Quizzes & Puzzles6 mins ago
Theresa May Says She Will Rip Up Human Rights Laws To Fight Terror
Senior Conservative sources indicated they were ready to opt out of the recent provisions of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) if powers to stop suspects using mobile phones and computers or to impose curfews needed to be toughened up.
http://
It's about time that somebody did it!
http://
It's about time that somebody did it!
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by naomi24. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
// I'll be happy for them to be locked up properly or immediate deportation.//
so would I - the only problem is that the 10 000 deported so that one possible bomber Goes HOME ! is that I might be one of the others
especially if you include the AB handshake ( cut off one of their hands before deportation ( oo-er Mrs ! )
One of the LIb Dems said that the one person who escaped deportation had a CAT ! and so the whole of the Human Rights AXt should go. Hard cases make bad law. So yeah you repeal an act of parliament because a cat was involved in one case
We have the law makers we deserve
and listen up you monkeys ! ( sorry sean spicer speak showing up there ) would we know about the Italians tipping off the Brits about Yusuf Dagger if we had the secrecy laws the govt wants
No we would not - it would be a state secret that no one need know
we need more laws not less
so would I - the only problem is that the 10 000 deported so that one possible bomber Goes HOME ! is that I might be one of the others
especially if you include the AB handshake ( cut off one of their hands before deportation ( oo-er Mrs ! )
One of the LIb Dems said that the one person who escaped deportation had a CAT ! and so the whole of the Human Rights AXt should go. Hard cases make bad law. So yeah you repeal an act of parliament because a cat was involved in one case
We have the law makers we deserve
and listen up you monkeys ! ( sorry sean spicer speak showing up there ) would we know about the Italians tipping off the Brits about Yusuf Dagger if we had the secrecy laws the govt wants
No we would not - it would be a state secret that no one need know
we need more laws not less
//Why should humans have rights just because they are human?//
To prevent abuse of power by the state. This has been a cornerstone of British governance since at least the 17th century and arguably much further.
The fact that this needs explaining is the best argument I have seen in a long time for citizenship to remain a compulsory subject in schools.
To prevent abuse of power by the state. This has been a cornerstone of British governance since at least the 17th century and arguably much further.
The fact that this needs explaining is the best argument I have seen in a long time for citizenship to remain a compulsory subject in schools.
By doing inhumane things to other (sometimes totaly innocent) humans the perpetrators should loose some of the rights associated with being human.
There does not need to be big swathes of the HRA discarded but maybe changed enough to not allow them the get out of jail free card. To not allow them to carry on as usual 'just because they haven't stuck someone with a knife.
Terrorist have free will and choose to kill and maim and inflict untold horrors on people like you and me doing nothing more than going about our daily lives. Maybe some of those ordinary people are sitting in a cafe right now tapping away on their iPads writing on Answer Bank!! Suddenly one of those terrorists walks in... and the keyboard goes quiet.
There is a subclass of human. It has nothing to do with race, religion, colour or creed, nationality or any other 'thing' you want to excuse them with. It has everything to do with the basic human condition.
There does not need to be big swathes of the HRA discarded but maybe changed enough to not allow them the get out of jail free card. To not allow them to carry on as usual 'just because they haven't stuck someone with a knife.
Terrorist have free will and choose to kill and maim and inflict untold horrors on people like you and me doing nothing more than going about our daily lives. Maybe some of those ordinary people are sitting in a cafe right now tapping away on their iPads writing on Answer Bank!! Suddenly one of those terrorists walks in... and the keyboard goes quiet.
There is a subclass of human. It has nothing to do with race, religion, colour or creed, nationality or any other 'thing' you want to excuse them with. It has everything to do with the basic human condition.
v_e //Rubbish candidate Jeremy Corbyn produced three bullet points and got ONE right: stop Saudis exporting Wahhabism.//
Short sighted to say the least. Firstly, an impossible ambition, and secondly extremist views are not confined to Saudi Arabia.
