Utopia Talk / Politics / Del. mugshots of innocents too expensive

asdasdfasdfasdfasdfa Member	Fri Apr 20 05:26:43 http://www...igh-court-ruling-a8310896.html 'Too expensive' to delete millions of police mugshots of innocent people, minister claims Up to 20m facial images are retained - six years after High Court ruling that the practice is unlawful because of the 'risk of stigmatisation' Thursday 19 April 2018 Millions of police mugshots of innocent people cannot be deleted because it would be too expensive, a government minister has claimed – despite a High Court ruling that the practice is unlawful. The work would have to be “done manually” by local forces, making the costs “difficult to justify”, a committee of MPs investigating the controversy has been told. The Home Office has also admitted it has no idea how many people have successfully asked for their mugshots to be deleted – amid suspicions that the figure is very low. The revelations were quickly attacked by Norman Lamb, the chairman of the science and technology committee, who has warned the mass retention of facial images raises “fundamental civil liberty issues”. They come just days after it was revealed the Home Office destroyed landing cards which could have helped Windrush arrivals prove their right to stay in the UK - allegedly to comply with data protection laws. “Innocent people should rightly expect that images gathered of them in relation to a crime will be removed if they are not convicted,” Mr Lamb, a Liberal Democrat, said. “This is increasingly important as police forces step up the use of facial recognition at high profile events – including the Notting Hill Carnival for the past two years. “It appears that the police are making-do with current systems and practices even if it results in images of innocent people being retained.” The Independent revealed in January that Mr Lamb’s committee was poised to launch an inquiry after running out of a patience with the government’s failure to act on the controversy. It is six years since the High Court warned of the “risk of stigmatisation of those entitled to the presumption of innocence”, adding that would be particularly harmful in the cases of children. But the Home Office urged forces to carry on retaining the facial images, promising new laws would follow. At least 20m are stored – a staggering one third of the UK population. Meanwhile, a “biometrics strategy” has been delayed for five years, prompting a watchdog’s warning that the number of retained images would rocket, breaching “individual privacy”. Concern has grown about the database as police have developed the ability to capture images using cameras in public places, as well as of people arrested or questioned. At the Notting Hill carnival, and other events, officers use facial recognition software to scan the faces of revellers, despite protests that it is unlawful and institutionally racist. Baroness Williams, the Home Office minister responsible for biometrics, agreed to explain in writing why mass retention is continuing, after appearing before the committee. Her letter, published today, states that mugshots are stored on the computer system of an arresting force before being transferred to the police national database (PND). It meant the images had to be deleted manually by the local force – a “complex exercise” – unless a decision was taken to “upgrade all 43 local systems and the PND”. “Any weeding exercise will have significant costs and be difficult to justify given the off-setting reductions forces would be required to find in order to fund it,” Baroness Williams wrote. Last year, under pressure, ministers agreed that people not convicted of any offence could apply to the police to have their images deleted. However, a Freedom of Information request in 2017 found few requests for custody image removals had been received - and that a third of those were rejected. In her letter, the minister revealed the Home Office was scrambling to compile accurate figures from individual forces. Mr Lamb vowed his committee would continue investigating, adding: “There is also an issue about whether some individuals even know that their image is on police databases in the first place.” Many DNA and fingerprint records have been deleted under legislation brought in by the Coalition government which promised to “roll back the database state”. Ministers have argued mugshots are “less intrusive”, because people’s faces are on public display any way - but the independent biometrics commissioner dismissed the claim.
Seb Member	Sat Apr 21 14:25:58 That is a piss poor excuse. If the police aren't abiding by the law and home office are encouraging them (last I checked parliament passed laws not departments) that should be a scandal. Shows how weak the opposition is right now.
jergul large member	Sun Apr 22 06:37:59 "Shows how weak the opposition is right now." Well, yah. The UK Government often gains strength when it creates foreign enemies for domestic consumption. Not that it matters really. Brexit should still tear it apart.
