The security services are doing a bloody good job. They prevent countless attacks each year but you can't stop them all. These people aren't posting their plans on Facebook or Twitter they attack randomly and don't mind dying for their fucked up cause. Clearly France's security services need to look into their safeguards and intelligence as these attacks are happening far too often over there but no way should us law abiding, not fucked in the head citizens have to give up our freedom just cos some nut jobs want to kill people.
Truck Runs into Crowd in Nice
- Thread starter johnny on the spot
- Start date
The security services are doing a bloody good job. They prevent countless attacks each year but you can't stop them all. These people aren't posting their plans on Facebook or Twitter they attack randomly and don't mind dying for their fucked up cause. Clearly France's security services need to look into their safeguards and intelligence as these attacks are happening far too often over there but no way should us law abiding, not fucked in the head citizens have to give up our freedom just cos some nut jobs want to kill people.
We seem to both support the security services but have a difference on how they should operate. I'm prepared to agree to that if you are
Sure. The world is a fucked up place and it seems to find new ways to depress me every day. Bring on the new season so we can get distracted by Pep winning us the league.
Let's not hijack the thread, but spot on mate
BlueDeadHead
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 26 Jul 2014
- Messages
- 2,999
This
I shouldn't say it's unimportant but spending time trying to be "greener" isn't moving the dial (it's too late for that). Spending time understand the likely impacts and be agile enough to adjust to them should be a priority.
But the focus on preventing terror needs to be upped imo. It would come at an expense of freedoms though. It's what the terrorists want but that's just unfortunate.
Northern Ireland was a disaster obviously (impacted my family in a number of ways). But it wasn't black and white. Things that were done were often for good reason but turned out shit. Maybe the same things can be done for the same reasons but with the benefit of lessons learned done better and with modern technology. Today as then the challenge was to seek out those that were planning to commit acts of terror, the people who actively support them, their tools of terror, etc. Better imo to be tough before it gets further out of hand.
If you don't agree then lets not go on about it.
FanchesterCity
Well-Known Member
On the people taking photos - I have sympathy.
One of the few ways we ever get to appreciate the horror of these acts with via footage - be it war footage, or tragedy footage. Take for instance the photos and footage from Hillsborough - years down the line it serves to reveal the horror of that happened (and it's also been used in evidence).
It seems horrific and uncaring at the time, and I accept the motivation behind some of it is highly questionable (in some people), but it should never just be dismissed as some macabre voyeurism.
One of the few ways we ever get to appreciate the horror of these acts with via footage - be it war footage, or tragedy footage. Take for instance the photos and footage from Hillsborough - years down the line it serves to reveal the horror of that happened (and it's also been used in evidence).
It seems horrific and uncaring at the time, and I accept the motivation behind some of it is highly questionable (in some people), but it should never just be dismissed as some macabre voyeurism.
I'm being relatively serious. I'm searching for a way to convey that I don't think that the security forces really have sufficient resources and authority to watch what's going on and deal with it. And for them to do this some things we take for granted today as generally bad might need to be on the table. Things not seen since the North, e.g. internment, house by house checks, border control, etc. And when you get into all of that we give up freedoms (like not being monitored everytime we walk down the street). But if these things have no slant because we learned from before then maybe they're not as bad...and if it keeps our children from harms way....
Lets leave it that we disagree.
FanchesterCity
Well-Known Member
We have no real idea who good or bad a job any security service is doing.
But the security services have to get it right EVERY time, whilst terrorists only have to get it right ONCE.
No amount of monitoring the nation's activities will prevent a guy driving into a crowd, or turning on a gas tap and lighting a match - at least not until we can read people's minds.
Of course we can't just sit back and do nothing, but we could invest in a 'broad brush' monitoring of the nation - or invest in more intelligent targeting and perhaps deeper levels of monitoring those individuals. I am far more in favour of more power to monitor targets, but against the 'broad brush' approach.
But the security services have to get it right EVERY time, whilst terrorists only have to get it right ONCE.
