Janis Sharp, mother of accused Pentagon hacker Gary McKinnon, is upbeat about her run for Parliament despite acknowledging she has little chance of becoming an MP. Sharp is contesting the safe Labour seat of Blackburn held by Jack Straw, the Justice secretary, as an independent in a campaign that aims to highlight the erosion of …
If she thinks that her son is "vulnerable" because of Aspurger's, does she support him and other asspies being placed into long-term custodial care? Or should they, even if being congenitally incapable of conforming to society's norm, still be be allowed to roam free in society, but not be held responsible, legally or criminally, for their actions? Shouldn't people not responsible for their actions be isolated from society, both for their own good and the good of society? I understand that that might prevent her from seeing her son as often as she wants, or under the conditions that she might prefer, but, personally speaking, I really don't think that that is what should determine public policy. Of course, she would certainly feel otherwise.
"f Ms Sharp asked around the town she would probably find that the concern was that there were not enough cameras not that there were too many."
Yeah because EVERYONE thinks there should be at least 100 CCTV cameras watching them at all times.
Ah, the "fighting crime" defense..
I think I maybe ought to start collecting all those reports that clearly indicate that cameras do ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to FIGHT crime. All they occasionally do is provide information to catch a criminal (read: solve the crime after it has taken place).
That it is vaguely possible to catch a criminal (as long as no hoodie was worn) is, of course, an extremely helpful thought while you're lying on the pavement bleeding to death after being stabbed.
If you shoot one in ten people you may actually reduce the crime rate in a similar fashion.
actually i think if you were to shoot 1 in 10 you would have a far greater effect on crime. i seem to recall reading in these hallowed pages recently some stats about how the thousands of cameras in london have assisted in on average 3 arrests per year or something simmilar.
and on a slightly tangential issue when the filth beat an innocent bystander to death with at leat 4 cameras on them they are let off anyway.
Best of luck to Mrs. McKinnon. I for one would love to see that pompous self important dipshit straw taken down a peg or two
Indeed, nobody seems to care but a few
For years I'd always assumed Labour's rhetoric about only the wealthy caring about civil liberties was their usual tripe - a pack of lies designed to bring itself about - but recently it does seem that at least in my circle I'm the only one who sees anything wrong with Deep Packet Inspection, Interception Modernisation, indeed CCTV, traffic cameras, having to hand over encryption keys or being locked away, and indeed the ID Cards which everyone seems to forget *will* eventually become mandatory and their current voluntary state is simply so Labour can brush questions aside this election.
Seriously though, on my trip to college every day, we pass about 9 speed cameras - enough to lose your license twice and more over. A string of 4 are actually all within line of sight of each other - and this on a rather winding road. It's plain moneygrabbing - there's no real public bloody order purpose.
@46bit: Indeed, nobody seems to care but a few
"Seriously though, on my trip to college every day, we pass about 9 speed cameras - enough to lose your license twice and more over. A string of 4 are actually all within line of sight of each other - and this on a rather winding road. It's plain moneygrabbing - there's no real public bloody order purpose."
So there couldn't be any other motive for encouraging people to keep to the speed limit on a 'rather winding road' where, presumably, line of sight and reaction times are reduced than revenue raising?
There are only 'enough to lose your license twice and more over' if you exceed the posted speed limit. If you don't do that you won't lose your licence. It's not difficult.
.. just before you vote is it Conservative or Lib Dem policy to remove these things?
Give than a lot of local and county councils are lib dem and tory, and they get to decide if they're going to be installed or not - ask questions there first.
This ideal that it's national gov't installing cctv, speed cameras el al is absurd.
All I'm saying...
Good for her
I'd vote for her if I was in Blackburn :-)
good luck - I hope she wins
This will be the same Jack Straw, who with ALL his years of experience in jurisprudence declared the decision by nine Law Lords (i.e., a full deck) on Constitutional rights to be "simply wrong".
This is as bad as signing that rubbish treaty because it truly shows what disregard he and his ilk have for the principles that have guided this country since (well, before, actually) Magna Carta.
Anything that helps reverse the decline of our legal system back to the days when the King could make it up as he went along, or across to Marxist-Leninism where the state can make it up as is goes along (take your pick, you can keep them both)...