Seb Member	Sun Apr 22 15:35:45 Jergul: Lol. You really are churchills definition of a fanatic. Cornyn US weak entirely on his own account. Labour under any other leader should have beaten Mays anaemic campaign last year. At this rate I think she'll think through until after brexit. Labour isn't a string enough opposition and the Tories don't want to fail to deliver it. Tory remainders will push for a soft brexit. And leavers will put up with that for now because once out, we're out. Divergence can the come later. They will not want a referendum that could lead to "hard remain" under worse conditions than previously. A change of leader and the Tories could then beat Cornyn. Brexit will be Corbyn's tuition fees for many, and his coalition of voters is too small.
jergul large member	Sun Apr 22 17:25:39 Seb Right to the adhom? Nice! You would have to be pretty naive not to think that domestic politics play an important part in conservative party grandstanding in foreign affairs. The tories lost their majority and are effectively dead men walking. DUP will not be nice about confidence and support, alternately the conservative party will implode. A external enemy fits the ticket nicely for a Thatcher style solution to the problem. Think through what? PMs cannot call early elections without a 2/3rds majority vote from parliament. Labour gained 9 points, the conservatives 5.5. Wishful thinking on your part to imagine Labour returning to Blair type leadership.
Seb Member	Sun Apr 22 17:48:05 Jergul: Not an adhom to observe you are incapable of changing your mind or the subject. Suffice into say no, Corbyn's weakness cannot be blamed on, e.g. Syria and Russia. Take for example this week, where even the daily fucking mail is condemning windrush deportations: a policy devised by Theressa May herself as Home sec. It's dominated the news cycle but Labour have totally failed to capitalise it. Andrew Adonis furious tweets have a greater impact on national conversation than the Labour front bench. I'm sorry, the issue is Labour is fundamentally weak. Their policies are weak, their tactics are weak, an and lies starmer, their use of parliamentary process is weak. His own MPs think he fucked up handling of that but one only needs look at the fact he lost the most winnable election Labour has fought since Blair's landslides. He made tiny gains, but irrelevant really. He still lost by a large margin. And many voting Labour thought they were voting for a party opposing a hard brexit or brexit outright. So Labour's support will likely fall at next election. The only question is whether the tories will fall faster. But the Tories oust shit leaders. May will be booted for someone new come next election. Cornyn won't. So he'll fight the next election having lost his previous one, having alienated remainers with his support of brexit while also alienating the middle class. Btw Where did I say Labour returning to Blair type leadership was on the cards? The inability for that to happen is a core part of my thesis. That's part of the basic weakness of Labour right now. Inability to construct a big tent coalition of voters.
jergul large member	Sun Apr 22 18:39:20 Seb Suffice to say that you are merely alleging weakness because the home office answers to the current government, and somehow it is the opposition that is to blame for being weak. Could we not more fairly say that it shows May is weak. Unless of course we have an agenda claiming Corbyn is weak on every possible occassion. May's fundamental weakness is causing all kinds of fall out (I am mostly concerned with how attempts to bolster support causes havoc in foreign policy). Its the kind of lame tory stuff that gave brexit in the first place (that disaster will be hard to top, but May is doing her best). A 9 point gain is not a tiny gain. Or the UK is returning to a two party system. The conservatives in bed with DUP is reason enough to shy away from minor, insignificant and useless parties with around 10 seats in Parliament. Big tent would seem to be new labour by your line of argument (waah middle class). As if more than 40% of the vote is not big tent.
jergul large member	Sun Apr 22 18:42:58 The wishful thinking is that of running an election on the option of providing consent and support to either new labour, or the conservatives. Making the case that a vote for the liberal democratic party is a winning vote no matter what if it lands in the balance of power between labour and the conservatives. Or some pipe-dream like that.
