Habeas Corpus

[gettin2dizzy]

If they vote for 42 days, they've really lost the plot. They abused the last lot of laws ferociously, and I have no doubt they'll do it again.

Using 'anti terrosist' laws to spy on a family to determine their school catchment area?!

Using 'anti terrorist' laws to rough up a pensioner for saying 'rubbish' during Jack Straws speech?...

Gordons doing the job of the terrorists; he's removing our freedoms bit by bit. I fear the Government more than the "terrorists".

...6pm...

[SoulKiss]

If they vote for 42 days, they've really lost the plot. They abused the last lot of laws ferociously, and I have no doubt they'll do it again.

Using 'anti terrosist' laws to spy on a family to determine their school catchment area?!

Using 'anti terrorist' laws to rough up a pensioner for saying 'rubbish' during Jack Straws speech?...

Gordons doing the job of the terrorists; he's removing our freedoms bit by bit. I fear the Government more than the "terrorists".

...6pm...

Someone should snatch Gordon, or one of the others and hold them for 42 days without access to legal representation, or the ability to make a call.

Oh but wait, thats kidnapping.

One rule for them, another for everyone else....

[gettin2dizzy]

Someone should snatch Gordon, or one of the others and hold them for 42 days without access to legal representation, or the ability to make a call.

Oh but wait, thats kidnapping.

One rule for them, another for everyone else....
You looking for a volunteer? ;)
(that would probably be seen as sufficient evidence now though...)


It scares me there's so much unrest in this country with regards to freedoms being taken away. But the majority is not only unaware; they don't want to use their noggins to work out what crimes are being committed.

Mind you; for ?3k a day compensation I might see if I can get myself locked up. Maybe protesting outside Westminister as that's NOW a terrorist offence? :thumbsup:

[SoulKiss]

You looking for a volunteer? ;)
(that would probably be seen as sufficient evidence now though...)


It scares me there's so much unrest in this country with regards to freedoms being taken away. But the majority is not only unaware; they don't want to use their noggins to work out what crimes are being committed.

Mind you; for ?3k a day compensation I might see if I can get myself locked up. Maybe protesting outside Westminister as that's NOW a terrorist offence? :thumbsup:

hmmm £3k/day you say, or £126k if held full term

It IS tempting you know, and its only a month and a half.

Could do it every year and have quite a good lifestyle.

Sounds like a plan

Who's in ???

[the_lone_wolf]

note that the compensation is only if you are not charged...

if they invent some bull**** charge just to show that holding you for 42 days was justified, then you are found to be innocent, i assume you get nothing...

[Sosha]

http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/politics/2008/06/42day_detention_debate_live.html

[gettin2dizzy]

Criminal :(


28 days shouldn't have been allowed. We've once again lost our most basic of rights.

[Sosha]

Government: 315. Opposition: 306. Majority: Nine

:-(

Go House of Lords....

[Filipe M.]

Another reminder for me to shave and try and get rid of my tan before going up there again... :rolleyes:

[Warthog]

Pfffff, bye!
*packs bags, leaves for a more free country like Cuba or Zimbabwe*

[gettin2dizzy]

David Davis

:notworthy:

More of them please :)

[keithd]

the erosion of our civil liberties continues....

28 days was too long, there were measure in place that allowed an extension of those 28 days in any case?

i trust the house of lords will see sense and throw the thing out...

and let's not get started on ID cards either eh?!

[Filipe M.]

and let's not get started on ID cards either eh?!

I take it you're in favour of the whole thing then? :lol:

[Grinch]

Who wants to down load the terroist hand book with me... I look a bit shifty so will probably be locked up.

[Grinch]

Oh and anyone got the link... ;-)

[keithd]

I take it you're in favour of the whole thing then? :lol:

i think that all my personal details from my DNA the colour of undercrackers i wear is available to the highest bidder is a simply marvelous idea Tristram

[keithd]

Oh and anyone got the link... ;-)


www.howtomakeweaponsofmassdestruction.biz

[Filipe M.]

i think that all my personal details from my DNA the colour of undercrackers i wear is available to the highest bidder is a simply marvelous idea Tristram

:smt045 someone out there must really find themselves very smart for coming up with that one.

