Social media scrutiny and firearms licensing in Scotland

[stagboy]

If you are a certificate holder and you come to the attention of the police on an unrelated matter, they may well do an audit of your social media, and any unwise posts may come back to haunt you. I know of one instance where a father praised his son for having got off a speeding charge (or was it drink driving?) on Facebook. A few months latter, when the father was being interviewed by the FEO, a hard copy of the Facebook post was put on the table in front of him. He was then challenged about his attitude to law and order. Can't remember the outcome, but this case was what sparked my later social chat with the firearms licensing manager, who told me they do routine searches of an applicant's social media, and actually target and sometimes c monitor that of any certificate holder who comes to their attention.  

Edited March 6, 2018 by stagboy
typo

[Scully]

I know my FEO is aware of PW, but whether that’s because of him being a shooter or in a professional capacity I have no idea. 

I also know that representatives or serving officers visit this forum, consisting of genuinely interested shooters and at least one that only posted to let members know his force were holding a firearms amnesty, but wouldn’t be drawn into answering when I asked why he thought legitimate law abiding shooters would need to know. 

Do I think the topic of this thread is a good idea? It certainly couldn’t do any harm, although I can’t really see many shooters condemning themselves, and if they’re posting on here the chances are most will already have firearms, so a tad late perhaps?

We’re mostly a well adjusted bunch and those who aren’t or become less so already have the means to do wrong. 

 

[AYA117]

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/couple-who-faked-holiday-sickness-‘rumbled’-on-facebook/ar-BBJU6qY?li=AAmiR2Z&ocid=spartanntp

Even travel agents use 'Social media'

[panoma1]

1 hour ago, Delboysparky said:

There is 1 Police Officer for every 517 people in the UK, the average computer ability of a Police Officer is at best basic, with many resorting to 1 fat finger typing.  Lets take in to consideration shift wort over 24 hrs a day, 365 days a week. So in reality how many police officers are 'monitoring' the internet every day? 

There is something like 200 million emails sent annually in the UK alone, 89 percent of adults use the internet daily (about 42 million people), with about 36.6 million people having a facebook account.  

This is excluding all other social media, chat rooms, deep web, dark web, tor etc etc.   The stats speak for their self  http://www.hondachat.com/showthread.php?t=IDLEupJzDoC7VLP8o 

Who is reading all this data?  Its GB's a second? 

 

Lets not detract from the fact the police to view parts of the internet for law enforcement or intelligence purposes. 

But if innocent people think they are being spied on, you need to put your foil hat on more often and stay off the gin.  I think people have to much faith in the nearly bankrupt and short sighted government abilities if this is the case. 

But again @Gordon R, I am interested in why you have a different opinion and I thank you for contributing.  

I asked you in a previous posting what a police researcher does? You did not answer! It is a civilian specialist researcher employed to do research for the police, so your example of a copper with sausage fingers sitting at a computer typing person the keyboard with one digit is not really the full story is it?

I am fond of the saying " there are lies, damn lies and statistics" the statistics you give are for police officers, but do not include hundreds of police civilian employees throughout the various constabularies, so it ain't down to the bobby to do this research/admin work!

And let's face it we all know about "trigger" words such as "bomb, gun, explosives etc, which the anti terrorist police use on the internet to identify possible terrorist suspects, so no doubt the police use this method too?

Oh! and finally....the dictionary definition of covertly is..........without being openly acknowledged or displayed..........so my definition is accurate, but as I said, different to what the police interpretation of "covert" activities is!

[Delboysparky]

47 minutes ago, stevo said:

I thought Facebook was for children . ........

oh no that’s it , it was designed for teenagers, however grown ups with to much time on there hands , decided to take over and make everyone else see just how **** there life is , and embarrass there kids and family in the process. ...... is that the one your all on about ? 

Haha ?

How would Jeremy Kyle still be in work if it wasn't for teenage brained adults fighting over Doris calling them names over social media if they didnt have Facebook.

[panoma1]

27 minutes ago, stagboy said:

If you are a certificate holder and you come to the attention of the police on an unrelated matter, they may well do an audit of your social media, and any unwise posts may come back to haunt you. I know of one instance where a father praised his son for having got off a speeding charge (or was it drink driving?) on Facebook. A few months latter, when the father was being interviewed by the FEO, a hard copy of the Facebook post was put on the table in front of him. He was then challenged about his attitude to law and order. Can't remember the outcome, but this case was what sparked my later social chat with the firearms licensing manager, who told me they do routine searches of an applicant's social media, and actually target and sometimes c monitor that of any certificate holder who comes to their attention.  

And I bet they are not beyond doing it for personal reasons too? For example, to "get even" with someone who in the past has challenged their authority?

