Mass surveillance in the UK is Orwellian.

1. the united kingdom is obsessed with CCTV cameras

1.1. They even have microphones coupled with CCTVs. Some cities allow operators to speak to law offenders via loudspeaker.

1.1.1. If the person stops what they are doing there will be a polite thank you but if not, authorities will come in no time.

1.2. Britain, which is known as a surveillance state, has 1 camera for every 14 people and on average, the same person is seen on 70 different CCTVs per day. In 2013 it was estimated that there were 4.9 million cameras in Britain.

1.3. Britain's GCHQ and NSA had violated human rights privacy for 7 years because the public didn't know what safeguards were taking place

1.3.1. NSA had access to emails and phone records through PRISM, an illegal program

1.3.2. British gov't collection of information collected by U.S., ranging from Google, Apple, and Yahoo. The companies say they did not help the gov't spy and that they had no knowledge of "PRISM," and said they only handed over content to those who gave a valid court order.

1.4. privacy issue: A Washington appeals court reversed a $70,000 verdict awarded to an ex-employee pension recipient. City videotaped a disabled pensioner’s activities and was sued for invasion of privacy and emotional distress. Jeffers v. City of Seattle, #5967-1, 23 Wn. App. 301, 597 P.2d 899 (1979).

2. In addition to CCTVs, there are also body-worn video cameras, BWVs for short.

2.1. It is mostly worn by police but some supermarket workers and university security staff have started using them. 20,000 will be deployed to officers this year.

2.1.1. food and drug administration: do not give approval until after extensive research yields promising results. body-worn video cameras have potential but not enough evidence yet.

2.2. Makes regulating public civil liberties more difficult because they don't know about how such technology is being used.

2.2.1. Not much is known about these cameras and could actually decrease people's tendencies to report incidents resulting from their fear of being recorded.

2.3. Consent decree: “The United States has not required that all PPB officers wear body cameras, but the Agreement does not prohibit the City from using body cameras. … If the City utilizes body cameras, the City must carefully govern their use to protect the rights of subjects and bystanders, e.g., providing Miranda warnings when appropriate and respecting reasonableexpectations of privacy.” U.S. v. City of Portland, #3:12-cv-02265 (D. Ore. Aug. 29, 2014).

3. Roadside cameras are connected to number plate recognition systems.

3.1. There is a growing roadside surveillance system that has been unregulated for 30 years. They use this information to track, record, and store vehicle information for up to two years.

3.1.1. Some roadside cameras that can detect bodily fluids will allow the government to exercise rules regarding car-sharing lanes. People bypass it by putting mannequins in the passenger seats but with an infrared beam pointed to the windshield, the camera will be able to detect whether or not the total blood and water content matches.

3.2. There are 20 different cameras that spy on vehicles and capture plate information.

3.2.1. SpeedCurb Uses sensors embedded in the road to trigger a camera to take a photo if a vehicle has passed over them too quickly. In addition, markings on the side of the road also provide photographic evidence of how quickly a car has been travelling between the markings. Locations: Everywhere. SpeedSpike: Uses Automatic Number Plate Recognition, and the 1,000 cameras currently being used can be linked so as to monitor a motorist’s whole journey on main roads across the country.

3.2.2. Police Automatic Number Plate Recognition These record number plates of every passing vehicle, then store information to ‘help detect, deter and disrupt criminality at a local, force, regional and national level’. Records can be accessed for up to two years. If a vehicle is of interest to police, officers monitoring it can order a patrol car team to stop the driver and, if necessary, make an arrest. Locations: Widespread.

3.3. Mandatory onboard vehicle telematics systems have been suggested for future use: can monitor vehicle location, movement, status, behavior. Includes a GPS receiver and an electronic device installed in each car.

3.4. Hadecs 3: Introduced last year by the Highways Agency. We were told the cameras would primarily be used for ‘smoothing traffic flow and increasing [motorway] capacity’. But it seems they are mostly used as a speed camera. They record average speed over a specific distance. Unlike other average speed cameras, the Hadecs3 is painted grey not yellow, making it hard to spot — raising concerns that it is more about revenue than safety. This would seem at odds with the 2001 law that required all speed cameras to be painted DayGlo yellow to avoid concerns that the cameras were nothing more than hidden revenue raisers. The Hadecs3 camera uses radar to monitor several lanes of traffic.

