Author: -
Publisher: BBC News (Online)
Date published: October 2012
Theme: Big Brother
Surveillance
Drones
Control
Summary of text:
Chief Constable Alex Marshall of Hampshire Constabulary, wants to create a debate on whether Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) or Drones, should given extra support of the police. His reason for using the drones are because they can stay in air longer and are cheaper than conventional aircraft.
Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) said: “Nothing will be approved unless safe mechanisms are in place to avoid mid-air collisions.” However Marshall's concern is that the "public need to have a debate and the police need to make sure we understand peoples’ concerns about security and about privacy".
A member of the Home Office (Damian Green) said "Drones are like any other piece of kit - where it’s appropriate or proportionate to use them then we will look at using them."
Key points of the text:
- Chief Constable wants drones because they are cheeper and stay in the air for longer.
- Police want to make should they understand people's concern about security and about privacy.
Key Quote 2-3:
"…the police need to make sure we understand peoples’ concerns about security and about privacy…"
"The use of UAVs in UK airspace has increased with the CAA approving applications from five police forces since 2010."
"Chief Constable Alex Marshall of Hampshire Constabulary said drones stay in the air longer and are cheaper than conventional aircraft."
My Response:
I don't understand why the Chief Constable of the Hampshire Constabulary wants to roll out this idea of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles, when the United Kingdom is already one of the most surveyed and watched countrie and society, in the world. In some parts of the UK (borough of Wandsworth) there are four cameras per 1,000 people. Its total number of cameras - 1,113 - is more than the police departments of Boston [USA], Johannesburg and Dublin City Council combined. [1] So when we already have this incredibly high rate of the state monitoring it's citizens, I don't understand why there is a need for drones to be patrolling the air when all they can do is monitor the citizens, they won't be able to arrest or punish them but observe and monitor.
To me this is just another way for the state to control and survey their citizens, and has an ominous presence of the state depicted in 1984.
[1] http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8159141.stm
My Response:
I don't understand why the Chief Constable of the Hampshire Constabulary wants to roll out this idea of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles, when the United Kingdom is already one of the most surveyed and watched countrie and society, in the world. In some parts of the UK (borough of Wandsworth) there are four cameras per 1,000 people. Its total number of cameras - 1,113 - is more than the police departments of Boston [USA], Johannesburg and Dublin City Council combined. [1] So when we already have this incredibly high rate of the state monitoring it's citizens, I don't understand why there is a need for drones to be patrolling the air when all they can do is monitor the citizens, they won't be able to arrest or punish them but observe and monitor.
To me this is just another way for the state to control and survey their citizens, and has an ominous presence of the state depicted in 1984.
[1] http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8159141.stm
No comments:
Post a Comment