42 days dentention.

[ThePretenders]

As parliament votes on extending terror detention without charge to 42 days, the likelihood of the bill being defeated is high. pre-charge detention from 28 days is opposed by the Conservatives, Liberal Democrats and 30 or so Labour MPs. Former PM Tony Blair tried to increase it to 90 days but was defeated by a huge rebellion in the Labour ranks.

The government argues that under the existing law they need more time to question suspects in exceptional cases so that extra information could be extracted.

However, many indidivuals and Liberty, a civil liberties pressure group have not been aware of any case since 2000, where an extension of the period beyond 28 days would have been required.

What balance there needs to be between protecting lives and preserving liberties? Should the government proceed with this policy due to the 'challenge posed to police by the increasingly complex and international character of terrorist cases', in their own words? If this bill is defeated would it be a major blow for Gordon Brown and affect his premiership?

Discuss.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7 446141.stm

Here is a nice picture I made for you.

[LazyPint]

Nice picture.

I'm undecided, but leaning towards keeping the current period.

42 days? Six weeks in a prison without being charged before being released with a "Whoops. Guess we were looking for someone else after all?

It just seems a bit too much. If they can't get enough information in 28 days, that's their fault. Inevitably it'll come down to the "nothing to hide, nothing to fear" reasoning, but I don;t much like that either.

I guess I am sort of decided after all.

[Imperator]

Personally I think we need to sit the governments of both our countries down and ask them straight up, "What won't you do to defend us against terrorism?" "What lines won't you cross in the name of defending freedom?"

If they say there are no lines they won't cross, we take both governments out for an afternoon of electrotherapy.

It's a good thing government as a body is rather slow, otherwise they would have figured out by now the most obvious and effective way of protecting freedom is simply to take it away from us and lock it in a vault till we're ready for it.

[SmilezRoyale]

If you can't afford to take away people's individual freedoms, you're best bet at fighting terrorism is to get the people of the UK to grow an intense militant hatred of the un assimilated muslim communities, and create their own personal riots against them.

Actually that would screw you up even more. TBH, you guys are screwed no matter what you do. Once again; you're humanity won't save you. You cannot change the fact that you are infidels nor can you make any changes to prove otherwise.

[uhnoesanoob]

Europe just needs to grow some balls and only make secular laws. Don't conform to ANY major religious group's demand, or else you guys may be in trouble.

[Drakim]

No. You simply cannot defend your freedom from enemies by taking it away yourself. Isn't this exactly the shit and unfairness we are afraid terrorists wish to push upon us?

[Earfetish]

If you don't have a single scrap of evidence to charge someone with after 28 days, they probably shouldn't be arrested. You can still gather evidence after they've been charged, surely.

Anyway I don't like it. It took us ages to get these freedoms, we can't sacrifice them because 50 people have died in terrorist attacks over the last decade.

[Tri-Nitro-Toluene]

Am I the only person who thinks that its a bit odd that we suddenly need lots more time to deal with terrorist activities than we did before? Fuck, we had internment when we were dealing with the IRA and I'm still pretty damn sure intelligence gathering for evidence to charge people with didn't take over 28 days.

Whislt technology has dvanced, most the evidenc eis still gonna be easily accessible in some form, even if you do have to hack into a computer, look at emails etc. If you know what you're doing it doesn;t take that long to get access to these things.

And lets face it, for the msot aprt we're dealing with people who'se imagiantion is limited to blowing themselves up, hardly the sign of people with the intelligence to actually generate complex encryptions for computers. throw on top of that the fact that these people are easily brainwashed, as demsontrated by the fact they're willing to blow themselves up, then you're further strengthening the ' these guys aint that smart' argument.

[ThePretenders]

"Sorry lady, you're not allowed to trespass on the cycle path. Oh well, you're arrested under the 2000 Terrorism Act."

[ThePretenders]

Update: The Ayes to the right 315, the Noes to the left 306. The Ayes have it, the Ayes have it.

[Tri-Nitro-Toluene]

At 6/11/08 01:21 PM, ThePretenders wrote: Update: The Ayes to the right 315, the Noes to the left 306. The Ayes have it, the Ayes have it.

It won't get through the Lords. And if they force it through with the Parliament Act then there's gonna be political hell to pay as that's an abuse of the act.

[ThePretenders]

At 6/11/08 01:24 PM, Tri-Nitro-Toluene wrote:

At 6/11/08 01:21 PM, ThePretenders wrote: Update: The Ayes to the right 315, the Noes to the left 306. The Ayes have it, the Ayes have it.

It won't get through the Lords. And if they force it through with the Parliament Act then there's gonna be political hell to pay as that's an abuse of the act.

You're probably right. The members in the Lords are more independent than the Commons, so there wouldn't be any party whips pressurising them to vote for the bill. Anyway, this government is unpopular, so they might as well force this bill through 18 months, when the term comes to an end.

[LazyPint]

I guess it was partly thanks to them throwing in compensation for anyone who isn't charged after 42 days.

What if they're released after 41?

[ThePretenders]

Two years ago, you would be called a softie or terrorist sympathiser, if you were against these measures but many people seem to be against these measures now. I wouldn't be surprised if the police didn't abuse these measures by prosecuting them under the act for unrelated offences.

[Mr-Pope]

I'm sure the irony of curbing basic freedoms in the fight against people who "hate our freedom" will be hilarious one day. Also lol @ it being left up to the Tories to take a stance against authoritarianism.

As has been said, hopefully the Lords will rape this in the face.

[abluepillorafreemind]

At 6/12/08 09:24 AM, Mr-Pope wrote: I'm sure the irony of curbing basic freedoms in the fight against people who "hate our freedom" will be hilarious one day. Also lol @ it being left up to the Tories to take a stance against authoritarianism.

As has been said, hopefully the Lords will rape this in the face.

Indeed. lol @ the Tories. Who would've thought the had any backbone? They've been swilling around the house of commons as a shapeless jelly for long enough.

Anyway, I personally am a NAY. Whatever anyone says, this is an erosion of civil liberties, and playing straight into agitators hands. It must end now. Hopefully, the Lords will throw this bill straight. Goddamn I am not old enough to vote ...

Anyway. By introducing this bill we are descending to the terrorists lever of barbarism. Do we Brits want to see a Guantanamo on our shores?

[poxpower]

As long as they're ready to give a million dollars to anyone they piss off unjustly.

[PhysicsMafia]

The day that freedom died...

And it would have been defeated if the DUP hadnt been so willing to sell all our civil liberties down the river.
Hasnt the past taught them anything? Internment doesnt work, it is only a recruiting tool for extreemists/freedom fighters/ terrorist..(delete as appropriate)

In N.Ireland the first thing many inocent men did after they were released from internment was to go and join the IRA. The detention of innocent people without charge or even due process only adds credance to armed resistance.

[ThePretenders]

House of Lords reject it 309 to 118.

Do you think Gordon Brown will bypass the Lords using the Parliament Act?