42 days

[Mojo]

Government has won the 42-days vote. An absolute disgrace.

 

[Ascot]

Government has won the 42-days vote. An absolute disgrace.

Could be because he isn't going to last 09?

 

[Beaker]

Government has won the 42-days vote. An absolute disgrace.

What a shame.... never mind.

 

[Mojo]

See how your MP voted.

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm/cmtoday/cmdebate/15.htm#hddr_22

 

[will1337]

Who doesn't have the potential to be a terrorist?

 

[will1337]

Then you'd have to wonder if they'd found out enough about the person to justify detaining them. The duration they should have to detain suspects can't really be decided by anyone without a lot of knowledge and those worried about civil rights should be a lot more concerned about the extraordinary renditions and Guantanamo Bay etc. If the government planned to change it to up to years then I'm sure the answer would be a lot more obvious.

 

[eezypeazy]

Should potential terrorists be held for longer than before if it helps prevent attacks and deaths? Well yes. Surely it goes without saying? As long as the person is not mistreated until they're charged obviously.

Dear Mr Coxster,

I was so pleased to read your comments. It seems to me that you are fully in support of my Government's proposal to detain potential terrorists without charge for up to 42 days.

In view of this, I trust that I can also call upon your support on a related matter.

As you may be aware, our prisons are presently operating above their designed capacity. You can see that, in order that our new detention proposal can be properly implemented, we are going to need to increase the number of prison spaces.

You obviously speak with the voice of the people of Farnborough, whom I trust will welcome the new prison to the town? Just think about the new jobs this will create in the Prison Service locally, not to mention construction industry jobs while it is being built.

I assume you will also be happy that, of necessity, this will be a high-security installation? This will need double perimiter fences, 24 hour floodlighting, armed prison staff and a complete kennel of guard dogs? We shall, of course, fit silencers to the police helicopters to reduce disturbance during the hours of darkness.

Now you may think that having a dedicated, single-location high security prison in Farnborough might, in itself, become a target for terrorists, wishing to free their comrades? But can I reassure you, once we've locked them all up, there'll be no one on the outside to try!

The town is also likely to benefit further, as the prison will no doubt become a tourist attraction in its own right. I understand that coach operators in parts of London, Bradford, and the West Midlands have already been asked by some local religious organisations if they might be able to arrange some private hires. Sadly, increased road traffic will add to congestion, but don't worry - once you've got congested, we'll build you a tramway and slap on a congestion charge to solve the problem.

Yes, the future for Britain under Labour is bright.

Trusting that I can count upon your vote when the time comes,

Yours sincerely

Gordon Brown



(as dictated to eezypeazy)

 

[P156KWJ]

Dear Mr Coxster,

I was so pleased to read your comments. It seems to me that you are fully in support of my Government's proposal to detain potential terrorists without charge for up to 42 days.

In view of this, I trust that I can also call upon your support on a related matter.

As you may be aware, our prisons are presently operating above their designed capacity. You can see that, in order that our new detention proposal can be properly implemented, we are going to need to increase the number of prison spaces.

You obviously speak with the voice of the people of Farnborough, whom I trust will welcome the new prison to the town? Just think about the new jobs this will create in the Prison Service locally, not to mention construction industry jobs while it is being built.

I assume you will also be happy that, of necessity, this will be a high-security installation? This will need double perimiter fences, 24 hour floodlighting, armed prison staff and a complete kennel of guard dogs? We shall, of course, fit silencers to the police helicopters to reduce disturbance during the hours of darkness.

Now you may think that having a dedicated, single-location high security prison in Farnborough might, in itself, become a target for terrorists, wishing to free their comrades? But can I reassure you, once we've locked them all up, there'll be no one on the outside to try!

The town is also likely to benefit further, as the prison will no doubt become a tourist attraction in its own right. I understand that coach operators in parts of London, Bradford, and the West Midlands have already been asked by some local religious organisations if they might be able to arrange some private hires. Sadly, increased road traffic will add to congestion, but don't worry - once you've got congested, we'll build you a tramway and slap on a congestion charge to solve the problem.

Yes, the future for Britain under Labour is bright.

