I do appreciate that folks will vote based on their personal perception of security issues and situations, and how they feel the recipients of their votes will address whatever concerns they have about same.

But assuming we’re accepting that people aren’t being forced to vote a particular way, it gets into very grey territory. It might be difficult to define at precisely what point peoples’ free will when it comes to democracy is being compromised.

What irritates me is this extreme argument of “If you are restricting National ID cards, you are leaving our country wide open to terrorists”. It’s a fucked up statement cause it implies that 1) ID cards protect the country, which they don’t , and 2) There is no other alternative.

The goal of terrorist group is to use irregular acts of violence to ensure that a country is in a state of fear. The reason you see these Terrorist clips of some dickhead in a cave in Iraq shouting “Death to Britain” is because the terrorists use those videos as an alternative. When people are afraid, threats are just as effective as real strikes, in that they both achieve the goal, in this case , to scare the shit out of the public.

Here is where the politicians chime in, they exacerbate the publics fears by saying things like National ID cards are necessary to prevent attacks. They constantly remind you of two things
1) You should be afraid
2) You’re safe, but only as long as you’re voting for us.

“Those who trade freedom for security lose both and deserve neither” is something of a bumper sticker, but it highlights a point. We could stop drug trafficking in Ireland by insisting on anal cavity searches on everyone who arrives in Ireland by any means, and blocking the coastline, but at what cost?

The threat of terrorism is minor in comparison with the other, far more likely threats to your life while living in Britain. Most people have an incorrect perception of probability, thats why they play the lotto. That’s why people are scared getting on the Tube. That’s why people worry about flying into New York in September.

What I don’t like to see is disproportionate intrusive security measures brought in to combat threats that are far far less likely than a car crash, or food poisoning, or even plain old “getting beaten to death while outside a nightclub”.

Re the rest of it, there does seem to be a lot more surveillance and such like. One thing that does spring to mind is that you don’t make a direct link between this increase and a decrease in democracy. Ie, what aspect of the surveillance is stopping peoples’ freedom of choice to vote for someone who’ll get rid of it all, if that’s what they want?