"Auditors" Police, security guards etc

OneTenner

LE
Book Reviewer
I'm sure we've all seen the CCTV warning signs claiming they're 'for our safety' and 'to prevent crime' - they don't, they just enable it to be recorded and put out on channel 5... Anyway, is there not an irony in @Filthy_contract being surveilled, tracked and ID'd by a system that was justified as a crime prevention measure and not a wide-scale monitoring of the public at large? Yet when cameras are turned on those who use such systems, precisely 'for the prevention of crime' well, recording of it, anyway they cry foul? well, you reap what you sow. Possibly 'in your face' would be a more appropriate phrase to use.
I'm not anti po-po, and I'm not a supporter of those seeking to disassemble society but I do think you should heed what the rest of us were told when concerns about the use and omnipotence of CCTV were made - (to paraphrase) It's there to help make a safer society, if you're doing nothing wrong, you've nothing to fear.
 

Themanwho

LE
Book Reviewer
Hey, you're the one asserting that citizen journalists are trying to overwhelm the forces of law and order with YouTube videos, then windmilling at everyone who disagrees with you.
"Citizen journalists"? Oh, I think you mean cnuts with cameras...
 
Well, that would be the narcisistic way of viewing it
It seems some people will quite happily see others rights dismissed, but will scream blue murder if they feel they have been dealt with harshly.
Oh, the irony
 
And no doubt they will. That doesn't alter the fact that cnuts with cameras produce nothing positive, they waste the scarce policing resources in order to make dull repetitive videos which apparently appeal to those who wish the forces of law and order ill for whatever reason.

True, but if they are cünts not breaking the law there’s nothing that can be done. If there’s nothing that can be done why waste time doing nothing?
 
"Citizen journalists"? Oh, I think you mean cnuts with cameras...

If I'd meant that, I'd have written it.

It's good to know you're running out of ideas though. You could probably leave the thread right now and no-one would notice you'd left.

I rather suspect you'll make the usual rookie error.
 
Last edited:
Again I am forced to ask exactly who is wasting police resources? the cnuts with cameras or the cnuts in the black and white uniform who overreact to the presence of an odd bloke with a camera?

Terrorist clearly undertaking a hostile recce:

b4c261aa0f61edb98967830c1cdaa1a4.jpg



Nothing to see here:

woman-pram-16012079.jpg
 

Themanwho

LE
Book Reviewer
If I'd meant that, I'd have written it.

It's good to know you're running out of ideas though. You could probably leave the thread right now and no-one would notice you'd left.

I rather suspect you'll make the usual rookie error.
If you consider that self righteous no-mark "AB" and his ilk to be "citizen journalists" rather than the selfish, attention seeking trouble makers that they are, then there's really very little hope for you.
 

Themanwho

LE
Book Reviewer
True, but if they are cünts not breaking the law there’s nothing that can be done. If there’s nothing that can be done why waste time doing nothing?
Again I am forced to ask exactly who is wasting police resources? the cnuts with cameras or the cnuts in the black and white uniform who overreact to the presence of an odd bloke with a camera?
Post #599 refers to both your questions.

Edit to add relevant quotes:

Unfortunately if the Police find some prat filming a potential target (police station, hospital, army camp etc) then they need to question the reason for his actions. This is the hook allowing the cnut with a camera to confect a conflict by refusing to cooperate and "asserting his rights", when the whole reason for him doing so is to enable filming of that conflict.

*Snip*

These "Auditors" are of exactly the same ilk: using their rights to gum up the works and make themselves the centre of a large mess, in exactly the same manner as the Insulate Britain bellends. It's just a matter of scale; they're all attention seeking, trouble making scum, who would benefit from a damn good ignoring. Sadly, they're just clever enough to make themselves impossible to ignore.

I don't know what the answer is, but I know it isn't to legitimise these attention seeking parasites, by pretending they have a point..
 
Last edited:
Unfortunately if the Police find some prat filming a potential target (police station, hospital, army camp etc) then they need to question the reason for his actions. This is the hook allowing the cnut with a camera to confect a conflict by refusing to cooperate and "asserting his rights", when the whole reason for him doing so is to enable filming of that conflict.

I don't know what the answer is, but I know it isn't to legitimise these attention seeking parasites, by pretending they have a point..

No, they really don't.

"Police officers have the power to stop and search anyone who they reasonably suspect to be a terrorist under Section 43 of the Terrorism Act."

Using a camera is not evidence of terrorist activity.
Refusing to volunteer unnecessary information is not evidence of terrorist activity.
Being annoying is not evidence of terrorist activity.

It matters not whether or not you feel they have a point; showing up police and jumped-up council staff as officious, overbearing nincompoops by legal means is a legitimate protest against police and civil agencies investing themselves with powers and authority that they do not legally possess.
 

New Posts

Latest Threads

Top