Should Cell Phones be Registered for Security?

When that happens here I will relinquish my phone.

DITTO. All our problems are a result of too much interference by government in our lives.

If you've ever seen a show about the Mexican police system and Mexican jurisprudence, you'll know how dangerous this is. The traffic in stolen phones will skyrocket, and if your phone gets stolen and then left at the scene of a crime you're going straight to prison.

The whole idiotic idea behind this is that there is some vast underground network of criminals that commit all of the crimes. Granted, the drug cartels are large and there is a lot of drug-related crime. Nevertheless I bet most of the crimes are committed by individuals acting alone, not as part of some vast cell-phone network.

Unfortunately, Mexico is on my (and others') do-not-travel-to list with the skyrocketing drug crime.

The drug gang membership is about the same size as the whole Mexican army and the gangs are pretty well armed.

It may soon spill over into the south US since sadly most of their drug export goes to the US.

Not to wander too far off topic but I think you have pin pointed the problem. "Most of the drug export goes to the US" ...... So it is not their drug problem it is yours. Without a demand there will be no supply, and there will always be a demand no matter what laws are passed.

So legalize the damn stuff and put all the drug lords out of business already!

And while you're at it leave my cell phone alone too.

Why yes we will jump right on legalizing all recreational pharmaceuticals just as soon as you self righteous canuks do.

"Laws only affect the law-abiding..."

I couldn't have said it better myself.

The police can compell by legislation all cell phone companies to give name and address of all users.When police do random checking of mobile phones the ID/passport number of registered owner of the phone will appear in the screen of the phone.If another guy posses it police will take him into custody.In a south asian country they are doing it

One high tech advantage that criminals have today is the internet. With it they can communicate virtually anonymously, with great mobility and little fear of being detected. To counter this advantage, governments have started a program to track every IP address on the planet linking it to an identifiable resident. Is this an invasion of privacy, or should the government be allowed to track all internet users?

"They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." - Ben Franklin

I think he was right then and it is still right now.

Spot on.

As if.

The NSA was monitoring Bin Laden's INMARsAT (cell phone) loong before 9-11 to no avail, see :

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/spyfactory/

This is done in a number of countries, Malaysia for one.

My question is - why not if it helps?

Because I prefer to live free without some entity watching my every move.

When you follow the logic that allows a government to take on more and more power, that government eventually becomes a tyranny.

What is the UN doing? What it says regarding human rights-right to live in any part of a world at least in their own country,access to fresh water,clean air,police protection, access to food,news(local/foreign),websites,email,ICRC,AI,other human rights groups etc? UK,US and UN have good relationship with all those police states and in the UN they have majority vote too

If you lose your cellphone you should report the police immediately.Someone could use it for anonymous call or to activate a bomb or to communicate with criminals. So registering with the police has its advantages and disadvantages(privacy). Compare with motor vehicles where by using a false number plate it could be used for a criminal act and the police cannot trace the vehicle easily.

I wonder which member of the Industrial/Military complex is paying off lobbying members of the Mexican government to buy some very expensive equipment that will, if you can believe them, detect the identities of cell phone users making suspicious calls.

If you want untraceable calls, use Skype. Criminals know this.

The advantage of registering cellphones far outweighs the disadvantage(s), that is, if any. A number of criminals have been apprehended here since the advent of compulsory registration. I take note of the fact that criminals will find a way to beat the system but in my view this may not be possible unless service providers decide not to cooperate fully. Yes we all yearn for our freedoms but the fact is criminals have taken over. I don't mind loosing these freedoms so long as it is for the betterment of society

There is a major problem with your argument. It works fine when you agree completely with what the big brother government has defined as a criminal. The problem arises when they change that definition. Suddenly something you have always considered as a basic human right, or just something you think is none of there business becomes a "criminal act". And becuase you gave up your freedom earlier when things were all "cool". You are already registered and on their watch list.

Very well spoken. I could not agree more.

GA from me.

We can summarise by saying "If a good leader rules there will be no problems to the countrymen". If we can reconstitute the UN in a useful manner there will be peace on earth. Now even a tiny island with little population without heritage is recognised as a "state" or a "nation" and has a territory to call its own,have armed forces,protected by sovereignity,represented in the UN,get aid and even weapons from other nations/UN etc while a multi national community with nearly 60million people living in many countries has no sovereignity,no army,no representative in UN,cannot get foreign aid etc. Who can change this situation? If the UK/USA/UN etc are not interested who can address this issue?

The issue will most likely address itself. Have a look at the theory proposed by Joseph Tainter bak in the late 1980's about societies collapsing because they become to complex and can no longer respond in a timely fashion to major crises...

Another consideration- far too many of the "sovereign" nations recognized in the world today have been cobbled together with little attention (or, perhaps, too much attention) to the fact that the included citizenry are not compatible (Congo, Iraq, Somalia, the five "stans" of central Asia, Serbia/Croatia, to mention only a few). I have not finished a full analysis yet, but I have the distinct impression that a majority of the recognized "sovereign" states did not exist 100 years ago- yet the UN demands that recognized international borders are sacrosanct. Forcing people to join in unions not to their liking is not going to solve any problem.

When the collapse finally comes (which may or may not be in our life-times), people will tend to sort out their own preferred associations, but it is unlikely this is going to be a pretty time...

If UN,Commonwealth etc refuse membership and aid to nations violating basic human rights there will be no problems.