[Delboysparky]

33 minutes ago, saddler said:

In may case, NO complaint had been made against anyone. nor was any form of official information gathering taking place for any potential or pending prosecution.

100% fishing trip; at the tax-payers expense: I was told in no uncertain circumstances that FULL monitoring of ALL social forums and similar chat rooms DOES happen; this being around 7-10 years ago!!
...all from a force with some of the lowest criminal detective/prosecution rates in the UK. 

The bigger question should be, why is the very limited police budget going toward such media scrutiny instead of actual root & branch police work and solving the host of crimes that have been committed & go in-investigated? It's easier to sit in a warm office for 12 hours browsing Farcebuk than crawl on hands and knees in the grass looking for stolen goods or vital case evidence that will put folk away for some serious crimes that would otherwise be brushed under the carpet...and are being so ignored, as can be seen from published statistics.
 

Do you think regular Police Officers are the ones trawling the internet for information 'just in case'? 

I think someone is sensationalising the ability of the Police to monitor the goings on of the internet. 

Edited March 6, 2018 by Delboysparky

[grrclark]

Remember that monitoring of social media does not mean that a person is physically sat in front of a screen and reading through posts.

There are many tools that will search through posts and highlight anything that falls within certain parameters, increasingly these tools are becoming AI enabled and so capable of some very sophisticated analysis.  There are also a host of businesses who do this as a commercial venture; Experian for example have a dedicated business stream that carry out incredibly sophisticated analysis and profiling of social media content and users.

If an analysis is carried out as part of a grant or renewal then setting up search criteria based on email addresses, mobile phone numbers, names, geography, subject matter interest, facial recognition, etc is super easy.

How many know that Facebook already have a commercial venture using their facial recognition tools and our consent to use our images in order to help retailers best target walk in customers for a particular product push.  So you walk into a shop, the CCTV ties into the Facebook backend, facial recognition search is conducted, they see that the punter has liked a certain brand or product and so the sales assistant walks up and armed with that info highlights particular products.

It is not really a massive leap to use the similar technology from the photo on the application for to identify social media posts and from there it is so easy to start to refine criteria and all without an individual doing a thing, it is all done by compute power and AI.

[Delboysparky]

32 minutes ago, Gordon R said:

I am not convinced you are trying to stimulate debate. From a scathing assessment of the abilities of the Police to ridiculing the notion that anyone does look at social media - via your mathematics for juniors - you seem to have a closed mind.

I don't agree with your thoughts and don't see it as my role in life to educate people who are unwilling to listen. I do not care to expand on my comment.

 

My realistic assessment of the ability of the Police, because you don't agree doesn't make it an invalid opinion. 

I have already said that social media is looked at but not 'monitored' as some people claim. 

I by no means have a closed mind on the subject, and I would like people to engage and express what they think.   Some already have. 

[Delboysparky]

22 minutes ago, panoma1 said:

I asked you in a previous posting what a police researcher does? You did not answer! It is a civilian specialist researcher employed to do research for the police, so your example of a copper with sausage fingers sitting at a computer typing person the keyboard with one digit is not really the full story is it?

I am fond of the saying " there are lies, damn lies and statistics" the statistics you give are for police officers, but do not include hundreds of police civilian employees throughout the various constabularies, so it ain't down to the bobby to do this research/admin work!

And let's face it we all know about "trigger" words such as "bomb, gun, explosives etc, which the anti terrorist police use on the internet to identify possible terrorist suspects, so no doubt the police use this method too?

Oh! and finally....the dictionary definition of covertly is..........without being openly acknowledged or displayed..........so my definition is accurate, but as I said, different to what the police interpretation of "covert" activities is!

Don't use the trigger words, MI5 may be watching

I apologise if I didn't answer part of your question, it certainly wasn't intentional. My comment on the number of police officers was a rebuke to the claim the police monitor the internet, monitoring and research are very different things. Plus firearms licensing isn't crime and therefore prevents use of surveillance or covert action. 

You are quite correct, the police employ intelligence analysts/researchers for much of the internet stuff, but officers do carry out minor open source research for minor offences. I think the last I was informed there is 1 Civil Servant to 2 Police Officers, I don't know how true that is, but I am guessing its not far off. 

I would argue the covert claim, as the police don't tell suspects they are gathering evidence, this isn't covert as far as the police definition goes, this is due to the fact that any monitoring or targeting falls within the surveillance category.  But I accept the dictionary definition. 

16 minutes ago, grrclark said:

Remember that monitoring of social media does not mean that a person is physically sat in front of a screen and reading through posts.