[Ed]

I don't think 42 days is unreasonable. I reckon that the public would probably support 42 days for suspected terrorists. I do. Erosion of fundamental freedoms, well it's my fundamental freedom not to be blown up, and I accept the Government's case that getting the evidence in suspected terrorist cases can be a time consuming business.

I think David Davis is a twit. I don't like him anyway, he looks shifty.

[SoulKiss]

Oh and anyone got the link... ;-)

Those nice men over at the US Department of Justice have one (http://www.usdoj.gov/ag/manualpart1_1.pdf)

Hey, does that make THEM terrorists too?

[keithd]

I don't think 42 days is unreasonable. I reckon that the public would probably support 42 days for suspected terrorists. I do. Erosion of fundamental freedoms, well it's my fundamental freedom not to be blown up, and I accept the Government's case that getting the evidence in suspected terrorist cases can be a time consuming business.

I think David Davis is a twit. I don't like him anyway, he looks shifty.

you're therefore - im my humble of course - subscribing to the governments ideals that there's a bogeyman out to get us all. terror threat? what terror threat? its propaganda at its best. 42 days is simply an OUTRAGEOUS amount of time to hold somebody without charge (see what i did there, i put it in capitals which means i meant it!), no other civilised country holds suspects for as long as we did with our 28 days, now its nearly been doubled? orwell was right you know

[Ed]

you're therefore - im my humble of course - subscribing to the governments ideals that there's a bogeyman out to get us all. terror threat? what terror threat? its propaganda at its best. 42 days is simply an OUTRAGEOUS amount of time to hold somebody without charge (see what i did there, i put it in capitals which means i meant it!), no other civilised country holds suspects for as long as we did with our 28 days, now its nearly been doubled? orwell was right you know

I don't have any statistics on this but we often read of people arrested under the anti-terrorism laws.

What's the bigger interest - the fact that someone might be banged up, unfairly, for rather longer than might ideally be desirable, or the safety of the public?

[SoulKiss]

I don't think 42 days is unreasonable. I reckon that the public would probably support 42 days for suspected terrorists. I do. Erosion of fundamental freedoms, well it's my fundamental freedom not to be blown up, and I accept the Government's case that getting the evidence in suspected terrorist cases can be a time consuming business.

I think David Davis is a twit. I don't like him anyway, he looks shifty.

I dont care about Davis either - its probably some plan in a Scheme of his TBH

I do care about the fact that if the Plod actually cared about the Soho Massive parking on double yellows and decided to do something about it, they could quote "Prevention of Terrorism", accuse us of purposefully blocking a street and haul the lot of us off for 42 days holiday.

As it is, TSM was stopped on his way home once (a distance from Soho I will admit) and the reason given was Terror related. (and that was about 5 mins walk from my house)

I think that the Orwelian Powers that the govenrment have given themselves HAVE to be taken from them, and PROPER laws be brought in, all the CCTV cameras should be ripped down and very long and hard consideration taken on where and if any of them should be re-instated.

[Viney]

Hmmm, 2 sides to every coin i suppose. If you where to ask the families of people of say, 9/11 or 7/7 attacks, or other terrorist stuff, or that you were one of those said familes, i am sure that your opinions/views would be different, and if you say not, then im sorry you are lying.

Personaly, i dont really care if poeple are banged up for 28 days or 42. How many people a year is this going to affect in reality?

[keithd]

Hmmm, 2 sides to every coin i suppose. If you where to ask the families of people of say, 9/11 or 7/7 attacks, or other terrorist stuff, or that you were one of those said familes, i am sure that your opinions/views would be different, and if you say not, then im sorry you are lying.

Personaly, i dont really care if poeple are banged up for 28 days or 42. How many people a year is this going to affect in reality?

from a horses mouth...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2007/nov/13/uksecurity.terrorism

[Flamin_Squirrel]

Mind you; for ?3k a day compensation I might see if I can get myself locked up. Maybe protesting outside Westminister as that's NOW a terrorist offence? :thumbsup:

... and once 'board and lodging, at a bargin price of 5k a day is subtracted, you'll end up owing the government money.

I don't have any statistics on this but we often read of people arrested under the anti-terrorism laws.

What's the bigger interest - the fact that someone might be banged up, unfairly, for rather longer than might ideally be desirable, or the safety of the public?

Banging people up unfairly, by a long way.

Why do you ride a motorbike? Because you've run it through your mind and decided that the reward outweighs the risk. And you know more than most how real those risks are, yet you still do it.

The same logic can be applied to this anti-terror business. The risk from terrorism is laughably small. Yes 53 people died in a horrific attack, but that was three years ago. Many times more people will have died slipping over in the bathroom since then, but you don't call in the flying squad becaue you noticed a shifty looking bar of soap in the shower.

The reward for choosing to proceed with life dispite the risk is to remove the oppertunity for an arrogant government run by a phsycotic scotsman to randomly lock people up.

Tiny risk, large reward. The new law is a travisty.

[Grinch]

Once again I offer my services as your new world ruler... I can sort all this easy.

[SoulKiss]

rOnce again I offer my services as your new world ruler... I can sort all this easy.

Sorry Grinch - thats MY job.

You can be Minister for Cake tho

[Grinch]

Sorry Grinch - thats MY job.

You can be Minister for Cake tho


I think if it came to a vote, people could easy direct there hate towards me, after all thats one of the leaders jobs.

[the_lone_wolf]

ironically as we reduce the liberties of our populous, the US supreme court extends hope to people stuck in what is the greatest affront to due process and the right to a fair trial in the western world...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/7451139.stm

[Viney]

from a horses mouth...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2007/nov/13/uksecurity.terrorismA r s e. There goes my argument.

i shall just go back upder my rock :lol:

[gettin2dizzy]

It's the most basic right not to lock an innocent man up. Besides, there are exeptional circumstances rules for situations which require this kind of action. The only reason this has been passed is so it can be acted upon easily, and frequently.

How likely is it that someone involved in terror will require much evidence gathering?! It's not a small crime easily hidden.

Would it have helped in ANY of the terrorist attacks? Has the current 28 days proven to help at all? NO

Have there been massive abuse of these laws already? Hell yeah.

It's sickening and just another building block of the police state.

[northwind]

We were in more day to day danger for terrorism during the "troubles", and yet somehow we got by without 42 days...

Can't get on youtube from work, but go and search for roy zimmerman, "that is the war on terror"

"There's that great quote about war, and I'm trying to remember who said it. That the people can always be brought to do the bidding of the leaders.
You just tell them they're under attack,
and denounce the pacifists for lack
of patriotism, now who said that? -
Oh yeah, it was Herman Goering

And that is the War on Terror"

[Pedrosa]

Those that cry out that you live in an ever increasing Police State culture really do for me get carried away with the whole thing. For me ID cards(I have had to carry one with me for the last 8 years-though it does not contain some of the personal info some are trying to push to be included in the UK one) are no big deal Should I ever get stopped by the police or asked in a shop or bank to prove my ID I can do so.

Over zealous powers of arrest and detention for suspected terorists? I have no problem with that at all as I feel I would never be dragged in myself. One can only hope that the investigation leading to any arrest has been carried out professionally and diligently before the arrest warrant can be issued. Hence,although 42 days are allowed for them to button down the case for court appearances or official charges to be made that should prove to be,(hopefully) way more than ever required.

Arresting one person and holding them for 42 days is a small price to pay in my mind when we consider the havoc just one terrorist can cause. The arguments that say we only have a terrorist incident every Preston Guild, and so we do not need this.....are in my mind wrong. just maybe the authorities are ever more vigilant and their methods are working and making it more difficult for these people.

We can rant and rave from a distance. But God Forbid any of our lives or loved one's are devastated by the acts of terrorism. Put in that situation I very much doubt the money mentioned to hold a suspect would be begrudged. Lose a family member to a bomb or bullet and I am sure you would readilly if able,pay that 5k a day to have that person back safe with you.

But then again,what do I know?

[rigor]

Those that cry out that you live in an ever increasing Police State culture really do for me get carried away with the whole thing. For me ID cards(I have had to carry one with me for the last 8 years-though it does not contain some of the personal info some are trying to push to be included in the UK one) are no big deal Should I ever get stopped by the police or asked in a shop or bank to prove my ID I can do so.

And, given time and the will to do it, I could prove I was you as well. ID cards mean nothing but a warm fuzzy "Oh I'm safe now feeling".

Over zealous powers of arrest and detention for suspected terorists? I have no problem with that at all as I feel I would never be dragged in myself.So it's OK as long as it doesn't effect you??

One can only hope that the investigation leading to any arrest has been carried out professionally and diligently before the arrest warrant can be issued.Hope is really no where near the level of expectation we should have on our police force

Hence,although 42 days are allowed for them to button down the case for court appearances or official charges to be made that should prove to be,(hopefully) way more than ever required.So you don't think it's a possiblilty that it would work the other way round ever? Let's pick this guy up, I'm sure we can find something against him in 28 days, or if we need to we can now extend it, as long as we can convince a judge.

Arresting one person and holding them for 42 days is a small price to pay in my mind when we consider the havoc just one terrorist can cause. The arguments that say we only have a terrorist incident every Preston Guild, and so we do not need this.....are in my mind wrong. just maybe the authorities are ever more vigilant and their methods are working and making it more difficult for these people.Rubbish. If I was that way inclined I could probably commit an "terrorist outrage" on the way home, or with only a couple of days of planning. Thinking back to the bomber who targeted gay bars in Soho. The police had no idea of what he was planning, because he was a lone person. Nothing will stop people dedicated enough from committing terrorist acts.


We can rant and rave from a distance. But God Forbid any of our lives or loved one's are devastated by the acts of terrorism. Put in that situation I very much doubt the money mentioned to hold a suspect would be begrudged. Lose a family member to a bomb or bullet and I am sure you would readilly if able,pay that 5k a day to have that person back safe with you.It's just the cynical way the govt added the "Oh well, if we don't charge them we'll pay them cash" line, as if that made everything OK, like a National Terrorism Act Lottery.

[Flamin_Squirrel]

We can rant and rave from a distance. But God Forbid any of our lives or loved one's are devastated by the acts of terrorism. Put in that situation I very much doubt the money mentioned to hold a suspect would be begrudged. Lose a family member to a bomb or bullet and I am sure you would readilly if able,pay that 5k a day to have that person back safe with you.

And should you die riding a motorbike, which is infinitely more likely than you ever getting blown up, would you like your family to crusade in your name to have biking banned?

Either way, this is why it's unwise to listen to victims, or families of victims, because they're often the least objective and thus incapable of making any balanced judgment on what's best for the general population.

[Messie]

OMG never thought I'd agree with a Conservative MP

Is there any hope for me now?

[Stu]

Humiliating Victory
I loved that quote from an SDLP guy last night :D

[northwind]

Over zealous powers of arrest and detention for suspected terorists? I have no problem with that at all as I feel I would never be dragged in myself. One can only hope that the investigation leading to any arrest has been carried out professionally and diligently before the arrest warrant can be issued. Hence,although 42 days are allowed for them to button down the case for court appearances or official charges to be made that should prove to be,(hopefully) way more than ever required.


Just to name one recent occasion existing anti-terrorist legislation has been deployed against the public- it was used to detain protestors on their way to Gleneagles during the G8 summit, who had committed no crime and who were most likely going to commit no crime, simply travelling on their way to a peaceful protest on public roads.

And if the 42 days should prove to be more than needed, why do they ask for it?

