I used to think a lot of things were justified, because on balance they would help to protect innocent people against relatively minor illegal activities, and while they could theoretically be used for major abuses by governments no democratically elected administration would ever get away with doing it. Many of those had to do with balancing everyone being accountable under the law with anonymity and privacy.

Unlike some people, I prefer to learn the lessons of history and change my views when the evidence warrants, and I am increasingly of the view that the democratic accountability of our governments is far too weak and the price of trusting governments with the power afforded by a surveillance state is far too high to pay for some modest benefits.

A case in point: 'omh mentioned the London Congestion Charge in another post to this discussion, linking to news that (contrary to clear assurances given when the cameras were rolled out) the London mayor now wants to give police direct access to the cameras. Now, to be fair, this isn't an absurd idea: no doubt these cameras do help to catch some people who are trying to escape justice after breaking the law (they are careful to cite examples of this) and reportedly this was in the Mayor's manifesto at the last election so it does have some degree of democratic mandate.

Of course, there have also been stories where the system has gone horribly wrong and incorrectly fined people[1], or just not been understood and penalised people who were trying to behave reasonably and do the right thing[2]. Given that the way our court system works means that it can be prohibitively expensive to challenge automated penalty notices issued by such systems if you live a long way away and were just visiting (assuming you really were ever there in the first place) I have significant reservations about how easy this kind of "enforcement" becomes under a surveillance state, and whether even the genuine benefits of better enforcement against minor offenders are enough to justify such schemes, which makes me even less trusting of the long-term motivations of those involved.

[1] I can't immediately find a link, but the one I most remember was an elderly gentlemen who lived in the north of England and rarely if ever visited London any more, yet who wound up getting many fines sent to him, presumably because someone cloned his plates.

[2] http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2012/jan/23/congesti...