Seb Member	Mon Apr 23 03:30:53 Jergul: Has someone hacked your account? The govt is able to ignore and brush things off that would be resignation matters in other times because the opposition is weak. A competent opposition would be having a field day with information rights; tying Cambridge Analytics, brexit, conservative overspend at the last GE, this police stuff, deletion of eindrush boarding cards, the fact that DCMS havet yet enacted the data protection bills or provided guidance ahead of her, and widespread unreadyness for GDPR in govt dept (this refusal to delete is a breach of GDPR which becomes enforceable next month) into a single coherent narrative. Instead - silence. Possibly because Cornyn is playing 11 dimensional chess to ensure brexit happens but most likely because Labour is dysfunctional. So a weak govt that would fall in ordinary times right now has a free hand. Your reading of foreign policy is dead wrong. Where is this supposed threat to May? There's zero prospect of a leadership challenge and less for a GE when Labour is polling worse than before the last one. You are once again trying to blame the UK for an act of aggression carried put against us. A 9 point gain in the conditions of the last election is anaemic. Or put it another way "Corbyn, against a backdrop of widespread hatred of the conservatives, the most unifying policy context for the left in decades, the most incompetent Tory campaign under the weakest leadership in modern times, at peak austerity - did worse than Gordon Brown". This is not a platform for victory. Generally, an important factor in GEs is the relative polling of the leaders Cornyn has never exceeded May by a significant margin, and never at all for two months running. The last time he level pegged was October and he's now 14 points down after a steady decline. There's no discernable impact on the polls from Syria or Skripal affair. The public have made up their mind on the relative merits of May and Cornyn. And Corbyn is losing support of remainers - and Momentum is alienating more voters than it brings in. You can't demonize moderate voters and then wonder then they don't turn up to support you. Labour can do well (I expect local councils next mlnth to be ok, but also expect a boost to green and lib dem as a message 'RE Labour's brexit policy). But Labour need someone like Sadiq Khan before they can win again.
jergul large member	Mon Apr 23 04:51:48 Seb We will just have to agree to disagree. It is again an issue where we have absolutely no common outlook from which to base an argument. The reason why labour shadow, back and front benchers are not making hay is in my opinion not that they have taken stupid drugs collectively, but rather for 5 reasons: 1. Never interupt people making mistakes. And May is making many (you listed some) 2. Brexit negotiations are ongoing. Not a good time to upset the cart. 3. Anti-Russian posturing is ongoing. Not a good time to upset the cart. At least not until Yulia's groomed sob-story (if any) hits the public. 4. Make sure May owns the mess that is Brexit shields her government for sure. The loyal opposition is not a ruling alternative until that mess is done. 5. Stay on message for council elections. Renting and school funding issues should maim the tories.
patom Member	Mon Apr 23 05:48:56 The police don't take the mug shots. They are taken by Corrections Officers inside a jail as part of the booking process when someone is arrested. Once someone is adjudicated and released from the jail their file is kept indefinitely. Even when they die their files are pulled from inactive files to what we referred to as the dead files.
Seb Member	Mon Apr 23 07:32:02 Jergul: 1. May is making mistakes, but by failing to oppose and voting with the govt, Labour is endorsing them. 2. Depends, but yes, that holds if you support brexit. The majority of labour voters don't, which is why Labour will wind up being punished. 3. Utter irrelevance. The Russia thing is a few weeks old, the political dynamics were hardly effected. There's no signal in the polls. And it's already been replaced twice. *You* care about Skripal. Most voters don't. 4. Well exactly - no pressure on may. 5. We shall see. There are a lot of extremely pissed of labour voters that thought they were voting for soft/no brexit and then got told "80% of people voted for pro brexit parties". Patom: This is in the UK.
jergul large member	Mon Apr 23 07:48:48 lol@pulling a thatcher by creating foreign adversaries is "totally irrelevant". It her whole political survival strategy. I merely disagree on your analysis of the two other points.
