Poll: Who is going insane?
Hughsie
Hughsie's Dad
Both
Neither
I have no idea. Hell, I'm only voting because I don't want to feel left out
[Show Results]
 
Who's lost the plot? Me or my Dad?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
31-05-2012, 05:40 AM
RE: Who's lost the plot? Me or my Dad?
I tend to agree with your dad on all 3. But not for the reasons he gave.

But no you are not crazy. Well you are crazy. Just slightly less crazy than some of our members. And my flying pink elephant agrees.

Behold the power of the force!
[Image: fgYtjtY.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
31-05-2012, 05:50 AM
RE: Who's lost the plot? Me or my Dad?
I'll answer point by point.

#1 - You're crazy. CCTV everywhere is evil, especially when only the government holds the keys to the tapes.
#2 - You're crazy. Allowing police to keep your DNA without probable cause is presumably unconstitutional in some parts of the world. In general I want to be treated as innocent until proven guilty, and that means that the government doesn't get to take information from me that I don't voluntarily give unless they have a reasonable reason to suspect me of something.
#3 - You're both crazy. Legal documents can be legally enforced, but they can also be changed by agreement and in some cases you can take the risk that they will not be enforced. It sounds like the bank was essentially trying to lay down conditions to ensure proper restructure of a potentially failing business. If Gordon was providing a more detailed restructuring model then there's no reason why that couldn't be taken to the bank and potentially sorted out. There's also no reason why if the changes were successful and the loan repaid that the bank would try to enforce anything. The problem will come if Gordon's restructure fails and the contract has not been changed. The guy will probably lose big if this occurs.

So - you're both crazy, but he's less crazy. What do you know?

Give me your argument in the form of a published paper, and then we can start to talk.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Hafnof's post
31-05-2012, 05:56 AM
RE: Who's lost the plot? Me or my Dad?
1) The Government generally doesn't hold all the tapes. I would think a large proportion of CCTV in England is own by private business protecting their property.

2)See this thread.

3) I said that either the bank would have agreed or decided not to challenge it. He was saying that it's possible that the bank hadn't agreed and did fight it but didn't have the grounds to.

Best and worst of Ferdinand .....
Best
Ferdinand: We don't really say 'theist' in Alabama. Here, you're either a Christian, or you're from Afghanistan and we fucking hate you.
Worst
Ferdinand: Everyone from British is so, like, fucking retarded.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
31-05-2012, 06:02 AM
RE: Who's lost the plot? Me or my Dad?
(31-05-2012 05:50 AM)Hafnof Wrote:  I'll answer point by point.

#1 - You're crazy. CCTV everywhere is evil, especially when only the government holds the keys to the tapes.
#2 - You're crazy. Allowing police to keep your DNA without probable cause is presumably unconstitutional in some parts of the world. In general I want to be treated as innocent until proven guilty, and that means that the government doesn't get to take information from me that I don't voluntarily give unless they have a reasonable reason to suspect me of something.
#3 - You're both crazy. Legal documents can be legally enforced, but they can also be changed by agreement and in some cases you can take the risk that they will not be enforced. It sounds like the bank was essentially trying to lay down conditions to ensure proper restructure of a potentially failing business. If Gordon was providing a more detailed restructuring model then there's no reason why that couldn't be taken to the bank and potentially sorted out. There's also no reason why if the changes were successful and the loan repaid that the bank would try to enforce anything. The problem will come if Gordon's restructure fails and the contract has not been changed. The guy will probably lose big if this occurs.

So - you're both crazy, but he's less crazy. What do you know?
And if there was a bank holding everybody's DNA and the police were able to use it to find someone who killed or raped or something and stop them before they did it again, that would still be considered crazy and 'unconstitutional'.

I pose this question, what is more 'unconstitutional', numeric victims being attacked/raped/killed etc.. before police are able to stop the offender, putting people in very real serious danger. OR you having your DNA in their records that they will likely (unless you're up to something dodgy) never even need.

That is the question you have to ask yourself.

The exact same goes for the CCTV cameras. I say put more up, anything that could help stop perpetrators from continuing doing whatever awful crime they are doing.


What? Do you think the government has time to just sit down and stalk individuals all day? "Oh he's talking to some women, lets blackmail him!". Hell no, that will never happen. And even if it did happen it would be very remote and likely a one off thing, not like daily basis by any means. The cons of having your face for a few seconds as you're walking down the street on a security camera real are far outweighed by the the pros of catching criminals and protecting society.



I'm actually shocked so many people are against things like nation wide DNA or CCTVs, or even these remote drones that fly around. Makes you think they've got something to hide.
But I say swob away, get everyones DNA, I'll be first in line, I got nothing to hide and if it saves lives, swob away.

[Image: 3cdac7eec8f6b059070d9df56f50a7ae.jpg]
Now with 40% more awesome.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes earmuffs's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: