Death Proof - Tarantino does it again. Wicked film, cleverly shot, cool script, great soundtrack, great little goofy quirks...get out and watch it!

Here's a song from the soundtrack, 1965 would you believe!

The scene its associated with in the film is a little brutal, hold on make that a LOT brutal. Genius nonethless.

I blogged earlier on the topic of DNA databases and civil liberties, reading some of the comments here it was clear that many of the respondents were like me, distrustful of those who run things and didn't have very much confidence in their ability to safeguard their data or run things in a fair non invasive way.

It's clear too that on the whole government generally doesn't trust the people, as it, whatever 'it' maybe appears to be absolutely petrified of the people, so will at every opportunity, look at ways of nailing people down and restricting their ability to move outside of their structured confines or agreed ways of behaviour. laws, tax monitoring, proof of this and that.

It's as if people alone can't be trusted to run their own affairs, as if people need some kind of heavy handed controlling force that makes sure that society is allowed to run in a way that suits the existing set of arrangements, even if the existing set of arrangements are clearly askew and in need of redress.

It isn't just government of course, its banks and inurance companies and anyone else on the receiving end of a claim of one sort or another. I myself made a claim just the other day from my insurance company, I could almost hear the scepticism in the mans voice as he listened to my explanation of what happened. I could almost feel him referencing some cue card or watching some program on his computer screen that monitored my voice inflections for traces of suspected fraudulence.

I do of course have a choice to move on and source a new insurance company next time though, one that isn't so distrustful, maybe one that doesn't make me feel like some pseudo criminal, yet the reality is that wherever i go they are likely to treat me with the same level of suspicion as any other 'client'. It's a bad world and everyone is guilty until proven otherwise!

I'm not going to elaborate too much more as it will be interesting to hear what others think on this.

Why do you think there is such a lack of trust in our world? Am I painting an accurate picture of the relationship between the people and the state, people and commerce or is it a whole lot better than I purport?

Are people more dishonest than they once were, is there a declining set of moral standards, are we all to blame for the type of governance we have, or is it simply a reaction to an ever increasingly competitive world that forces a branch of 'every man for himself' mentality on us all?

I was reading Stephs blog the other day and read her post on DNA and Civil liberties I commented over there but thought I'd reproduce it here for furhter comment.

The debate stemmed from the comments of Lord Justice Sedley who called for everyone to be put on the national DNA database including foreign visitors. On the face of it it seems like a difficult argument to resist, who can really argue effectively against measures that would ( if we are to believe in the science) make the identification of perpetrators of rape, child killing and murder so much easier.

To be honest if I truly trusted those who governed me, if I hadn’t bore witness to a long list of civil abuses of power in my short time on this planet, if I hadn’t read books like 1984 and subsequently seen parallels in my own everyday life, if there truly was some means of ensuring that my very personal essence and blueprint, god given, biological, non political, non partisan, naturally created material exclusive to me could only ever be used to detect murderous or sexually abusive or violent crime then, perhaps, just perhaps I could well live with it. How can anyone seriously argue that a technology that actually identifies the perpetrator of a crime, that could well be commited again on others within our community, endangering the lives of our sisters and brothers, daughers and sons not be used?

I certainly can’t, not without being mocked and derided as an irresponsible idiot; yet like so many others have identified this isn’t what people have issue with. People have a serious issue with trust, they simply don't (rightly so too) trust those who’d be entrusted to ensure it was used in the right way. Data would be leaked and sold and companies would use this data in sneaky underhand ways. Forget the data protection act, that’s circumvented and ignored daily, its an old clunky mechanism that just cant keep up and is poorly policed.

People would be be right not to trust that cold hearted rationale that would for examples sake, take the chance and probability out from say, medical or life insurance. Companies like these would jump on arguments that say that open disclosure of ones DNA profile should be a requirement of being accepted into a policy. It would be used to develop multiple policies tailored specifically towards certain types of ailements. People would be frightened to the ends of the earth with probabilities that said, your gene profile shows you have a predisposition to cancer or (insert any other number of possible nasty later life diseases) and would be expected to pay the appropriate amount. Society would become eugenicised by a system that made living with a later possibility an economic burden. People would be expected to submit a ‘clean’ DNA profile to prospective employers or life partners, who’d want to knowingly pass on a death sentence or disability to their yet to be had offspring? What company would want to invest thousands of pounds in a person who might be dieing of leukaemia some 4 years down the line?