No amount of monitoring the nation's activities will prevent a guy driving into a crowd, or turning on a gas tap and lighting a match - at least not until we can read people's minds.
Of course we can't just sit back and do nothing, but we could invest in a 'broad brush' monitoring of the nation - or invest in more intelligent targeting and perhaps deeper levels of monitoring those individuals. I am far more in favour of more power to monitor targets, but against the 'broad brush' approach.
FanchesterCity
Well-Known Member
If we could search every house in the UK, it wouldn't help. There's not enough manpower.
As difficult as it is, the only real solution is better / more accurate targeting of specific individuals.
It makes much more sense to relinquish freedoms for those under specific investigation - phone taps, internet monitoring, surveillance etc than for a carte blanche approach that we all have to give up privacy so random checks can be made. If random checks are the answer, we're asking the wrong questions to start with.
When I said house to house I meant localized. For example a section of Paris. But I don't know what the security forces require other than I presume they want more people, more technology, more freedom from some laws that restrict them and more freedom from protests because they are infringing on our current rights.
As I said way back it's a danger to give them too much trust but I wonder if we have to.
FanchesterCity
Well-Known Member
I understand that, but I'm saying a carte blanche 'monitor anyone you like' doesn't seem like much of a strategy. It's a scattergun (pardon the terminology) approach. That's why I'm not in favour of sweeping relaxations of privacy laws.
I AM in favour of making it easier and more timely to monitor targeted individuals - so that it's easier to get approval and have a real depth to what they can gain access to whilst investigating them.
However, here's the rub - let's say the security services want to discover who you've phoned / emailed etc then the government has to put in place the technology / legislation to make sure that is recorded by your ISP / Network operator / bank etc, and that's where it affects us all. We all have to be monitored and logged in order for them to retrospectively investigate us on the off chance we MIGHT become bad guys in the future.
Alternatively, you put in place the 'capability' to monitor you, but it can only be activated with the relevant warrants and justifications.
I'm in favour of the latter option. We aren't monitored all the time, and the authorities need justification to do it. The cost (downside) is that the monitoring only starts when activated and there's no historical data.
That downside of not having the historical data might be the difference between people dying or not. I don't know the solution but I wonder if we need to accept that loss of privacy (e.g. my content here being loaded into a huge data lake to be analysed for key words etc) to give the security forces extra information that may make the difference.
Essentially they are trying to find a needle in a haystack and patterns matter therefore data matters. And beyond that when the patterns leads to suspicion they need to act to prevent. Maybe it's searching or intensive surveillance or locking someone up to keep them out of circulation for a period of time.
Obviously I'm no security expert. I am just concerned about the future for my kids and I see escalations in Europe that if not seemed may spread further. I also feel sorry for these new victims. Whatever it is that we need to do more of I'm for.
I fear though that apathy will reign and nothing extra will be done.
I'm not sure you fully appreciate the ramifications of what you've written there. You're straying into the realms of thought crime and secret police. And don't mistake nothing extra being done for apathy. Maybe the authorities feel we already have a good balance of liberty and safety, without the need to dragnet every minutae of our lives in the hope of stopping someone commiting a crime before they have even done it.
Some of the things people have suggested in this thread are downright scary. We're supposed to be living in a free progressive society, not willingly submitting to an authoritarian Stasi state. If East Germany is what you're after please go find it somewhere else; I'd hope the majority of people on the UK aren't willing to give up our liberty quite so easily.
Well said mate. Some of the ideas being proposed on here make Sharia law a more moderate alternative.
Mad Eyed Screamer
Moderator
The media should stop reporting it on mass 24 hours. These twats want publicity and notoriety
Don't give it them, don't name them just a quick "this happened today in Nice" No pictures and no reports. Just the facts and move on to the next story. Starve them of what they crave
Blue Haze
Well-Known Member
This is going to keep happening until... when? When do the weekly massacres stop? We can't ban trucks. Shit, basically anyone who can drive can do this.
Honest question. What are we going to do?
Honest question. What are we going to do?
gordondaviesmoustache
Well-Known Member
This.