Page 1 of 3
UK? What the hell? Seriously.
Posted: 17 Dec 2008, 20:44
by sultan2075
Do you guys need to get permission to brush your teeth too?
Seriously, though, I read stories like this pretty regularly about the UK. Does the government really try to control that much of your lives? I apologize if that sounds rude (I really don't mean it to sound that way), I just can't think of a way to ask that question that doesn't come out like that. I find the above article really shocking.
Would the Sisters have to fill out a form saying "vampires" and "meth-fueled bikers" for the ethnic groups?
Posted: 17 Dec 2008, 21:23
by Pista
I had to check the date, as I thought it might have been an April fool's thingy.
Anyone here had to fill one of these in?
Posted: 17 Dec 2008, 21:37
by boudicca
No Steve, I certainly haven't. Because contrary to the view sultan appears to hold of our green and pleasant land, we are not being shackled by a 1984-style State. We do however have sufficient government interference in our lives to ensure that people (generally) don't have to pay for urgently needed medical treatment and piffling stuff like that. The meddling bastards! When western europe learns to follow the US model I'm sure civilization will really advance.
That was me being sarcastic btw.
Posted: 17 Dec 2008, 22:52
by stufarq
boudicca wrote:No Steve, I certainly haven't. Because contrary to the view sultan appears to hold of our green and pleasant land, we are not being shackled by a 1984-style State. We do however have sufficient government interference in our lives to ensure that people (generally) don't have to pay for urgently needed medical treatment and piffling stuff like that. The meddling bastards! When western europe learns to follow the US model I'm sure civilization will really advance.
That was me being sarcastic btw.
Yes, fair point, but in all honesty, the answer to the original question is yes - ever since 9/11, the UK Government has used excuses like terrorism and gang warfare and being a bit black to try and exert unwanted levels of control over our civil liberties. Sultan's hardly the first person to point it out considering that it's been a subject of continual high profile public and political debate for several years now.
There are, of course, many who agree with the Government's position and I'm not trying to get into a detailed political debate here but it can't be denied that this is a major issue in the UK right now and will continue to be for some time.
The Independent wrote:In a letter to Sir Ian Blair, the Met commissioner, Mr Sharkey said: "In explicitly singling out performances and musical styles favoured by the black community we believe the use of Risk Assessment Form 696 is disproportionate, unacceptable and damaging to live music."
Or just plain racist.
On the other hand, anything that stops Craig David performing has to be good so I'm in favour.
Posted: 17 Dec 2008, 23:08
by EvilBastard
I'd love to see what info The Girls put in for this:
Name: Andrew H Taylor
Alias(es): Andrew Eldritch
Address: Nowhere near your sorry little planet
Phone number: 0898-BITE-ME
Effnik background of audience: dodgy darklings, creatures of the night, sad old goffs, rivetheads, ravers, stompers, moshers, shoe-gazers, arm-wavers, pop-kids, emos, and one or two real people who happily tick "other" when asked their effnisity.
Seriously, folks, this is a little worrying. What if the likely audience's ethnic background doesn't match Cap'n Piggsly's expectations? If you say "mostly white," then do they have a quota? Venue capacity is 1000, if more than let's say 250 non-white people (how you define that is anyone's guess) show up then are they turned away at the door?
I can see the value in saying "OK, who's playing, because whoever's playing will have to comply with local tax legislation and if we know they played then we know whether they declared it on their income tax" but that should hardly be the venue's responsibility, especially given that HMG is not exactly obsequious about chasing tax-dodging barristers in preference for going after the much smaller cash-bleed from benefits fraudsters.
Posted: 17 Dec 2008, 23:17
by biggy
"The controversial Form 696 would affect performances in licensed premises by stars such as Craig David"
Sounds like a good deal to me.
Posted: 18 Dec 2008, 13:50
by markfiend
Our "green and pleasant land" is becoming a police state. Did you know that RIPA allows the police access to your mobile phone records (who you've called, who you've texted (although not (yet) the contents of those calls and texts) and where you've been), your ISP's records of your browsing, your landline records, all more-or-less on a whim?
Slight tangent: The police busting Damian Green is very serious challenge to democracy in this country. Having your political opponents arrested is unconscionable!
Posted: 18 Dec 2008, 14:10
by Erudite
Last time I checked there was no "becoming a police state" about it.
Britain is one already!
CCTV cameras, Oyster cards, random drug testing outside of pubs and clubs before entry et al, and yet we've got more violent crime and drug addicts than ever before.
If we spent less money on policing the state and more on actively reducing hte gap between rich and poor and improving social conditions across the board a number of these issues would improve by default.
I'm digressing. I'm ranting. But this kind of sh
it really winds me up something chronic.
