£400m to be spent on putting CCTV cameras inside private citizens homes....

Former Member

Under the inauspicious guise of keeping an eye on "bad families"...

Story.

Eugh....not only a shocking waste of money but further proof that our 'left-wing' government is intent on taking us back to 1984. That Orwell chap must have been psychic.

What does everyone else think?

Former Member

I think an awful lot of coats will be hung on cameras.

Former Member

Provided it's a true story (which remains to be seen, coming from the rag that gave us the swan-eating immigrants), it is both disturbing and a complete waste of money. I couldn't care less what 'troublesome' families get up to at home to be honest. It's their actions outside that are the problem.

Former Member

there have been houses like this for year for families who are thought to be at risk of abuse. they are normally used for rehabilitation of the parents, without breaking families up. Its used as a very last ditch attempt before taking kids into care. they have also been used in cases of where children from a family have been taken into care, and then the couple has another child and they monitor their progress for 6 months to make sure that this child isn't at risk anymore

Former Member

Aladdin wrote: »

Provided it's a true story (which remains to be seen, coming from the rag that gave us the swan-eating immigrants), it is both disturbing and a complete waste of money. I couldn't care less what 'troublesome' families get up to at home to be honest. It's their actions outside that are the problem.

So even if the kids might be being abused? I know it was only a throwaway comment so I'm not picking you up on it, just saying sometimes it's worth being extra clear. FWIW my cousins kids have just been listed as vulnerable or something (basically go on a list where the government keeps an eye on you) and whilst my cousin and her partner aren't nasty or abusive, they are no model parents, happily spending the day on facebook or in front of the tv while the kids crawl about the house doing god knows what.

Former Member

I've got first hand experience with some of the so called "parents" of children who are at risk. If putting a camera inside their house and recording them is what it takes to keep a child from harm then I'm all for it. If it's a breach of their privacy then tough shit. They should learn how to care for their children.

Former Member

I don't doubt *a few* are too thick to think it through, but surely most people who want to abuse their kids and have cameras installed at home will simply wait until they're out of shot (whether be in the toilet, the staircase, the lift, etc) to do so? CCTV is not going to stop such behaviour. Not unless you plant it on the kid's head.

Former Member

The Devil's Kitchen has much the same opinion as I do of Schools Secretary and full-time Adolf Hitler lookalike Edward Michael Cunt - any man who attempts to claim for two Remembrance Sunday poppy wreaths on his expenses deserves all the bile and abuse going, as far as I'm concerned. DK's analysis of this story is bang on the money.

Former Member

Aladdin wrote: »

I don't doubt *a few* are too thick to think it through, but surely most people who want to abuse their kids and have cameras installed at home will simply wait until they're out of shot (whether be in the toilet, the staircase, the lift, etc) to do so? CCTV is not going to stop such behaviour. Not unless you plant it on the kid's head.

Stupid morons are actually in some ways the brightest people on the face of the planet, just when you think nobody can be more stupid than a particular example or instance you see, some ingenious git goes and manages it.

Former Member

Aladdin wrote: »

I don't doubt *a few* are too thick to think it through, but surely most people who want to abuse their kids and have cameras installed at home will simply wait until they're out of shot (whether be in the toilet, the staircase, the lift, etc) to do so? CCTV is not going to stop such behaviour. Not unless you plant it on the kid's head.

it's not, but there are more forms of abuse than just hitting/doing sexual things to them.
Neglect is the most common, and it's something "parents" like this do everything they can to hide from social services, and normally they are successful. Then as soon as the social have gone, things revert back. They're raising the next generation, and the they're creating a generation of unhealthy, aggressive, unfit, unclean, unkempt children.

Former Member

Whowhere wrote: »

I've got first hand experience with some of the so called "parents" of children who are at risk. If putting a camera inside their house and recording them is what it takes to keep a child from harm then I'm all for it. If it's a breach of their privacy then tough shit. They should learn how to care for their children.

The scariest shit is people like you are allowed to wear a uniform.

Former Member

morrocan roll wrote: »

The scariest shit is people like you are allowed to wear a uniform.

If that's what you think then fine. If you'd seen some of the things I'd seen you'd think differently.

Former Member

I can see both sides of the argument on this one. It's cheaper and better than putting children into care. It's also the thin end of the wedge.

I think the fence is pretty comfy.

Former Member

Kermit wrote: »

I can see both sides of the argument on this one. It's cheaper and better than putting children into care. It's also the thin end of the wedge.

I think the fence is pretty comfy.

I think the idea of monitoring a "parent" who is neglecting their children will ultimately have the desired effect anyway. Either
1.They know they're being watched so they start looking after their kids because they HAVE to.
2.They know they're being watched, and start looking after their kids because they realise they are awful parents.
3.They know they're being watched but don't give a shit. They continue neglecting their kids but now the Police and Social services have the evidence they need to put the children with a family who can look after them and prosecute the "parents" for neglect.

Some people are poor excuses for human beings. Some of the things they do to their children are at best disgusting and at worst inhuman. Anything that prevents more children dying at the hands of adults who should be sterilised can only be a good thing.

Former Member

All well and good, but who decides who's a good parent and who's a bad parent? It's very easy to set precedents that are difficult to get rid of. It's very easy to then justify cameras in every parent's house- after all, most sexual abusers are relatives and are never known to police.

Social services can't always be trusted to get their decisions right, either- just look at the number of parents who've lost their children because of unfounded allegations. Look at Sally Clark.