No, DNA profiling needs to be used for research into gene therapies and stuff that contributes to the greater good without damaging or spoiling the lives of those who live today and tommorrow and thats that nothing else, ever.As much as it pains me to say I really must be satisfied with what we have today (crime detection wise) and live with the consequences of its shortcomings. I think the law as it stands today is simply ill equipped to deal with the pandoras box of issues that would stem from such a policy. I relly dont want to live a life in a society that legislates reactively. Put some very solid, cast iron , irreversible protective measures in place 1st, then I might, just might have a second look. Not today though, no way.

Ok, so lots of people say anyone who doesn't wear a seatbelt is a moron and should be prosecuted and fined and all that punitive nonsense.

I disagree.

If I want to be an idiot, if I want to risk headbutting my airbag or flying through the windscreen then that should be my personal choice, it shouldn't be for the state to say I must.

I just got pulled for not weraing a seatbelt on a trip into town to get some money from the hole in the wall. Net result is a £30 fine. Lovely.

Now i know there are lots of arguments out there in favour of wearing the damn things but jesus, have a bit of leniency in the system for christs sake. I genuinely forget to belt up and get whacked with a £30 fine! its just not far i tell you. Yeah yeah, i hear all those voices saying, aha Rob well at least you'll think twice next time and all that stuff but still....

The motorist in the uk is such an easy target, we are a milked cash cow, criminalised and chased at every opportunity. I really really really dislike the mentality in this country that says bossy boots copper can dole out tickets willy nilly for piffling little things like failing to wear a poxy seat belt. If you look at the legislation it gives all manner of exemptions. If you are an emergency services person then it allows you discretion. This I can understand. It also allows people who drive people for hire (licensed taxis) for example an exemption from the law. Why? What is it about a cab driver that excludes them from the possibilty of flying through windscreens or nutting the steering wheel?

The law is an ass, either its dangerous to not wear a seat belt or it isn't. If a copper or a fireman or an ambulance worker needs to eject themselves from their vehicle quickly, then i can understand that a belt might impede them. But hang on, what if i were in an accident and happened to be constrained by the belt, what if the car was on fire and i couldnt release the damn thing, what then? Burn perhaps?

On balance i'm sure the damn things are probably safer to wear than not but it really should be my right to decide on whether I wear one or not.It's nanny state interference!

£30 feckin quid!!! Bastard. I asked the pc concerned whether or not she'd perhaps had a bad day and whether she enjoyed just pissing people off and ruining their day, to which she replied, ive had a great day sir, you do not have to say anything, but it may harm your defence if....fuckin robot! hang on i said, interrupting her, talk to me like a human being for christs sake, don't dehumanise me behind that facade of thing you think is justice...Sir, she responded, i'm just doing my job, I have no discretion over such things...what a fuckin robot.

At this point i gave up, no point antagonising a robot, they just call in the other robots and rip your car to bits to find something else to slap you with.

can anyone see where Im coming from here? can anyone see that she really didn't have to issue that ticket, she could have just told me off and warned me that if she saw me again she'd ticket me. No discretion indeed, what bollocks is that? Let me guess, she'll go back to the station and wear a lie detector that will recognise that she saw a naughty motorist without a seatbelt and thus gwt reprimanded for behaving like a human?

If you are a policeman or woman reading this, then jesus christ, try and behave like a human, and if you don't or don't want to even, then at least take a little look inside yourself and question why youve become such a horrible bastard at least. It just really isn't necessary.

end of rant.

I had to change a flight detail for a flight to Ibiza today.

I sat on the phone for 75 minutes!! Before deciding to give up the ghost.

What appalling customer service this is. "Your call is important to us, a customer service representative will be with you as soon as one becomes available"

What a lot of old bollocks that is. More like, your call to our premium rate 0870 prefix number is important to us!

Why can't companies just offer a decent after sales service? Is it so much to ask for a quick accessible easy to use service? I'll never book with these people again. So for the sake of screwing me over for 75 minutes at 10p per minute, they've lost a future customer.

Lots of my friends fly all over Europe too. I'll be telling them the same too. Do not use thomsonfly.com.

ad: Need a cheap flight?