Trusting that I can count upon your vote when the time comes,

Yours sincerely

Gordon Brown



(as dictated to eezypeazy)

I am in agreement with the 42-day thing too, as if you are wrongly suspected of terror, then you should have nothing to worry about, as 95% of the time, the person the police catch will be the person who has commited the crime. In the other 5%, it can take a long time for items such as DNA evidence to come through, and it eases the pressure on the PM and police if you are allowed to question the suspect longer.

 

[Donny Dave]

Look at this way. You've had an innocent conversation with someone who is (unknown to you) a suspected terrorist. The police then arrest you and question you for 6 weeks while they look for evidence to say you are a terrorist.

After 6 weeks, they can't find any, so they let you go. In that time, you'll will probably have lost your job, or if your at college, been kicked off your courses and lost most of your friends, as they will not want to be associated with a suspect terroist.

The compensation on offer does not cover the cost of trying to rebuild your life and living with the stigma of being labelled a terror suspect.

 

[P156KWJ]

Look at this way. You've had an innocent conversation with someone who is (unknown to you) a suspected terrorist. The police then arrest you and question you for 6 weeks while they look for evidence to say you are a terrorist.

After 6 weeks, they can't find any, so they let you go. In that time, you'll will probably have lost your job, or if your at college, been kicked off your courses and lost most of your friends, as they will not want to be associated with a suspect terroist.

The compensation on offer does not cover the cost of trying to rebuild your life and living with the stigma of being labelled a terror suspect.

that is a very good example of what may happen if you were very unlucky. However, say if you were a terrorist, and you were detained for 28 days, by this time, vital evidence may not have come through, and if you are released, by the time they come to re-arrest you if they have proof, they may have commited another crime or gone in to hiding and never seen again.

 

[eezypeazy]

I asked someone today this:

You're in a town centre, and there in the Square, is a man, waving about a copy of The Bible and shouting, "Repent, for the end is nigh." What would you think?

Answer: Bible basher.

Then I asked: The next day, in the Square, you see a man of Asian origin, waving a copy of the Qur'an. What would you think?

Answer: Potential terrorist - lock 'em up!


You can take the analogy further. A group of young men standing atop Newcastle Keep taking pictures of Central Station and High level Bridge are railway enthusiasts - unless they happen to look Asian, when they're potential terrorists.

We're at the top of a slippery slope here, folks... and I'm not looking forward to reaching the bottom!

eezypeazy

 

[Mojo]

Nobody has made a convincing argument that 42 days is required time to detain a suspected terrorist. If you feel that it is not enough time, why not make it easier to prosecute.
- Remove the bar on Phone Tap evidence in court
- Allow post-charge questioning
- Allocate more resources to the intelligence services

"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both." - Benjamin Franklin

 

[TheSlash]

Anyone could be a potential terrorist really

Especially those strongly opposed to the plan for 42 days detention. I nominate Mojo

 

[Beaker]

Look at this way. You've had an innocent conversation with someone who is (unknown to you) a suspected terrorist. The police then arrest you and question you for 6 weeks while they look for evidence to say you are a terrorist.

After 6 weeks, they can't find any, so they let you go. In that time, you'll will probably have lost your job, or if your at college, been kicked off your courses and lost most of your friends, as they will not want to be associated with a suspect terroist.

The compensation on offer does not cover the cost of trying to rebuild your life and living with the stigma of being labelled a terror suspect.

Your boss is likely to give back your job as its not common to be done for terrorism, you can also sell your story to the press. The bad publicity is going to fall on the cops not you. However if the police had a terrorist and had to release him due to time being up, they would be shot down in flames. So they are damned if they do , damned if they dont.

 

[Max]

I personally think this is an utter disgrace, and is a destruction of 700 years of British civil values. 42 days is simply too long, and, as Mojo has said, there is absolutely no evidence to suggest that this is the right length of time.

I see that my MP has stood down as a result of holding these very views, and good on him I say - it's good to see that some MPs are still willing to stand up for what they believe in!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7450627.stm

 

[Beaker]

Yer but what good is standing down going to do, i mean he can't really argue now.Its just a publicity stunt. What a prat.
A destroying 700years of british values ha. most of those 700 years we approved slavery are you suggesting that is better than the 42 day rule?

