new concession for terror bill. - Page 3

garinda · 11-06-2008, 01:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by blazey

I don't agree with andrew but I don't agree with this view either. There is such thing as 'excessiveness'.

For example, I personally think 24 weeks is excessive for abortions, and a much shorter time was appropriate. I guess the difference is the effect on ones being after being held captive for such a long period without charge or knowledge of what is likely to be decided. Like a baby that is allowed to develop too long in the womb before being aborted, it feels pain. Allowing the government to hold people captive for so long without reason causes [in some cases at least] unnecessary stress and anxiety.

That's the way I see this issue.

How many terrorists are expected to be held for these kind of periods? I imagine that they are only going to be held within good reason for this extended period, so I don't see a problem with legalising it, but I can see andrews view of it not being needed to date so why now.

I'm in favour of it I think, but I don't really know enough about it.

It comes down to principle.

You either believe suspected terrorists can be detained without charge, or you don't.

The time scale is irrelevant, principles aren't.

Rosencrantz · 11-06-2008, 01:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by garinda

....and by the way, I was fighting for real civil liberties whilst you still had brown stuff leaking out of your nappy.

Sorry, sir, I'll leave you to erode my right not to be in a cell for a ridiculous chunk of time now. Far be it from me, the youth, to question the ineffable wisdom of my elders, who know best, amen. Whilst I have leaked brown stuff from my nappy, now, like a beautiful circle of life, I see it is leaking from your mouth.

BRING ON THE PRISON CELLS!

blazey · 11-06-2008, 01:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by garinda

It comes down to principle.

You either believe suspected terrorists can be detained without charge, or you don't.

The time scale is irrelevant, principles aren't.

Well I think both are relevant, but principle is more important.

How many people are going to suffer injustices at the hands of this proposed time extension? Not many in my opinion, if any at all.

Therefore the good will generally outweigh the 'evil' (i.e. innocent detainees) and I am in full support of the proposal because of this.

andrewb · 11-06-2008, 01:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by BERNADETTE

I don't for one minute think that suspects are picked up on the basis of NO evidence. However long it takes to prove or disprove that the evidence is right or wrong as long as innnocent lifes are not taken I for one am all for the longer detention period!!

Well they are, this is what the terrorism act is for Bernadette! Is hard to believe isn't it! I hope you can rethink now you know this.

The Crown Prosecution Service deal with saying if evidence is enough to prosecute terrorists. They have said that they do not need more than 28 days.

andrewb · 11-06-2008, 01:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by garinda

Total hypocrisy.

The Conservatives think it's totally okay to hold suspected terrorist without charge for four weeks, but six weeks is bang out of order?

What on earth is the difference?

That's just about a time scale, and nothing at all to do with principles.

If you really believed in the principle of freedom you'd be lobbying that people shouldn't be held without charge at all.

Not at all. There is a fine balance to be made. That balance is broken when you can detain people for longer than it is necessary. 42 days has never been necessary. Fact.

garinda · 11-06-2008, 01:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rosencrantz

Sorry, sir, I'll leave you to erode my right not to be in a cell for a ridiculous chunk of time now. Far be it from me, the youth, to question the ineffable wisdom of my elders, who know best, amen. Whilst I have leaked brown stuff from my nappy, now, like a beautiful circle of life, I see it is leaking from your mouth.

BRING ON THE PRISON CELLS!

Appology accepted.

Dismissed.

Now go and practice using quotes in your posts, so other people's words don't appear in the middle of your own.

Rosencrantz · 11-06-2008, 01:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by garinda

Appology accepted.

Dismissed.

Now go and practice using quotes in your posts, so other people's words don't appear in the middle of your own.

You mean...those were YOUR words that supported my proposals? I didn't even notice! Oh happy day! I'm so glad we agree

garinda · 11-06-2008, 01:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rosencrantz

Sorry, sir, I'll leave you to erode my right not to be in a cell for a ridiculous chunk of time now. Far be it from me, the youth, to question the ineffable wisdom of my elders, who know best, amen. Whilst I have leaked brown stuff from my nappy, now, like a beautiful circle of life, I see it is leaking from your mouth.

