mercalia wrote:Bonefishblues wrote:thirdcrank wrote:
I think this is the wrong analogy. Let's suppose a posse of police were to be on a street, stopping everybody and requiring them to prove their ID to check if they were - in a general sense - of interest to the police. The fact that some might not consent to this isn't - in any legal sense - suspicious.
This is similar to the debate about ID cards.
The guy was making an active show of his non-compliance and being filmed doing so - there was an element of cause celebre about it, I thought, but yes, I agree, we need some greater clarity about the extent of our privacy.
Perhaps it is now time for a Bill of Rights to enshrine them.
I dont think it is illegal to wear some thing over your face in public ( hence the gear that muslim women wear) so the police should have no presumption that you are a crook and need investigating? maybe you are just a odd person or some one famous ( they have been known to put on a disguise?) or just ugly, dont like your looks?
I think my point was that he was very obviously (and publicly) actively avoiding it, hence the suspicion as to his motives. It's the sort of to-and-fro we can continue, our even interchanging sides, I suspect, but with the onset of this tech I do think there's a significant grey area that needs resolution.