracy," all the way back to the source of it all -- Richard Viguerie.

I remember being a kid and watching Ruby Ridge, Waco, et cetera. I remember going to gunshows with my dad and stocking up on stuff, coming home and watching Red Dawn. I remember hating Bill Clinton and Janet Reno with a passion.

I most certainly did not feel SMUG about being an American before Bush -- but I can tell you, I did feel PROUD.

That is now long gone. Between the antics of Bush et al, and the bullshit, lies, half-truths and innuendos I have to endure at work, I am now perhaps the least "conservative" person I deal with on a daily basis anymore.

I am leaving my job and leaving Washington to go back to school for mechanical engineering (I had started out as a comp sci and bio double the first time, ended coming out with a BA in English 'cause my heart wasn't in it at the time) and doing school right this time.

I now hate politics with a passion and I can pretty much guarantee that I hate those in power now more than you ever will. I wanted to buy what they were selling before, but now not only do I want my money back, I want to sue for damages.

I used to be a Ron Paul fan, but even in the last few months I've become so fed up that frankly, I don't want to have anything to do with any of those "let the market sort it out" people who only care what happens to you until you're born, then throw you to the wolves.

Oh, by the way, they're the wolves.

The corner stone of the whole operation, the lynch pin, the original vampire, is the National Right to Work foundation. They operate front groups, pimp fake economic numbers, et cetera.

They're the ones that need to go down first, because they're the ones that have been pushing this crap since the 60s.

Anyway... sorry for the rant. It's been a long week.

Whoa

[copponex (13876)]

How's the koolaid these days?

Since when is suspending habeas corpus, destroying congressional oversight, and wiretapping phones without permission from any legal authority constitute freedom?

Or is this the crazy part of American culture where abortion is murder and war is heroic?

It's about time

[NotBornYesterday (1093817)]

Thank got they got their dog poop crime spree under control.

Good strategy

[iosmart (624285)]

It is thought that punishment of petty crimes deters the more violent and dangerous crimes. The reason is that if people see that they can get away with small stuff, they will push the boundaries and see all what else they can get away with. If small crimes are prosecuted, they won't dare try to commit a serious crime. This has been studied with strict treatment of graffiti artists in NY during the 1980s and 1990s. See this book for more information: http://www.gladwell.com/tippingpoint/index.html [gladwell.com]

Taking Liberties documentory

[QX-Mat (460729)]

Available at http://www.noliberties.com/ [noliberties.com]

and if you're a UK view, for free here,

http://www.channel4.com/video/true-stories-taking-liberties/catchup.html [channel4.com]

(WMP11 unfortunately)

For anyone who's studied the UK constitution, and in particular, Lord Nicholls' dicta in Belmarsh, it is frightening to see so obviously what one Government has done to the UK in a way that will effectively bind successive governments: not for want of power, but for want of justification should they revoke popularist statues that give the illusion of service.

Matt

On, a, tangent

[93 Escort Wagon (326346)]

I just wanted to point out that the editors could have inserted several more commas into the title given to this submission, if they'd really tried.

Re:On, a, tangent

[6Yankee (597075)]

NO! It is the BAD kind of puppy!

So, are you gonna clean that shit up, or sit around here whingeing about commas? :)

Privacy VS. Security

[silentcoder (1241496)]

It's interesting how attitudes differ. People (including in the UK) seem to think the CCTV there is a terrible violation of privacy and the justifications for it, even if true, would be weak. In South Africa, CCTV is profligating faster than that and our tech is actually MORE advanced now. Here, it has gotten nothing but praise. People just don't care about privacy. There is a twofold reason for that I think. The first is that just a generation ago we were living under what was little less than a military dictatorship. A dictatorship that had propaganda SO effective that some people to this day yearn for their rule ! What's worse, people here seem to chaos and order as a black/white thing. Either everybody does what they are told all the time, nothing more, nothing less- or you have complete chaos. The idea of a free society in between those extremes, where the individual's rights matter is basically non-existent. Throw in a massive crime wave, and putting up CCTV will get you hailed as heroes, with nobody wondering if it may be abused. It is scary to see the same thing happening in the UK though - because it removes from the rest of us yet another example of liberty being respected - if the UK with their relatively small crime problems lose it... how will we with a crime wave possibly convince people that the little extra security you may or may not get out of CCTV may not be worth the incredible price we are paying ? We already live in a country where it is now a crime for teenagers under the age of 16 to HUG OR KISS. How long before we have teenagers arrested for making out - and CCTV used to find them/as evidence ? It's no less of a minor crime than dogpoop (of course, the kissing should never have been a crime at all but at least it's classified as minor). The biggest irony of all is, even in South Africa the camera's have not actually had a real positive effect, the criminals simply moved to other neighbourhoods. So the cycle ends up with every street everywhere being under surveillance in the end. 1984 Was not so far fetched.

Poor summary, poor submission

[MLCT (1148749)]

Recent reports in the U.K. media indicate that the laws are being used for everything but terrorism investigations

"everything but" - well no, actually, that is tabloid style summary hyperbole - in fact it isn't even hyperbole, just plan rubbish.

The submitter should familiarise themselves with (off the top of my head) three ongoing terrorist trials where CCTV evidence is important to gaining a possible conviction. One in particular, that of the prosecution of associates of the 7th of July London bombers who travelled with them to London in advance to case targets, relies heavily on CCTV to link these people to the bombers, and will help obtain convictions (should that be what the jury decides).

That is just an ongoing trial, and is publicly known, "terrorism investigations" covers a multitude of unknown (to the public) current investigations - monitoring people who have warranted the attention of the intelligence community.

But god forbid the truth should get in the way of a hyperactive slashdot submission - desperate for 500 comments of "1984", "slippery slope" and every other cliché under the sun. There may be (and indeed I would personally say, are) valid criticisms of CCTV and how people are monitored in public places - but that debate is entirely short circuited and debased with juvenile submissions like this that are not interested in facts, only hyperbole.

Remember

[houghi (78078)]

Remember, remember
the 5th of November.
The gunpowder, treason, and plot.
I know of no reason
why the gunpowder treason
should ever be forgot.

Metaironic

[hacksoncode (239847)]

People have skirted around this, but I find it interesting to note that the crimes which the UK appears to *actually* be these CCTV cameras against are, in fact, bigger problems for the citizenry than the terrorists and pedophiles which were used to sell it.

We need a new word for something that's ironic because it is designed to seem ironic but really isn't.

The meta-irony here comes through in the point that terrorists aren't really a danger to normal people (statistically speaking), and in fact are probably less of a hazard than slipping on dog poop on the sidewalk. But you can get CCTVs pushed through based on the former and not the latter because almost all people have extraordinarily poor risk assessment skills.

Re:Metaironic

[startled (144833)]

The meta-irony here comes through in the point that terrorists aren't really a danger to normal people (statistically speaking), and in fact are probably less of a hazard than slipping on dog poop on the sidewalk.

Are you really making the case that most people in the UK are more likely to be killed by sidewalk dog poop than acts of terrorism? I understand that the likelihood of either is quite low, but I'm still going to have to see a few cases of death by sidewalk poo before I believe they occur with any frequency.

Re:Yay

[by Anonymous Coward]

Then they came for the dog owners,
And I didn't speak up because I was not a dog owner.

Re:Yay

[garett_spencley (193892)]

I agree. I'm not a dog owner currently but I have nothing against dogs and if I did own one I would up my dog's shit because it pisses me off to no end as well.

But I still believe in due process and privacy and small government and limiting government's power over people's lives. I'm not a doom sayer conspiracy theorist who thinks that the British or Canadian government turning into Nazi Germany in my life time is a likely scenario (sorry for the Godwin) but there are still a lot of bullshit laws that IMO do more harm than good and democracy has this one downside where the majority (some times a rather large group of people which was demonstrated in the last 2 US presidential elections) gets consistently screwed over.

