Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter


Forgot your password?
United Kingdom Crime Government Privacy

David Cameron Says Fictional Crime Proves Why Snooper's Charter Is Necessary 179

An anonymous reader sends this story from TechDirt: "You may recall the stories from the past couple years about the so-called 'snooper's charter' in the UK — a system to further legalize the government's ability to spy on pretty much all communications. It was setting up basically a total surveillance system, even beyond what we've since learned is already being done today. Thankfully, that plan was killed off by Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg. However, Prime Minister David Cameron is back to pushing for the snooper's charter — and his reasoning is as stupid as it is unbelievable. Apparently, he thinks it's necessary because the fictional crime dramas he watches on TV show why it's necessary. Cameron said, 'I love watching, as I probably should stop telling people, crime dramas on the television. There's hardly a crime drama where a crime is solved without using the data of a mobile communications device. What we have to explain to people is that... if we don't modernise the practice and the law, over time we will have the communications data to solve these horrible crimes on a shrinking proportion of the total use of devices and that is a real problem for keeping people safe.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

David Cameron Says Fictional Crime Proves Why Snooper's Charter Is Necessary

Comments Filter:
  • The bigger problem (Score:5, Informative)

    by petes_PoV ( 912422 ) on Saturday February 01, 2014 @04:05PM (#46129759)
    ... is that a large number of the couch potatos in the country will nod quietly and agree with him.

    We already know that things which happen in soap operas come to pass, in real life - as programmes like those set the agenda for what "ordinary people" assume is socially acceptable: both for their own behaviour and that of others. Those programmes (and cop shows, too) also tell people what is an acceptable reaction to given situations.

    Some (non-viewers) might say that these are fictional drama and therefore should be treated as non-real and non-realistic, but just check out TV forums and see how many posters refer to actors by their characters' names. For a lot of people, TV is real-life: just as Google IS the internet as far asa they're concerned.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 01, 2014 @04:24PM (#46129867)

    That's why politicians start from ridiculous propositions -- so that any "compromise" is well in their favor.

    And while we're at it...

    Whenever a controversial law is proposed, and its supporters, when confronted with an egregious abuse it would permit, use a phrase along the lines of 'Perhaps in theory, but the law would never be applied in that way' - they're lying. They intend to use the law that way as early and as often as possible.

    Meringuoid's Law [], 2005, Slashdot.

Q: How many IBM CPU's does it take to execute a job? A: Four; three to hold it down, and one to rip its head off.