 

[richa2002]

Yer but what good is standing down going to do, i mean he can't really argue now.Its just a publicity stunt. What a prat.
A destroying 700years of british values ha. most of those 700 years we approved slavery are you suggesting that is better than the 42 day rule?

:roll:

 

[TheSlash]

But surely the same could be said if you were held for 28 days on suspicion of being involved in terrorism?

Eezypeazy:- Apologies for having an opinion that is different to yours. I shall note in future to follow everyone else in life. Wait... I'm a teenager. According to the media (who I should now follow in everything I do in life), that surely means I should go into a shop, steal a knife and carry it around with me everywhere I go. Yeah, that sounds like fun :roll:

You already do, don't you?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Don't worry about civil liberaties and all that, you lost them the day the first CCTV camera went up

 

[Crompton Karl]

I for one and in favour of detaining a suspected terrorist while investigations are being undertaken. However, i believe the existing 28 days was enough and extending it to 42 seems a little too long in my opinion. 28 days should be enough time for PC plod to find out if this detainee is actually a terrorist.

Don't waste money detaining suspects for an extra 2 weeks, instead plough that money into extra policing and anti terrosit schemes designed to stop them in the first place.

Karl

 

[Coxster]

You already do, don't you?

Don't worry about civil liberaties and all that, you lost them the day the first CCTV camera went up

Can't possibly comment - I've had my opinions on everything wiped by eezypeazy, and have been warned by someone in forum staff authority that any further comment on this matter from me will result in 'discipline'

 

[eezypeazy]

I'd just like to point out that if any of Damon's posts in this thread have been "wiped", it was absolutely nothing to do with me! (I've been too busy watching the Margaret Thatcher season on BBC 4 tonight to pay attention to any forum!).

Methinks someone else is watching and deciding exactly how "free" speech should be today....

 

[Tom C]

I've been too busy watching the Margaret Thatcher season on BBC 4 tonight to pay attention to any forum!

Yeah, doesn't matter how many channels you get on Sky or Freeview you still end up watching the same old rubbish.

For once I agree with Mr Beevers, television is a load of toot, especially when one of forced to watch a series glorifing the likes of Baroness Thatcher.

 

[RJ]

Methinks someone else is watching and deciding exactly how "free" speech should be today....

It has been said before by a moderator on here that this forum does not operate a free speech policy, or that free speech laws do not apply when a forum is used as a vector.

It has also been said by a moderator on here that any printed comment is libel without evidence to the same, whatever that means...

 

[Donny Dave]

I've just had a quick scan through various news sites, and noted one thing in particular ....

The old "Prevention of Terrorism" law is now this law. Why was 7 days enough (even post 9/11) to gather enough evidence then, but not now?

They have the same technology as they did 3 years ago, and the same rules of evidence still apply.

My opinion is that the government are doing the same as the "oppresive regimes" that the US and UK are trying to get rid off ....

Another thing. The posts that have been deleted have been removed by a member who has decided that he doesn't want his comments in the topic. None have been removed by an admin or moderator. So I don't see how the forum staff can be deciding how free speech is today :?

 

[Aussie_Rail]

What's the 42 day thing? Is the length of time you can be held in custody?

Ryan.

 

[Beaker]

:roll:

I was more aiming my argument at the overexageration of the amount of press this is getting. I mean '700 years of british values' seems a tad over the top. We were killing people up until 1964, how is putting somebody in a cell for 42 days worse than killing something, theres no un-doing once your heads 10ft away from your neck....

 

[Mojo]

What's the 42 day thing? Is the length of time

42 days is the proposed limit on which those suspected of being a Terrorist can be held without charge. It is not currently law.

I can also say that no posts in this thread have been deleted by anyone other than the original poster.

 

[Coxster]

Indeed David and Mojo - to avoid 'discipline'. I only apologise that I couldn't fully meet the request in that I was not able to remove quotes in other people's posts.

 

[Mojo]

Sorry, but is the purpose of a debate, which this is, albeit virtual, to get your opinions across and to respond to other's opinions, with perhaps an attempt to persuade the other parties to change their views?

 

[Coxster]

with perhaps an attempt to persuade the other parties to change their views?

Yeah, but I'm not sure threatening supporters of the 42 day ruling with a ban is the right way to go about it though.