E-petition against UK online monitoring law

Bobisuruncle54 · 14 Jun 2012 at 22:24

Hi guys,

FYI, the United Kingdom online monitoring law has been published. You can read it here (pdf link). This will allow the monitoring of all your online communications and web browsing, and needless to say, completely invades your privacy. I have signed the petition, and I hope you agree that this shouldn't be passed into law. So let's start the process to get it scrapped.

You can sign the e-petition against it here (direct.gov.uk).

I apologise if a thread has already been created on this.

DAnDan · 14 Jun 2012 at 22:25

No thanks.

The Halk · 14 Jun 2012 at 22:27

I'm not signing a petition without knowing a great deal about it - anyone who does is a ****ing idiot and needs a lobotomy (in my entirely humble opinion).

I'm also not prepared to read an 80 page document to make my mind up.

It'd help if you were to link some kind of fair synopsis of it?

Neil79 · 14 Jun 2012 at 22:28

The Halk said:
I'm not signing a petition without knowing a great deal about it -

lol

E-Petition against UK online monitoring...

Seems obvious?

The Halk · 14 Jun 2012 at 22:28

Neil79 said:
lol

E-Petition against UK online monitoring...

Seems obvious?

Well not really, no. I'm almost certainly going to be against it, but I won't sign a petition without knowing what I'm signing. This isn't Facebook, we're not going to like cancer away.

Bobisuruncle54 · 14 Jun 2012 at 22:29

Yeah that's right, let's forget the idea just because it's a little inconvenient.

Democracy in action.

Summary available here.

RomanNose · 14 Jun 2012 at 22:32

Halk, it's been all over the news though?

he proposals will force internet and phone providers to store details of customer calls, emails and website visits in a major expansion of surveillance laws.
May suggested the laws would only be used to access "crucial bits of information" and would not invade people's privacy.
She also denied that there was a lack of control over the laws despite admitting that there were more than 500,000 requests for such information.

That sums it up quickly.

It is disgusting that the government are trying to sweep it out under the pretense of counter terrorism, I am sure the 7/7 bombing victims would be equally disgusted with this proposal.
BECAUSE IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH TERROISM, TERROISTS CAN USE ENCRYPTED COMMUNICATIONS THROUGH OFFSHORE SERVERS QUITE EASILY.

The Halk · 14 Jun 2012 at 22:32

Bobisuruncle54 said:
Yeah that's right, let's forget the idea just because it's a little inconvenient.

What? You think it's better for people to crayon an X every time some idiot puts a petition in front of them?

Bobisuruncle54 said:
Democracy at the lowest common denominator.

Fixed that for you.

Bobisuruncle54 said:
Summary available here.

Thank you.

KNiVES · 14 Jun 2012 at 22:33

Waiting for obligatory 'I don't do anything wrong so I don't mind it' comment from the resident ocuk morons.

The Halk · 14 Jun 2012 at 22:34

RomanNose said:
Halk, it's been all over the news though?

That sums it up quickly.

It is disgusting that the government are trying to sweep it out under the pretense of counter terrorism, I am sure the 7/7 bombing victims would be equally disgusted with this proposal.

I know, but I've not read detail on it, and most of the articles are worst case/best case type journalistic rubbish. One thing that sticks in my mind is Teresa May going on about how it'll prevent paedophile rings. My eyes rolled at that point.

Cosimo · 14 Jun 2012 at 22:34

No point in voting before one has had the time to disgest the draft bill.

Bobisuruncle54 · 14 Jun 2012 at 22:34

The Halk said:
What? You think it's better for people to crayon an X every time some idiot puts a petition in front of them?

Fixed that for you.

Thank you.

No, somebody with brains would type it into Google for all of the ten seconds that takes. On one hand you're absolutely right, on the other hand you want to be spoon fed information with sources you wouldn't verify or cross examine to make up your mind for you.

You're right, democracy is down to the lowest common denominator indeed.

RomanNose · 14 Jun 2012 at 22:35

Moses said:
Why are you so sure?

OK, well this is never ever going to stop any terrorist attack at all. And they are trying to make it out to be a bill that will catch terrorists.

Craterloads · 14 Jun 2012 at 22:36

Do these e-petitions actualy work?

Also why are the government actually doing this, we know its not for "terrorism"? Whats the real agenda.

DAnDan · 14 Jun 2012 at 22:37

RomanNose said:
OK, well this is never ever going to stop any terrorist attack at all. And they are trying to make it out to be a bill that will catch terrorists.

So, what are you proposing that the government actually intends to do with the bill if it should pass? How do you know it's not for terrorism?

Cosimo · 14 Jun 2012 at 22:40

RomanNose said:
Halk, it's been all over the news though?

That sums it up quickly.

It is disgusting that the government are trying to sweep it out under the pretense of counter terrorism, I am sure the 7/7 bombing victims would be equally disgusted with this proposal.
BECAUSE IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH TERROISM, TERROISTS CAN USE ENCRYPTED COMMUNICATIONS THROUGH OFFSHORE SERVERS QUITE EASILY.

So it's been on the news and all the internet geeks are up in arms as one would expect. I doubt very much whether you have sat down and even read the document. As with Halk, I'd rather take some time to study the draft proposals before making up my mind.

StriderX · 14 Jun 2012 at 22:42

DAnDan said:
So, what are you proposing that the government actually intends to do with the bill if it should pass? How do you know it's not for terrorism?

When has government been truthful?

Ever?

I think that's enough for caution.

The Halk · 14 Jun 2012 at 22:42

Bobisuruncle54 said:
No, somebody with brains would type it into Google for all of the ten seconds that takes. On one hand you're absolutely right, on the other hand you want to be spoon fed information with sources you wouldn't verify or cross examine to make up your mind for you.

You're right, democracy is down to the lowest common denominator indeed.

I have brains thankyouverymuch. 10 seconds into Google isn't going to produce a great summary.

If you could stop being butthurt for just a moment, you might consider it's you that's asking people to sign the petition, so you might consider it appropriate to link some kind of summary, rather than expect everybody else to have to go find it.

I read the summary. It doesn't seem anything like as bad as what people are saying.

The basics of it are that the data which is already collected, will be accessible from a central point by the police, intelligence services, SOCA and HMRC.

A normal police officer will be able to access the logs (not the data) which means, to my understanding anyone with access could look at someone's logs and see they were connecting to extra marital affair sites, or gay porn, or far left/right political sites.

I don't know that I can agree to this because it leaves the door open for abuse by a great deal of people. While they can't access the data that doesn't mean privacy is maintained.

I could only agree to this if access was strictly limited, and logged.

DAnDan · 14 Jun 2012 at 22:44

StriderX said:
When has government been truthful?

Ever?

I think that's enough for caution.

Not really. Show me any evidence that they have plans to use this for something that will negatively impact the life of the every day person, and I'll sign.

The Halk · 14 Jun 2012 at 22:44

Craterloads said:
Do these e-petitions actualy work?

Also why are the government actually doing this, we know its not for "terrorism"? Whats the real agenda.

I don't think so. There's a great deal of morons who will sign any bit of paper put in front of them. Anyone with a bit of sense knows a petition should be ignored.