UK Liberty

Nothing to hide, nothing to fear?

Posted in ID Cards, rhetorical questions, state-citizen relationship by ukliberty on December 9, 2009

This Sun journalist applied for (and eventually received) an ID card.

Why has the Sun censored his date of birth and place of birth?

Booze

Posted in law and order, relates to ordinary people, rhetorical questions by ukliberty on November 2, 2009

Social costs of alcohol £20bn pa.

Nearly 9,000 alcohol related deaths in 2007.

In nearly half (45%) of all violent incidents, victims believed offenders to be under the influence of alcohol.

This figure rose to 58% in cases of attacks by people they did not know.

37% of domestic violence cases involve alcohol.

In nearly a million violent attacks in 2007-08, the aggressors were believed to be drunk.

Why don’t we get excited about that? Where is the vociferous moral campaign against the horrors and evils of alcohol? Why don’t the Daily Mail, Sun and Daily Telegraph print angry columns demanding alcohol be classed as an illegal drug?

I ask this because some people don’t seem to understand Nutt’s point.

With the above in mind, re-read what Nutt said:

Another key question we have to address as a society is whether our attitude to drugs is driven because of their harms or are we engaging in a moral debate? One thing this government has done extremely well in the last ten years is to cut away much of the moral argument about drug treatments. They have moved in the direction of improving access to harm reduction treatments, an approach that, I think, is wholly endorsed by the scientific community and by the medical profession. For reasons that are not clear, the same evidence-based change has not happened in relation to the classification of drugs of misuse. I think it should happen because, while I’m not a moral philosopher, it seems to me difficult to defend a moral argument in relation to drugs if you don’t apply it to other equally harmful activities.

[update]

[update 2]

It was pointed out to me that “Booze Britain” constitutes a media-led campaign against the horrors and evils of alcohol.  This is a fair point – but I don’t recall any of the media suggesting alcohol should be made illegal.

    Why is Straw dishonest about the Labour’s illiberalism?

    Posted in politicians on liberty, rhetorical questions, surveillance society by ukliberty on March 5, 2009

    More generally, despite the claims of a systematic erosion of liberty by those organising this weekend’s Convention on Modern Liberty, my very good constituency office files show no recent correspondence relating to fears about the creation in Britain of a “police state” or a “surveillance society”. 

    Jack Straw in the Guardian

    The implication seems to be that there is no evidence of such fear if Jack Straw doesn’t receive such correspondence from the good people of Blackburn.

    But perhaps Jack should check the letters sent to his Ministerial office, too, for example:

    Many of Britain’s leading professional bodies have joined Privacy International and colleague NGO’s to call for the complete withdrawal of the controversial clause 152 data sharing powers. An open letter signed by thirty organisations ranging from the Royal College of Psychiatrists to the Licensed Taxi Drivers Association has condemned the new powers as a dangerous threat to privacy, and has demanded the removal of the clause from the Coroners & Justice Bill.

    Should legislators read legislation prior to voting on it?

    Posted in law and order, rhetorical questions by ukliberty on April 7, 2007