[Stu]

Just to name one recent occasion existing anti-terrorist legislation has been deployed against the public- it was used to detain protestors on their way to Gleneagles during the G8 summit, who had committed no crime and who were most likely going to commit no crime, simply travelling on their way to a peaceful protest on public roads.
?
That's just my thinking on the law against protesting within 1 mile of Parliament. There's no chance that someone would launch an attack on Parliament from a protest. If they wanted to attack, they would just do it.

And the fact that there is still an ongoing protest right in front of Parliament since before the legislation was introduced (therefore allowed) makes a mockery of it.

[Pedrosa]

[quote=Flamin_Squirrel;1537046]And should you die riding a motorbike, which is infinitely more likely than you ever getting blown up, would you like your family to crusade in your name to have biking banned?

/quote]

Poor comparison really. generally the risk here is to the motorcyclist himself. He does not intentionally set out to harm either himself or others. There are risks but no criminal intent to do harm.

The comments I passed earlier obviously I guess would seem reasonable in a perfect world where Police are doing what they are emplñoyed to do and innocent people are neither threatened by fanatics or the authorities.

Even if I were arrested as a suspect terrorist,gall me greatly indeed it would but my inocence would be finally proven. Darn there goes me and my fanciful perfect world nonsense again!

[northwind]

Even if I were arrested as a suspect terrorist,gall me greatly indeed it would but my inocence would be finally proven. Darn there goes me and my fanciful perfect world nonsense again!

The thing is, even if you have 100% trust in the current authorities you have to plan for the next one, and the one after that- it's harder to take a power away than it is to give it, generally. The current lot have shown that they'll abuse it fairly freely but so far generally in fairly trivial and squalid ways, nothing that's earthshaking. That's about par for the course for modern government really. If this really was the oppressive power-crazed authoritarian government people think we have, then we'd see trouble.

The way it was used before Gleneagles was really quite cunning, and obviously premeditated- they just arrested everyone on the buses (apart from the drivers) then released them a couple of hours later without charge. By that time it was too late to get to the demo, but they can say "Hey, it was only a couple of hours, that's a small price for safety surely?" The impact was huge in publicity terms, it totally gutted the protest but the impact per person was minor and easy to shrug off.

[Flamin_Squirrel]

Poor comparison really.

Why? You'd be dead, I can't see how whether you check out from being blown up or ending up under the wheels of an arctic make any difference.

[arenalife]

Adolf Hitler didn't create Nazi Germany in one fell swoop, he just passed lots of incremental laws that in themselves didn't seem significant, but resulted in his totalitarian state. By the time people realised, they couldn't do F all about it. We are certainly going the same way, the terrorist laws basically mean detention at whim. Just wait till we've all got ID cards and total DNA databasing.

[ThEGr33k]

hmmm ?3k/day you say, or ?126k if held full term

It IS tempting you know, and its only a month and a half.

Could do it every year and have quite a good lifestyle.

Sounds like a plan

Who's in ???

Woo hoo Why not? :p

[Welsh_Wizard]

I've only read 2 or 3 pages of this thread and one thing seems to be escaping me completely I guess...

Why are you worried about the length of detention when you need to be actively involved in terrorist activities to have it envoked upon you?? Is the ORG cultivating a terrorist cell on the quiet perchance ??

[arenalife]

Ironically this has all come about because they're trying to be transparent and above board. In the old days, when they needed to get rid of a few IRA guys, they just sent the SAS round in dark sweaters to terminate them. That never caused much furore as I recall, just seemed appropriate?

[northwind]

Why are you worried about the length of detention when you need to be actively involved in terrorist activities to have it envoked upon you?? Is the ORG cultivating a terrorist cell on the quiet perchance ??

I don't often do this, but :rolleyes:. You can't seriously think that the only people detained under anti-terror laws are terrorists?

[philipMac]

Ah yeah sure.
I mean, when Faulkner introduced internment in 1971 that stopped the IRA in their tracks.


Oh wait.
But but, no, I mean, bad example... ok, Gitmo, Camp X-Ray, unmarked Prison ships, that all worked out in the end for the US, right?


...right?