Seb Member	Mon Apr 23 08:03:11 Jergul: Loony left propaganda to explain away repeated failure to win elections.
jergul large member	Mon Apr 23 09:57:36 Maybot Right back to the adhoms. Nice! You are mistaken on the timeline. Thatcher tactics came after the election and when May really needed a political survival strategy. She could have lucked out personally and landed in the loyal opposition. She did not and has a DUP albatros hanging from her neck. Hard to imagine a worse outcome for her.
Seb Member	Mon Apr 23 11:20:48 Seriously, the whole "Thatcher Falkland way" stuff is silly. Very very silly. Give an example of foreign stuff "after the election". Kicked out by losing? Shed have to have resigned. Come on, you can't be this off beat, you are trolling right?
jergul large member	Mon Apr 23 11:37:41 The Salisbury narrative and Syria bombings are two examples. External enemies are great for bolstering sitting PM support. That this effect the PMs narrative and decisionmaking is obvious, particularly when we know and accept she is fighting for her political survival.
jergul large member	Mon Apr 23 11:38:13 You cannot be this off beat naive. you are trolling, right?
Seb Member	Mon Apr 23 14:12:30 Jergul: I.e. stuff that happened nearly a year after the election at a time of zero pressure on the govt. Mays personal ratings are flat, there is no immediaye tgreat to her, and in a months time nobody will remember Mays handling of the Skripal incident, let alone next May or next GE.
jergul large member	Mon Apr 23 15:05:30 Ie stuff that happened as the pressure from brexit negotiations and actual departure increase and the time approaches for May to be let go. Its not about the details, its about building Russia up as an external enemy. Stay tuned for endless reminders of that narrative. Its the only survival strategy she has.
Seb Member	Mon Apr 23 16:01:08 A minute ago it was straight after the election! And you agreed there's no specific pressure now because labour aren't pushing a Brexit issue. May's survival strategy is deliver Brexit.
jergul large member	Tue Apr 24 01:40:54 Seb A minute ago it was your reading difficulties manifesting themselves! Perhaps its worse when you use your phone to read stuff. Stick with a big screen is my advice! There is no specific pressure now because of the 5 points I listed. You agreed a while back that May was finished. And delivering Brexit is like having delivering rain as a survival strategy. Yepp, brexit will happen and it will rain. But neither will help May survive politically. External enemies is May's survival strategy (the narrative of Putin's personal culpability timed nicely with the Russian election incidentally). Though interestingly, it is also Boris' springboard to PM strategy. What a dog's breakfast.
Seb Member	Tue Apr 24 05:55:04 S: Utter irrelevance. The Russia thing is a few weeks old, the political dynamics were hardly effected. There's no signal in the polls. And it's already been replaced twice. J: "You are mistaken on the timeline. Thatcher tactics came after the election and when May really needed a political survival strategy." So ... not at her height of vulnerability inthe weeks after the election, but in the ladt few weeks when shes incredibly secure. The facts don't fit! Mays strategy is deliver a smooth Brexit with no visible shocks to act as a trigger crisis. Then use next two years to do some other stuff around inequality. Foreign policy crises are bad - they can be mishandled and they can weaken rather than strengthen. See Blair. The idea she's running around fomenting or exacerbating foreign crises doesn't fit at all. It's a fairly naive and knee jerk strategy anyway.
jergul large member	Tue Apr 24 07:16:55 Seb Wrong! Completely relevant! "Thatcher tactics came after the election and when May really needed a political survival strategy." That is exactly what I said. The need for a strategy was given by a weak minority conservative government. Executing the strategy was at the earliest possible convenient excuse. The facts fit! An orderly brexit and window dressing thereafter is not on the table and is not Mays exit strategy. The facts don't fit! She is running around formenting or exacerbating foreign crises. A strategy that appeals to a fairly naive and knee-jerk electorate.