There are many tools that will search through posts and highlight anything that falls within certain parameters, increasingly these tools are becoming AI enabled and so capable of some very sophisticated analysis.  There are also a host of businesses who do this as a commercial venture; Experian for example have a dedicated business stream that carry out incredibly sophisticated analysis and profiling of social media content and users.

If an analysis is carried out as part of a grant or renewal then setting up search criteria based on email addresses, mobile phone numbers, names, geography, subject matter interest, facial recognition, etc is super easy.

How many know that Facebook already have a commercial venture using their facial recognition tools and our consent to use our images in order to help retailers best target walk in customers for a particular product push.  So you walk into a shop, the CCTV ties into the Facebook backend, facial recognition search is conducted, they see that the punter has liked a certain brand or product and so the sales assistant walks up and armed with that info highlights particular products.

It is not really a massive leap to use the similar technology from the photo on the application for to identify social media posts and from there it is so easy to start to refine criteria and all without an individual doing a thing, it is all done by compute power and AI.

Very valid points, but do we think a firearms licensing department, who are under manned are using AI? 

You raise a very good point, Experian have a massive database non of us can escape.

18 minutes ago, panoma1 said:

And I bet they are not beyond doing it for personal reasons too? For example, to "get even" with someone who in the past has challenged their authority?

You conspiracy theorist

Edited March 6, 2018 by Delboysparky

[Scully]

30 minutes ago, grrclark said:

Remember that monitoring of social media does not mean that a person is physically sat in front of a screen and reading through posts.

There are many tools that will search through posts and highlight anything that falls within certain parameters, increasingly these tools are becoming AI enabled and so capable of some very sophisticated analysis.  There are also a host of businesses who do this as a commercial venture; Experian for example have a dedicated business stream that carry out incredibly sophisticated analysis and profiling of social media content and users.

If an analysis is carried out as part of a grant or renewal then setting up search criteria based on email addresses, mobile phone numbers, names, geography, subject matter interest, facial recognition, etc is super easy.

How many know that Facebook already have a commercial venture using their facial recognition tools and our consent to use our images in order to help retailers best target walk in customers for a particular product push.  So you walk into a shop, the CCTV ties into the Facebook backend, facial recognition search is conducted, they see that the punter has liked a certain brand or product and so the sales assistant walks up and armed with that info highlights particular products.

It is not really a massive leap to use the similar technology from the photo on the application for to identify social media posts and from there it is so easy to start to refine criteria and all without an individual doing a thing, it is all done by compute power and AI.

Post deleted; didn't realise Delboysparky had more or less posted the same question. 

Edited March 6, 2018 by Scully

[grrclark]

Just now, Scully said:

A valid and interesting point grrclark, but would our ordinary licensing department be privy to such resources as that utilised by those companies you've highlighted above ?

It wouldn't take much to use these additional resources and not excessively costly either.

I don't know what they do just now, I shall ask the question the next time I see a friendly copper, but if social media analysis does become part of the assessment process then it is likely that use of more advanced toolsets and solutions would become common place.

It is actually pretty scary just how much information can be gleaned on us from the use of publicly accessible data.

A quick example, prior to writing my first post I did a quick google search on Experian to remind myself of the name of their cross channel analysis product (Mosaic), after i finished the post I opened Facebook and the first suggested advert to me was for Experian credit scoring.  All because of cookies and browser tracking.  All too easy to build a profile of online behaviour using tools that are easily commercially available, especially if you have a specific person to look at.

It's a different animal if you are trying to pick out certain behaviour from a sea of unknown people, but if you have the name of the person then it is a doddle to carry out specific analysis. 

[Scully]

I know what you mean; I looked for some new tyres the other day, now everything I look at has ad's for tyres. 

[Delboysparky]

4 minutes ago, grrclark said:

It wouldn't take much to use these additional resources and not excessively costly either.

I don't know what they do just now, I shall ask the question the next time I see a friendly copper, but if social media analysis does become part of the assessment process then it is likely that use of more advanced toolsets and solutions would become common place.

It is actually pretty scary just how much information can be gleaned on us from the use of publicly accessible data.

A quick example, prior to writing my first post I did a quick google search on Experian to remind myself of the name of their cross channel analysis product (Mosaic), after i finished the post I opened Facebook and the first suggested advert to me was for Experian credit scoring.  All because of cookies and browser tracking.  All too easy to build a profile of online behaviour using tools that are easily commercially available, especially if you have a specific person to look at.

It's a different animal if you are trying to pick out certain behaviour from a sea of unknown people, but if you have the name of the person then it is a doddle to carry out specific analysis. 

@grrclark Are you a tech type of guy? 

I think the state of firearms licensing its unlikely they will invest in an area that simply isn't an issue at present quite unlikely, but not impossible. 

I think most people do not realise how much data they consent to being released through agreeing to terms and conditions of websites, forums and social media. 

[grrclark]

23 minutes ago, Delboysparky said:

Very valid points, but do we think a firearms licensing department, who are under manned are using AI? 

You raise a very good point, Experian have a massive database non of us can escape.

I have no doubt that the police will be using tools that take advantage of AI capabilities.  At a very simple level Siri, Cortana, Alexa, etc are all AI tools  There are loads of AI data analysis tools.

As a quick example have a look at Synthesio Social Listening.  It is geared towards brands who want to understand what is being said across the social platforms, but the premise is exactly the same should the police wish to focus on particular areas of interest.

 

[Delboysparky]

3 minutes ago, Scully said:

I know what you mean; I looked for some new tyres the other day, now everything I look at has ad's for tyres. 

You will possibly find you are targeted now for tire sales, the price wont be the cheapest either. 

Clear your cookies and unplug your router for a few mins, you will get a new IP address and they wont know you have looked at them

[Perazzishot]

Bottom line is the police have been told to use this technology, so you can expect a reaction to that over the next few weeks, months where they go out to prove they have listened and are complying, with a media involvement on this they will make them high profile.

[grrclark]

1 minute ago, Delboysparky said:

@grrclark Are you a tech type of guy? 

I think the state of firearms licensing its unlikely they will invest in an area that simply isn't an issue at present quite unlikely, but not impossible. 

I think most people do not realise how much data they consent to being released through agreeing to terms and conditions of websites, forums and social media. 

I have a good appreciation of the art of the possible with tech, but i'm not a Jesus sandal wearing tech geek.

I would suggest that as it is now being touted as a potential requirement that is as a result of an existing capability to be able to carry out the type of work rather then being something that would need new investment.

Big data analytics and social profiling is a massive industry and the benefit of that to the police or other agencies is so obvious that there will be a host of specialist tech firms who have specialist law enforcement services.

As to your last point there was an article that I read a little while ago that suggested if you were to try and read every set of T&Cs or EULAs that you agree to in using online services or software and it would take the average punter, i.e. no specific knowledge of contracts or law, about 2 weeks of solid reading and even then you wouldn't understand most of it.

[Gordon R]

Quote

I think someone is sensationalising the ability of the Police to monitor the goings on of the internet. 

And your facts to support that leap in logic? Please don't get your junior mathematics handbook out again.

Quote

My realistic assessment of the ability of the Police, because you don't agree doesn't make it an invalid opinion. 

You need to look up the meaning of realistic. It isn't quite the same on planet Earth.

[vampire]

1 hour ago, Gordon R said:

And your facts to support that leap in logic? Please don't get your junior mathematics handbook out again.

You need to look up the meaning of realistic. It isn't quite the same on planet Earth.

Not read any of this thread,just your post Gordon R made me chuckle,would make a great tatoo

[Vince Green]

We know that GCHQ monitors all internet traffic but unless you do something significant to attract their attention all of us are just background noise. 

I am not on any social media. Vince Green is my real name and if anybody wants to read all my emails, texts and posts feel free 

What we should be more worried about is the amount of commercial monitoring of us that goes on and we don't even realise its happening a lot of the time.  If you are buying a couple of bottles of whiskey a week that information will be known and available from loyalty cards cross referenced to debit and credit cards. Prospective employers employ search companies to dig the dirt and you would be shocked at how much dirt they can easily access through perfectly legal sources.

Edited March 6, 2018 by Vince Green

[Zapp]

Pigeonwatch is social media.

[walshie]

Whether you believe you are being monitored or not, if you don't post anything stupid, you'll be o.k. 

I don't see why the cops wouldn't use social media as a tool in seeing if someone is fit to have a gun. It's probably a more realistic view of a person than what he says over tea and biscuits at an interview. 

[Mungler]

Having been on here a while I have seen a few extraordinary and absolute nutters come and go (and get banned, and then get banned under their various pseudo sock puppet guises and so on).

If the top 10 nutters off here still have their tickets then I can only assume that the police don’t monitor social media properly.

[JDog]

37 minutes ago, Mungler said:

Having been on here a while I have seen a few extraordinary and absolute nutters come and go (and get banned, and then get banned under their various pseudo sock puppet guises and so on).

If the top 10 nutters off here still have their tickets then I can only assume that the police don’t monitor social media properly.

My assumption concerning the ‘nutters’ on this forum is that they have neither shotgun certificated nor firearms licences. I base this on the fact that they never post threads concerning their outings whether for pigeons, foxes or anything else.