Comment on Ulez: More than 300 cameras damaged or stolen in four months

CookieJarObserver@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

• echodot@feddit.uk ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  If you object to surveillance you should have objected about 20 years ago.

  This is nothing to do with surveillance and everything to do with people wanted to go to drive their big four before around in the city.

  I get why they’re not happy about it, but at the same time sod them and their NIMBY attudes. The reason that these laws are necessary is because people will insist on buying stupid massive cars that do 8 miles to the gallon.

  source

  • Syldon@feddit.uk ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    OR drive Diesels without particle filters fitted. There is zero evidence that the information stored by ULEZ is anything more than the registrations of cars that are more dangerous than is acceptable. If you are part of the 90% of people who drive cars within the standard then there is no need to keep the information on file.

    source
  • Treczoks@kbin.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    That could be done quite easy by just increase the tax on more wasteful and polluting cars. No need to put up cameras at each corner.

    source
  • midgephoto@photog.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    @echodot @CookieJarObserver
    Also to there being more people.

    source
  • JoBo@feddit.uk ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    ULEZ is about particulates, not gas guzzling. Unfortunately, it won’t take many SUVs off the road. It affects petrol cars registered before 2006 and diesels before 2015.

    90% of cars (and 95% of trips) are already compliant. There is a scrappage scheme to help people switch to a compliant model.

    source
• 018118055@sopuli.xyz ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  Yes, fuck surveillance. Driving is licensed and regulated. If you don’t want to be tracked, leave your phone at home and wear suitable clothing. Ride a bike or walk.

  source
• NuPNuA@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  So you don’t support measures to clean the air in London then?

  source

  • Treczoks@kbin.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    That could be more easily achieved by increasing the taxes on polluting cars in general. There is no need for cameras at every corner.

    source

    • NuPNuA@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      Except that’s it only applies to London, any change to vehicle tax would have to come from central government.

      source

      • Treczoks@kbin.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

        Less fuel-wasting cars anywhere would be a win-win over CCTV everywhere.

        source

        • -> View More Comments
    • CookieJarObserver@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      Or just forbidding them in general… But no, cameras! The awnser for all your Surveillance Climate Change questions.

      This is like being against encryption of private messages because pedophiles could use that…

      source