Seb Member	Tue Apr 24 07:51:32 Jergul: I think you need a lie down in a dark room for a bit. Your imagination has rather got the better of you. The Skripal affair barely registers on the polls and any effect will be long gone by an election. As an effect these "foreign crisis to manage elections" are naive - as in they don't obviously work. They are highly risky even if you don't get found out; and only work cost to elections. May's character as PM (as understood by the electorate) is fixed. You can't shift the dial on that. She's seen as an unimaginative plodder. The correct thing to do is to focus on a narrative that Britain's problems need an unimaginative plodder. Creating a foreign policy crisis is as close to an anti-strategy as you can find.
jergul large member	Tue Apr 24 09:43:22 Seb I think you should not use your cell-phone as a reading device. You do not understand what you read. Having Russia and Putin (Assad and regime occupied Syria) as enemies not only helps the conservatives in the polls, it boosts politians fronting hardlines politically. Registering on the polls assumes all other things are equal. Which they will not be until brexit is finalized. Crises are the means of sustaining vilification. Vilification is done by stretching both narrative and actions far beyond what an evidence based approach would entail. I think the practical management occurs like this: Something enters conservative leadership field of vision. Options are considered for dealing with the something. Crisis maximization far beyond the factual basis is chosen because May and to some extent Boris (and whatever the hell the defense minister is called) think it benefits them. May for political survival. Boris and whats his face for internal conservative party positioning. That you think May is not optimizing her chances of political survival is fair enough. But you do not think she will survive in any event. I think an unimaginative plodder facing down evil Putin and evil Assad fits the ticket nicely.
Seb Member	Tue Apr 24 12:01:13 Jergul: You appear to be confirming my interpretation of what you wrote. Where and how do you think my understanding of your position deviates from your intent?
jergul large member	Tue Apr 24 14:51:36 Seb It matters that Assad and Putin are evil. The strategy is based on vilification. Manufactured crises are merely a tool to that end and need not in themselves register for as long as the evil imagery is maintained. What say you Seb? Are Assad and Putin evil?
Seb Member	Tue Apr 24 17:45:59 Jergul: Are ... You ... microdosing?
jergul large member	Wed Apr 25 05:49:00 Seb No. You should ask yourself why May, Boris, and Gavin (I googled the defense secretary. Well worth it for a Gavin) choose to hardball Salisbury and Syria given that the option to wait for evidence was available and something the opposition would have opted for. Political scheming leaps immediately to mind as typical of how the conservative nomenclatura does things (the brexit referedum a case in point). May for political survival, Boris and Gavin for positioning when that attempt inevitably fails. That is my theory. Which I have argued for over numerous posts now. You disagree. Fair enough. But adhoms are uncalled for and do not serve to make your position stronger.
Seb Member	Thu Apr 26 10:14:51 jergul: " to wait for evidence was available and something the opposition would have opted for." What new evidence has arrived or might be expected to arrive? The UK had conducted it's own analysis, so the OPWC wasn't going to tell it anything we did not already know. This is the typical highly disingenuous argument. The fact that there was a rapid, well coordinated diplomatic response far more likely points to a plan prepared in contingency following litvenenko. At an official level, it was led by Mark Sedwill who is the National Security Advisor who sits outside of FCO and or MoD and in CO. The fact that Sedwill is no lined up to replace Heywood as Cabinet Secretary points to "very well put together plan". This doesn't look like something cooked up in a couple of days. I think your theory owes more to excessive cynicism. The supposed ad-homs are no worse than the silly stuff you engage in. It's also not really ad-hom fallacy as my characterisation follows from the ridiculous arguments - e.g. "Socratese says the student is stupid for beliving that" is different from "Socratese says we must not believe the student because the student is stupid".
jergul large member	Thu Apr 26 10:42:09 Maybot (I am glad we have established its not really an ad-hom when it follows from the rediculous arguments you make). Its a typical argument from someone who believes in the rule of law and not a fan of rule by decree. It would follow that I would be looking for evidence that would stand up in a court of law.
	show deleted posts

Your Name:
Your Password:
Your Message: