Why doesn't the government listen when even the police say they don't want to live in a police state?

Question

Hampshires Deputy Chief Constable, Ian Redhead, said 'Britain risks becoming an 'Orwellian' society as CCTV cameras spread to quiet villages with low crime levels.'

Acting Chief Constable, Colin Langham Fitt, said ID cards would make officers be seen as 'agents of the state', and called for a debate into the ongoing erosion of civil liberties and creeping increase in surveillance.

The former head of Police IT, Phillip Webb said law enforcement surveillance technologies could be misused and undermine public support for them.

If even the police are voicing their concerns, whis is the governement ignoring them and pressing ahead with ever more intrusive methods of TRYING to keep law and order?

BooBoo - I'm sure I will rest assured that when I get my 'butt blown up' it will all be captured on camera, and used as eveidence by the governement that they are right to bring in any surveillance measures they like.

Answer 1

Its called the totalitarian tiptoe.The government will not listen as its what THEY want! The idea of the totalitarian tiptoe is to diffuse any opposition there would be if they went ahead in one go. The change would be so great that heads would lift and eyes would open to ask the question: ‘What’s going on?’ By taking baby steps, each change is sold as small and insignificant. If we don't want to wake up one day and wonder where the last of our liberties went, it's time to wake up and vote this government out...

Answer 2

Even though this is quite evidently a post from and about the UK --- the same can actually be said of circumstances within the USA !!
And, the question COULD have ended with the simple post of
Why doesn't the government listen ?
This simple post would have covered THIS and any number of OTHER issues that seem to be mute in both countries as the PUSH to have complete oversight of every intricate detail of everyone's daily life becomes the NORM OF government focus !!
At a time when the true, central goal of the PUBLIC --- SHOULD BE the oversight and close scrutiny of GOVERNMENT ---- THEY are in a dead push to get all of US under the viewer !! The tables have seemed to be turned on us and it is NOT a good thing at all !!
And, why do they not LISTEN --- we, the people, have allowed a circumstance to develop --- whereby they have situated themselves into a place where THEY DON'T HAVE TO LISTEN ---- THEY DICTATE !!!

Answer 3

The problem is much more complex than that. The opinion quoted is fairly representative of the police, particularly the senior ranks. But the flood of 'anti-terrorist' legislation has given the police dubious grounds to arrest people who had no connection with terrorism.
Maya Anne Evans was convicted under the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act for reading aloud the names of 97 soldiers killed in Iraq.
John Catt, 80 years, was stopped in Brighton for wearing a T shirt suggesting that Bush and Blair be tried for war crimes. The purpose of the stop & search was given in writing as 'terrorism'.
Walter Wolfgang, also in his eighties, was ejected from the Labour Party conference for shouting 'that's a lie'. When he tried to get back in, the police arrested him under the Terrorism Act.
Sam Browne, 21 years, an Oxford graduate was drunk and shouted at two mounted police officers 'Mate you know your horse is gay. I hope you don't have a problem with that'. He was given a ticket under the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act.
Steven Jago, 36 years, a management accountant was charged under the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act for carying a placard which read ' In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act'. (A quote from George Orwell).
Charity Sweet was questioned in Whitehall. She was handed a form which gave the reason for the stop, including the words 'reading todays Independent'.
etc., etc., etc.

Answer 4

booboo does have a point tho if we someone blows somert up it would be a great help if we had an idea who dunnit.

I think its a good idea to a point high risk area should be covered ie banks schools and places of nightlife (pubs +clubs)

if a robbery happens and people get killed or if a kid gets taken against there will or if you get glassed at a club what are you gonna say then? you would expect place such as these to have cctv.

on the flip side tho I wouldn't like cctv cameras out side my house i do like my privacy and i think most people do.

Answer 5

boo boo - I remember the video footage from a CCTV camera of the 9/11 bombers - the footage didn't stop that one did it so your arguement is void!! and where are your arguements and evidence???

Yes we do live more and more in a police state and to be perfectly honest I can't see why!! Are we going to fit cameras to the corner of every street, every road, every lane throughout the UK?? I think a bit OTT!!!

Are ID cards worth the plastic they are printed on???? the 9/11 bombers had forged id documents!! so errr..... nope!!

More police on the streets, more police on foot, less paper work for the officers - thats what is needed.... not half hearted measures at fighting crime!!!

Answer 6

Because people are so apathetic that all they do is talk. Do you think the Communist can keep China in opression if the majority of people would revolt against them? They wouldn't stand a chance. It won't happen, because people are too chicken to unite and die for their cause and freedom. This could happen anywhere, even here in the U.S. There are signs of this in the works as I write.

Answer 7

Yeah but as soon as someone gets their butt blown up and the cameras caught who did it then maybe it won't seem like such a bad thing. We have got to realize we live in a very different world now and we can't keep tying the hands of the people who are trying to protect us. I understand the concern, but I think terms like Orwellian are a bit much, and there should be regulations regarding the use of the information but if you're not doing anything wrong than you shouldn't be that concerned. Unfortunately we have limited tools available to us to deal with the nut cases running around and until we live in a much saner world I think we should use the tools we have we have.

Answer 8

Intrusion into the rights of the people must be protested. The government must find other ways to solve crimes and terrorism.

Answer 9

Because the government are following the agenda of the New World Order, and they don't give a damn what the people want.

http://www.threeworldwars.com/new-world-order.htm
http://www.exposethenewworldorder.co.uk/

Answer 10

Because those in the government want the country to be a police state. Simple as that...