42 day detention

[TheBigYinJames]

those accused of wanting to blow someone up.

those brown people who may have been in the vicinity of somewhere sometime and maybe just maybe might have wanted to blow something or other up, but if not a good spell in a cell will soon deter them from that path, ello, ello ello. here, have several thousand pounds for our stupidity.

[Bagpuss]

those accused of wanting to blow someone up.

To make it that far through the process you have to be somehow involved, I don't see any non-terrorists being accidentally detained for 28 days, they are all involved in some way or another, even if they get off on a technicality. I'd quite happily see them tortured for information, should any evidence be found.

Do you seriously believe the government will now start to detain non terror suspects on fabricated information? Because that is the implication.

[HairyArsedBloke]

"We were just about to let him go on the 41st day when he fell down the stairs and broke his neck, poor chap."

[Spacecadet]

Only in this country could you have people shouting unfair in defence of those who want to blow us up.

Defending basic rights which have been in this country for close to 800 years

If there is enough reason to keep someone locked up for 42 days then just charge them and get it over with.

Its the detention without charge that I disagree with.

[snaw]

For 42 days you have to be a serious terror suspect, with sign off from MI5, the house of Lords, the Home secretary, Attorney General etc.
There is no way anyone but the most serious terrorist suspect is going to get hit by this. Only in this country could you have people shouting unfair in defence of those who want to blow us up.

That's the hype sure. But we now lock up suspects longer than anyone else in the world (Inc the chinese) and these laws which are done under the guise of terrorism have a way of being abused by the authorities.

Look at the natwest three - they got extradited to the US under the terrorism legislation - guilty or not, their crime had nothing to do with terrorism - it's was just convenient to use that law.

I'm sick of my freedoms being chipped away at, to give this government more power and control over my life. For the first time in my life I'll actively vote to put a labour government out of power rather than follow my conscience. If that means voting a tory in, or liberal or whoever I'll do it cause this current lot are a f cking joke, and this leader is giving us scots a bad name ...

[HairyArsedBloke]

Defending basic rights which have been in this country for close to 800 years

If there is enough reason to keep someone locked up for 42 days then just charge them and get it over with.

Its the detention without charge that I disagree with.

[Spacecadet]

Do you seriously believe the government will now start to detain non terror suspects on fabricated information? Because that is the implication.

The implication is that the government is building a legal framework that is open to abuse in the future

[TheBigYinJames]

Do you seriously believe the government will now start to detain non terror suspects on fabricated information? Because that is the implication.

This is the same govt who removed an OAP from protesting (legally) near parliament on anti-terror laws. The same govt who (in their local govt form) are using anti-terror laws to snoop into people's rubbish bins to see if they're cheating on their wheelie-bin quota?

I don't think anyone in their right mind actually minds ther govt seeking out real terrorists, it's the passing of laws which can be mis-used in future that bothers people. 28 days should be plenty to bring a charge, if you can't collect enough evidence in 4 weeks, what is another 13 days foing to get you? But detaining someone (without charge and recourse to a judge) for 48 days on just an unsubstantiatde suspicion is getting too close to the bone for a lot of people.

[lambrini_socialist]

I'd quite happily see them tortured for information, should any evidence be found.

OMFG are you Jack Bauer? you double-hard bastard, you.

show them the instruments!

[Bagpuss]

The implication is that the government is building a legal framework that is open to abuse in the future

That's always the case, in the meantime I'd rather not have potential bombers walking free because of lack of concrete evidence at 28 days. If chakrabarti et al want to visit them with some soup and warm clothes then let them. But, If they belong to a terror cell and they are active then it should automatically be up to 42 days.

Re the Natwest 3 they were extradited under the extradition act of 2003, which is applicatble for serious crime including fraud, a red herring in this argument.