//Her "Enough is enough" speech shows that she's incapable of honest assessment of our biggest problem which is Islam.//
In the current climate of enforced political correctness - which we, ourselves, have allowed to be created - it’s very difficult for anyone in the public domain to state the obvious without being howled down as racist, Islamophobic, etc – although the Archbishop of Canterbury stuck his neck out a few days ago, albeit with carefully chosen words. It is not only our politicians who need to wake up and smell the coffee (as ‘they’ say) – every single man or woman who defends the ‘rights’ of Islamists to maintain their idiosyncrasies must do likewise. For those who are, in effect, saying that those whose sole aim is to promote Islam above all, murdering innocent people in the process, should be afforded the same rights as everyone else, I disagree. It’s precisely that naive philosophy that has allowed this to happen. When people, whose ideology is so wholly detrimental to our society, demonstrate very clearly their disdain for this country, their opposition to western values, and their utter disregard for human life, they forfeit their ‘right’ to be afforded the courtesy of equal consideration. Mrs May’s intention to rip up those aspects of the Human Rights Act that prevent us from dealing with the extremists in our midst as they should be dealt with is, at the least, a step in the right direction. I hope she does it.
Short sighted to say the least. Firstly, an impossible ambition, and secondly extremist views are not confined to Saudi Arabia.
//Her "Enough is enough" speech shows that she's incapable of honest assessment of our biggest problem which is Islam.//
In the current climate of enforced political correctness - which we, ourselves, have allowed to be created - it’s very difficult for anyone in the public domain to state the obvious without being howled down as racist, Islamophobic, etc – although the Archbishop of Canterbury stuck his neck out a few days ago, albeit with carefully chosen words. It is not only our politicians who need to wake up and smell the coffee (as ‘they’ say) – every single man or woman who defends the ‘rights’ of Islamists to maintain their idiosyncrasies must do likewise. For those who are, in effect, saying that those whose sole aim is to promote Islam above all, murdering innocent people in the process, should be afforded the same rights as everyone else, I disagree. It’s precisely that naive philosophy that has allowed this to happen. When people, whose ideology is so wholly detrimental to our society, demonstrate very clearly their disdain for this country, their opposition to western values, and their utter disregard for human life, they forfeit their ‘right’ to be afforded the courtesy of equal consideration. Mrs May’s intention to rip up those aspects of the Human Rights Act that prevent us from dealing with the extremists in our midst as they should be dealt with is, at the least, a step in the right direction. I hope she does it.
I'd suggest that one need only look at Trump's attempts to enforce a travel ban to explain why basic protections against abuse of governments' and states' power need to be preserved.
And if that sort of abuse of power can be attempted in the US, where the system is designed so explicitly to ensure that very little happens without consensus across all wings of government, then it can be attempted here too. Human Rights protect us all. The most visible beneficiaries are those who, perhaps, deserve them the least, but shed rights for them and you shed your own rights too. Including to "appeal after appeal" to protect against possible miscarriages of justice, or whatever else you could care to name.
To Vulcan I'd also ask: if you take away the "human" part in human rights, as in being born human no longer qualifies you for those rights, then what condition do you intend to replace it with?
And if that sort of abuse of power can be attempted in the US, where the system is designed so explicitly to ensure that very little happens without consensus across all wings of government, then it can be attempted here too. Human Rights protect us all. The most visible beneficiaries are those who, perhaps, deserve them the least, but shed rights for them and you shed your own rights too. Including to "appeal after appeal" to protect against possible miscarriages of justice, or whatever else you could care to name.
To Vulcan I'd also ask: if you take away the "human" part in human rights, as in being born human no longer qualifies you for those rights, then what condition do you intend to replace it with?
The UK is not under siege by terrorists. Terror is a smaller danger to the public now than it was in the 1980s.
http://
Do not let the government take your rights away. This is an agenda-driven exploitation of a tragedy.
http://
Do not let the government take your rights away. This is an agenda-driven exploitation of a tragedy.
Latest Posts
Quizzes & Puzzles15 mins ago
Film, Media & TV47 mins ago
ChatterBank78 mins ago
ChatterBank81 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.