"across to Marxist-Leninism where the state can make it up as is goes along"
Isn't that what we effectively have now?
Martin Bell, who quit the BBC to stand as an Indy against Neil Hamilton overturned a 22,000 conservative majority to take his own majority of 11,000 against the incumbent.
There is always hope (but then you can never guarantee that the British voting public will ever do the right thing).
Big Brother is for Jack and his policies.
Single issue politician? Single issue voter.
I'd vote for her on the privacy ticket alone. Simply because nobody else makes it an issue.
If she's smart she also gets herself a long list of stupid little mistakes like, indeed, those holes in the road, and promises to fix them herself if she must. Shouldn't be too hard to do it flashmob style either. But I digress.
Not that it matters, I'm not a constituent.
Treating - another interesting story developing
Interesting to hear a report on candidates other than the three main parties.
Reg readers may also be interested to hear of a 'Treating' scandal brewing in this constituency read more at Craig Murray site: http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/
Good luck Mum
Mum needs to get professional help.
Possebly, but an f'ing big one. Were not talking about the normal "save our local hospital" type of single issue here.
A better way for Gary McKinnon
Shame he wasn't associated with football hooligans. Then he could claim he didn't understand the charges and the British courts would block his extradition.
"He is being put through extradition proceedings that were meant for terrorists but abused and applied against vulnerable people, such as my son," Sharp said."
Sorry no sympathy here. He is being put through extradition proceedings because of a CRIME whose effects were felt in the US - a crime that he has confessed to. If he gets away with this a bad precedent would have been set - that if you hack the innermost sancta of the US Department of Defense it's OK as long as you do it from another country.
The sooner he is sent/dragged/both kicking and screaming over to the good old U S of A to face American justice, the quicker justice will be seen to be done.
Re. No Sympathy
You sir, are a cock, and clearly have no understanding of the issue, if you did you wouldn't make such an idiotic comment.
Perhaps study a little about the issues and the reason extradition is opposed, and come back with a more informed opinion.
The USA is neither good nor old.
And how have you punished the people who left these computers wide open to attack, for their failure to carry out their duties? Thought so.
he had been some asshole redneck in a warbird shooting up AP journalists and the ground and then murduring a couple of kids and an AMBULANCE when they try a rescue.
cos then the good ol US of A would extradite these butchering scum to the hague and get them tried, convicted, sentenced to life and have the keys to their cells melted down and made in to medalions saying inbred murdering scum bastards.
or maybe not.
sorry brain fart at my end, I was forgetting that us types are not subject to international law, or the geneva convention, or the international declaration of human rights.
why would you need any of those things with god on your side.
She gets my vote
The "special relationship" with the US has resulted in UK adopting the BOGU position as exemplified in this instance by the asymmetry of the US extradition deal. Let McKinnon be tried in UK - if there really is a case to answer.
Not to mention UK is the biggest contributor to recent/current US' invasions, while at the same time US find it expedient to be "neutral" in respect of Britain defending it's sovereign territory - the Falklands.
.. is either criminaly responsible or he isn't - if he's not safe to be in society he needs to be locked up in Broadmoor or whatever.
The government have a duty to protect their citizens
but apparently protecting them from vengeful American prosecutors who are interested only in saving the administration's face, or trying offences which were committed in Britain under British law instead of handing the accused over to a system which can impose sentences vastly greater for the offenses than those available in Britain doesn't count, since Straw refused point blank to even consider doing that. I think the reason for that was that he was far more concerned about upsetting his boss's cosy relationship with the Americans than about protecting British citizens.
We've seen the same pusillamimous caving in to American interests with British citizens punished for internet gambling "crimes" in courts that should never have been considered to have jurisdiction, without a squeak of protest from our useless foreign office.
- +Comment Trips to Mars may be OFF: The SUN has changed in a way we've NEVER SEEN
- Vid Google opens Inbox – email for people too stupid to use email
- Pic Forget the $2499 5K iMac – today we reveal Apple's most expensive computer to date
- Google+ goes TITSUP. But WHO knew? How long? Anyone ... Hello ...
- RUMPY PUMPY: Bone says humans BONED Neanderthals 50,000 years B.C.