3.5. DVLA and DVSA cameras The Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency cameras check vehicles for which the excise duty (tax disc) has not been paid. However, the DVLA (which keeps registers of all drivers and vehicles in Britain) and the Driver and Vehicle Standards Agency (DVSA) share data. The DVSA was created in 2013. Its responsibility is to improve road safety by setting standards for driving and motorcycling. As well as sharing information with the DVLA, it has a network of mobile and static cameras to monitor whether goods vehicles have paid the HGV Road User Levy. Introduced nine months ago, the system has raised £500,000 in fines.

4. In 1984, there were telescreens and hidden microphones all over the place.

4.1. Telescreens were designed to act as a tv and a spying and communication device. That's how they implicated those who went against Big Brother and the law in some way. One time Winston wasn't exercising well and the woman leading the exercises called him out.

4.2. There were hidden microphones as well. Julia warned Winston to be quiet because there could be someone listening in on them while they walked past the train station and through the vegetation. In addition, they suspected the birds to have a microphone as well.

4.3. No one has privacy. Everyone who is doing a crime can be easily sought out by the Thought police.

5. Objections

5.1. Some will argue that mass surveillance is the solution to prevent further terrorist attacks and quite possibly another world war.

5.2. While I concede mass surveillance would lower the possibilities of terror threats as well as reducing local crime,

5.3. I still maintain that people have human rights, most importantly their right to privacy.

5.3.1. Roadside cameras: argue that it is for safety but there are multiple cameras that seem to be designed for raising fines.

5.3.2. cctv cameras: if operators can speak to loudspeakers, does this mean they decide how much a person is breaking the law? is it on their terms? where is the regulation???

5.3.3. body worn cameras: credibility of officers could be at risk. increasing use of cameras might create a norm in which the deposition of police officers become discounted because sufficient evidence (video footage or recording) was not provided. *this doesn't work because this has nothing to do with human rights*

5.4. In addition to long term studies, civil liberties are also at risk. Similar to the lack of studies done on body worn cameras, the public is not properly informed on the ramifications used in this kind of technology. As a result, some people might not feel comfortable with authorities for fear of being recorded. This could affect their ability or incentive to report incidents to authorities and alter the overall effectiveness of the police force.

6. Conclusion

6.1. I say... (repeat thesis) Citizens of the United Kingdom will not be able to achieve the comfort they seek in their own homes and public spaces because the authorities are too busy satisfying their need for power.

6.2. I predict... The Hancocks may take this to court and find a temporary solution to the ongoing issue but the movement is weak if compared to the government's supremacy. Perhaps, just like in 1984, the revolution is in the hands of the Proles.

6.3. It's time to... The new movement should be to educate more people on their rights to privacy and encourage them to challenge their authorities.

7. Introduction (possible hooks)

7.1. Hook 1: Recent Event or Historical Timeline They're everywhere. On public streets. In the airport. On the subway. The British are used to government installed cameras in their public spaces, but now with the advent of technology, the cameras are beginning to invade their homes too.

7.2. What do THEY say? According to Tony Porter, the British government's camera commissioner "The use of surveillance cameras within domestic environments continues to grow" because CCTV cameras have become so inexpensive.

7.3. Ask a rhetorical question. So what do you think the British government will do with this new found video footage? Will they put a stop to it? Or will they be able to change laws to appease the public?

7.4. State your thesis. In a perfect world the government and the public are harmonious with one another, but in an Orwellian world, just like those found in the UK, mass surveillance will only be used to advance the government's regime.

8. points I don't know where to include yet:

8.1. With the integration of surveillance cameras in daily life, what security measures will be incorporated along with them? As seen with the Hancocks, private use of CCTVs can create conflict because there are different perceptions on how it ought to be used. Another threat is posed with the increase of surveillance tools: how will the government prevent illegal collection of data if programs such as PRISM exist? It is true that they can invent preventative measures to ensure the privacy of individuals but moving into an electronic-based society where hackers can gain access to

8.1.1. protected files is riskier than maintaining the system we have now.