ChatterBank1 min ago
Financial support for Northern Ireland?
Does anyone believe that the D.U.P. were not offered any incentives to vote for the repeal of the Magna Carta ...oops sorry..... vote on extending the maximum time police can hold terror suspects to 42 days.?
Answers
1 to 14 of 14
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by bimbim. 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.
"28 days always having been sufficient"
Always?
The amount of time that a terrorism suspect can be held without charge has changed significantly in the last 8 years. An overhaul of counter-terrorism laws in 2000 increased the basic 24-hour detention to 48-hours, extendable to seven days with the permission of the courts. In 2003 that was doubled to 14 days, and the Terrorism Act 2006 took it to 28 days.
Always?
The amount of time that a terrorism suspect can be held without charge has changed significantly in the last 8 years. An overhaul of counter-terrorism laws in 2000 increased the basic 24-hour detention to 48-hours, extendable to seven days with the permission of the courts. In 2003 that was doubled to 14 days, and the Terrorism Act 2006 took it to 28 days.
"Why worry unless you are a terrorist?
No one seems to bother about other suspected criminals, who can be locked away for almost a year before they go to trial. "
This isn't about detention, it's about detention without charge, people awaiting trial have been charged with a crime, enough evidence was found for their to considered a good chance of conviction. This new law basically means they can detain people without any evidence, effectively just on a hunch or hear say.
As for nothing to worry about unless your a terrorist check this out...
http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2005/10/ terrorism_laws.html
No one seems to bother about other suspected criminals, who can be locked away for almost a year before they go to trial. "
This isn't about detention, it's about detention without charge, people awaiting trial have been charged with a crime, enough evidence was found for their to considered a good chance of conviction. This new law basically means they can detain people without any evidence, effectively just on a hunch or hear say.
As for nothing to worry about unless your a terrorist check this out...
http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2005/10/ terrorism_laws.html
It's not only terrorists that should worry. One of my mates was hanging around outside a tube station a couple of weeks back waiting for a friend to arrive, and he was stop and searched by plain clothes police officers who thought that what he was doing constituted suspicious behaviour. How much more 'evidence' would they have to have found to bang him up for 42 days? What if, as a tourist he had a map with a few high profile locations in London circled? Who knows?
Why worry unless you are a terrorist?
Because these laws allow action based on suspicion. Now, fair enough, this doesn't let you bang up just anybody, but it's still very lucrative.
Plus the 28-Day limit is already the highest in the Democratic world.
These comparisons from last week's Economist are very interesting:
Australia has 12 days, Turkey and Ireland have 7, France has 6, Spain and Russia have 5, Italy has 4, Germany, New Zealand and the USA have 2, and Canada has one.
Spain for instance has a greater terrorist problem than we do, so why do we need over 7 times more then them?
42 Days won't make the situation much worse, but it's completely unjustified overkill.
Because these laws allow action based on suspicion. Now, fair enough, this doesn't let you bang up just anybody, but it's still very lucrative.
Plus the 28-Day limit is already the highest in the Democratic world.
These comparisons from last week's Economist are very interesting:
Australia has 12 days, Turkey and Ireland have 7, France has 6, Spain and Russia have 5, Italy has 4, Germany, New Zealand and the USA have 2, and Canada has one.
Spain for instance has a greater terrorist problem than we do, so why do we need over 7 times more then them?
42 Days won't make the situation much worse, but it's completely unjustified overkill.
It's also important to consider that the Lord's may use it's 2-year suspension (after its stopped playing ping-pong, of course), which would delay the measure until 2010. By that date, as we all know, Labour will have to call a general election which they are highly likely to lose.
Thus hope is not lost just yet.
Thus hope is not lost just yet.
1 to 14 of 14