Posted: 18 Dec 2008, 14:39
by Silver_Owl
Posted: 18 Dec 2008, 17:06
by Bonksi
It's for our own safety, because we all know that every Muslim is a terrorist, as indeed every Catholic was in/ are in the IRA, every Black Teenage boy carries a gun and we all need our identities protecting.
This will work just as the Criminal Justice Bill stopped everybody dancing in fields.
Oh, sorry, I just slipped into Utter Bollox Mode.
George Orwell was right, he just got the dates a bit wrong. f**k the Fascist Police State.
s**t, we are gonna have to Fight for Our Right to Party!.
Bastards.
Posted: 18 Dec 2008, 17:24
by markfiend
Erudite wrote:Britain is one already!
True.
Posted: 18 Dec 2008, 18:14
by nodubmanshouts
You should all come here to the USA (except those of you who don't like to work - you can stay put). We have more government interference than we used to, but we're still the most free country in the world.
We're just about to get a new president, who we have high hopes for, and the exchange rate (for you) is rather good right now too.
But if you're afraid of all the things you read about America (guns, medical care, etc), try Western Canada. Its not as nice, but they sure have some pretty nice trees.
Posted: 18 Dec 2008, 19:30
by boudicca
nodubmanshouts wrote:But if you're afraid of all the things you read about America (guns, medical care, etc)
Not
afraid, more...
appalled.
Posted: 18 Dec 2008, 19:34
by nodubmanshouts
Which bits?
Posted: 18 Dec 2008, 19:38
by boudicca
Where to start? You named two. But I'm aware this is not a bash the US thread (more a bash the country we are beyond bloody lucky to live in thread
). I'm usually the last person on earth to get patriotic but this thread has just got my back up. Glass houses and stones and all that. I'd take our flaws over yours a million times over.
Posted: 18 Dec 2008, 19:40
by boudicca
sorry excuse me, that reads a lot more arsey than it was intended
Posted: 18 Dec 2008, 19:44
by darkparticle
Posted: 18 Dec 2008, 19:52
by nodubmanshouts
No problem.
I was born and raised in the UK, and voluntarily moved to the USA a decade ago. People crapping on my new country gets my back up too - especially when the crapping is not based on fact, but rather based on biased, anti-American journalism.
The "American model" makes a lot of people very happy, and is not to be dissed. I don't know one person who has come from UK, lived in the USA, and then voluntarily returned to the UK permanently. Not one. And I know a lot of people from the UK.
Posted: 18 Dec 2008, 19:59
by nodubmanshouts
dakrparticle, which country would you say has more freedom?
Posted: 18 Dec 2008, 20:07
by darkparticle
Sure there may be many attractive opportunities but that world is a bubble that doesn't exist out here there is carnage because of how the West, people working from the 'American Model' live, plain and simple.
If metals weren't used for mobile phone batteries they wouldn't need mining in Africa, which would mean the LRA wouldn't fight to control them and profit in sales to manufacture products in the west.
There are deeper concerns beginning to surface about the IMF & EDF work and it's negative effects. Countries forced to sell utilities to pay Internationsl debts, watch the carbon trading deals for more nefarious deeds that directly relate to your scope of choice and comforts.
Freedom isn't free, no there a hefty fuckin' fee
Posted: 18 Dec 2008, 20:14
by nodubmanshouts
So you couldn't list a freerer country, darkparticle, so you're changing the subject? Ok.
Posted: 18 Dec 2008, 20:18
by darkparticle
I couldn't say it's a countrywide thing more a localised way of being. I'd say some places in India will still live in a 'relative' freedom, they got concerns but their future is not dependent on the 'State'. I can't say I'm too aware of freedom I've lived most my life in the UK which is a Police state because no-one knows what Governance is, we have a Government but it's not the same
I like Liberty that I am 'free' to enjoy or take life seriously but that there's also a framework that protects 'freedom' so people have liberty....oh, I went on a bit yeah?
Posted: 18 Dec 2008, 20:21
by darkparticle
Anywhere where tins of food don't need delivering, that's a country with freedom
Posted: 18 Dec 2008, 20:26
by nodubmanshouts
Well, sure, freedom isn't just a set of laws - its a state of being too. But (I think) we're specifically talking about laws here (judging by the first post here).
Parts of rural India may appear free, but when a 13 year old can be legally raped by the town elders for the crime of holding hands with somebody of a lesser-caste, then I'm not inclined to call that more free than the USA.
Posted: 18 Dec 2008, 20:27
by nodubmanshouts
Anywhere where tins of food don't need delivering, that's a country with freedom
I think you just defined Cold War Soviet Union. Interesting definition.