Government is force even when they are democratic and are doing their job and serving the will of the people. They exist solely for the purpose of exercising force. They can take away your freedom, your property. They can send you to your death. The control and moderate and arbitrate. They are force and authority by it's very definition. So while CCTV has some positive uses I don't favour it because I don't like giving force more force. I don't like the idea of living in a world where everyone is considerate just because they're afraid. I don't like being afraid of being caught on camera walking into an adult bookstore. I don't trust the government to keep data safe and I realize the same can be said about passports and census data etc. but the way I see it the less there is to be abused or breached the better.

While you have no reasonable expectation of privacy while in public I think that you *should*. To a much lesser extent then on your private property obviously but people need to know that they're not being followed and recorded everywhere they go and having everything they do stored to some hard drive that can be accessed later and used against them.

I'm not crying Orwell or Hitler and I'm not even saying "slippery slope". I just don't want video footage of me when I'm out and going about my personal affairs. I'm a private person who doesn't even like his picture being taken in family portraits. My worst nightmare would be for me to be a celebrity. Video surveillance makes me feel like one.

Re:Yay

[Knave75 (894961)]

If it stops inconsiderate bastards leaving their dog's shit on the pavement, I'm all for it.

I guess it depends on where you feel public resources should be allocated. Dog poop certainly annoys me, but I do not want millions of taxpayers dollars to be used dealing with that problem. I'd rather they spend it on free breakfasts for schoolchildren or going after drunk drivers.

The point is, there are finite dollars to throw at a relatively large number of potential issues, and every dollar spent enforcing dog poop laws is one less dollar that will be spent on some other public good.

Oh, and using terrorism to justify spending any large amount of money is also annoying. But that is another issue.

Re:Yay

[Hektor_Troy (262592)]

The point is, there are finite dollars to throw at a relatively large number of potential issues, and every dollar spent enforcing dog poop laws is one less dollar that will be spent on some other public good.

That's almost true, but with the current exchange rates [yahoo.com] we keep getting more and more dollars ...

Re:Yay

[johnlcallaway (165670)]

I got pulled over in Phoenix a couple of weeks ago for not fully stopping at a stop sign. They had two motorcycle police officers monitoring the intersection.

Some may think 'what a waste of tax payer money, pulling people over for not making a complete stop at the stop sign'. But I decided instead of whining to talk to the police officer. Know what I found out??

They were there BECAUSE SOMEONE HAD COMPLAINED PEOPLE WERE SPEEDING DOWN THE STREET. In other words, they were doing exactly what the citizens who pay taxes asked for. Just not the ones that were speeding down the street.

Why did I not stop fully?? Because there were several kids hanging around the street and I was paying more attention to them than the stop sign. My fault, I paid the ticket.

But the police were hoping to slow people down so that none of these kids get hit because some moron is speeding down the street.

So .. the next time you think police have something better to do, the answer is yes. And if everyone would obey the 'not important' laws, like speeding or stopping at stop signs or not letting their dogs poop on the sidewalk, maybe they would have more time to do it.

All laws have to be enforced (or eliminated), otherwise people learn very quickly which ones they can get away with. When people learn they don't get stopped for speeding, they start to go faster. When they learn they can let their dogs poop anywhere, they will do that to.

So ... shut up, pick up your poop, and let the police officers get back to important work instead of having to babysit your ass.

Re:Yay

[Corpuscavernosa (996139)]

I, good sir, refuse to sell my liberty for a shit-free sidewalk.

Re:Petty crimes?

[nurb432 (527695)]

Its not about dog poo. its about private citizens being spied on with the assumption they are guilty and the loss of reasonable privacy.

I bet you buy the 'its for the children' nonsence too.

Re:

[calebt3 (1098475)]

I bet you buy the 'its for the children' nonsence too.

After all, they walk on sidewalks, too.

Re:Petty crimes?

[iamwithstupid (908895)]

Pavement

Re:May not deter crime, but...

[Dan667 (564390)]

Please send me all of your important info including passport, etc so that I might make sure that you are safe and nothing bad happens. I promise not to abuse it.