BRING ON THE PRISON CELLS!

Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead, along with your credibility.

garinda · 11-06-2008, 02:03

Anyway, look what I've found!

Bigger fish to fry.

Ciao.

BERNADETTE · 11-06-2008, 02:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by andrewb

Well they are, this is what the terrorism act is for Bernadette! Is hard to believe isn't it! I hope you can rethink now you know this.

The Crown Prosecution Service deal with saying if evidence is enough to prosecute terrorists. They have said that they do not need more than 28 days.

Sorry but they are not held with No evidence there must be something or they wouldn't be detained in the first place. The CPS can take months to decide on a domestic case so pray tell me how twenty eight days is enough time to sort a suspected terrorist case??

andrewb · 11-06-2008, 02:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by BERNADETTE

Sorry but they are not held with No evidence there must be something or they wouldn't be detained in the first place. The CPS can take months to decide on a domestic case so pray tell me how twenty eight days is enough time to sort a suspected terrorist case??

A lot of people, detained without evidence, have been released after 28 days. Clearly no evidence was there or they'd be charged!

Ask the CPS, they're the experts who say they don't need it for doing their job.

steeljack · 11-06-2008, 02:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by andrewb

Not at all. There is a fine balance to be made. That balance is broken when you can detain people for longer than it is necessary. 42 days has never been necessary. Fact.

think it might be useful for you to take a look at history , during WW2 upto 14,000 people were detained on the Isle of Man for up to 4 years without trial or hearing , have attached the wikipedia link for speed ..........
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defence_Regulation_18B

blazey · 11-06-2008, 02:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by BERNADETTE

Sorry but they are not held with No evidence there must be something or they wouldn't be detained in the first place. The CPS can take months to decide on a domestic case so pray tell me how twenty eight days is enough time to sort a suspected terrorist case??

If we didn't have a terrible difference between the number of white people stopped by police and the number of Black and ethnic minority people stopped I'd like to think it was true that people are only detained within good reason, but unfortunately it is the case that many people suffer injustices due to the threat of terrorism.

I can't remember the name of the case now but what about the guy who collapsed on a london bus because of his diabetes and the police just tazored him without hesitation? Yes it was near the time of a terrorist attack in the capital, but it's still a bit reckless! Their excuse was that he looked Egyptian! A white british man who had lived in the country his entire life.

Whilst I can accept the extension to the time, I don't accept that there is no risk of this power being misused.

Rosencrantz · 11-06-2008, 02:10

You'll have loaaaads of time to fry it, and maybe even think up some smashing new recipes if you could just land that cushty 48-day bed and board courtesy of Her Majesty! Oh, how I wish I was in prison, counting the walls in the room (6), or dreaming up all the things I would be doing if I was outside, like getting a job or raising a child, or, I don't know, maybe doing something other than brooding over how much FUN I'm having in my cell. Prison must be great, especially if they used 48 days to trash my house, my friend's houses, pull my PC apart, hell, maybe they'll even do me a favour and clean up a bit. Oh! And the MEDIA!

It'll be just like Big Brother! I'll be famous! I bet Hello! will cover my wedding. Maybe once I'm REALLY demonised I can make some new and exciting friends! Someone put me away with no evidence now, please, hurry, hurry!

BERNADETTE · 11-06-2008, 02:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by andrewb

A lot of people, detained without evidence, have been released after 28 days. Clearly no evidence was there or they'd be charged!

Ask the CPS, they're the experts who say they don't need it for doing their job.

Do you want this country to be safe? I for one don't think that these proposals are just thought up overnight but if you really believe they are I can't change your opinion. Personally I feel that the terrorists are just waiting to strike again and if these extra days can avoid another attack they are worth it. We will wait and see, hope you are right and I am wrong!!