Britain is to become the first country in the world where the movements of all vehicles on the roads are recorded. A new national surveillance system will hold the records for at least two years.
I have to wonder if some of the same people who decided that turning cattle into cannabalistic carnivors, and along the way came up with "mad cow disease", were involved in this decision? Who would have expected taking an animal which is a herbivor, that humans will eventually eat, and turning it into a cannibal was a bad idea? Just because it can be done does not mean it should be done.
Not that trying to track the location of every car in the UK is quite the same, but in my opinion it's close. I would be quite pissed as a citizen of the UK that my tax dollars are going to be spent for such a frivilous, complicated, and expensive approach to tracking terrorists. If they have no clue who the terrorists are, this kind of tool won't help prevent or stop attacks. Why would the path a terrorist take matter anyway? Also, if *everyone* is being tracked, won't that make tracking a specific car (or cars) harder? Unfortunately, when some technologies become available some knucklehead (always) thinks it should be implemented.
I suppose the British citizens think this will make them safer. I applaud them for stepping up to the task of implemeting this technology which will only increase in cost, have numerous implementation problems (resulting in data errors), and ultimately provide data in which 99.99% of it has no value. In the immortal words of Sponge Bob Squarepants, " Good luck with that!".
Regards,
Malta
