42 day detention

[lambrini_socialist]

I'd rather not have potential bombers walking free

what's a potential bomber?

[snaw]

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.

Legislation that was brought in to counter terrorist suspects. I know one of the guys, guilty as charged but the law was never intended for businessmen, no matter the crime.

Think you're misjudging the public sentiment, mentioning Chakrabati etc - take a look at the normally right leaning posters on this board, and even they are against this heavy handed legislation - if people genuinly thought it would be effective and not be abused in the future then you might find more support, but that's not the case I believe.

[Bagpuss]

what's a potential bomber?

Ah, let’s play semantics..
One who has the will, want, and means to make and explode a terror bomb but has not yet had the opportunity.
You may have seen some of their brethren's work?

[Churchill]

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.

If they (the powers that be) can't conjure up any evidence in 28 days what makes you think that 42 is going to help.

BP, as usual you're talking out of your saggy arse!

[Bagpuss]

Legislation that was brought in to counter terrorist suspects. I know one of the guys, guilty as charged but the law was never intended for businessmen, no matter the crime.

Think you're misjudging the public sentiment, mentioning Chakrabati etc - take a look at the normally right leaning posters on this board, and even they are against this heavy handed legislation - if people genuinly thought it would be effective and not be abused in the future then you might find more support, but that's not the case I believe.

I think you will find many people on this board will disagree with anything the Government does, even if it makes sense and even if it makes them appear a 'leftie liberal'. I couldn't care less for the rights and freedoms of terrorists or the views of conspiracy theorists

[snaw]

I couldn't care less for the rights and freedoms of terrorists or the views of conspiracy theorists

You're spectacularly missing the point. No one gives a sh!t about the rights or freedoms of terrorists (**** knows where the conspiracy theory bit comes into it) it's the right and freedoms of those who are not terrorists that we're all worried about.

I don't trust the police not to get it wrong, in fact I almost expect them to get it wrong more than they get it right, and generally to use (And abuse) any legislation they have at their disposal. This is 6 weeks of detention, without charge - wrap it up how you like, but that's way too much and I've yet to see any compelling evidence as to why it's needed.

[Bagpuss]

You're spectacularly missing the point. No one gives a sh!t about the rights or freedoms of terrorists (**** knows where the conspiracy theory bit comes into it) it's the right and freedoms of those who are not terrorists that we're all worried about.

I don't trust the police not to get it wrong, in fact I almost expect them to get it wrong more than they get it right, and generally to use (And abuse) any legislation they have at their disposal. This is 6 weeks of detention, without charge - wrap it up how you like, but that's way too much and I've yet to see any compelling evidence as to why it's needed.

For terror suspects, signed off by both houses and the attorney general after review of the case.
Just exactly why is Disgusted of Tunbridge Wells concerned?

Or is there some deeper conspiracy?

[Spacecadet]

Just exactly why is Disgusted of Tunbridge Wells concerned?

Disgusted of Tunbridge is disgusted because he knows that holding people without charge is NOT what England is about and by holding people for 42 days with out charge we're loosing another little piece of our (collective) soul.

[lambrini_socialist]

Or is there some deeper conspiracy?

shark officially jumped.

[Lucy]

I think you will find many people on this board will disagree with anything the Government does, even if it makes sense and even if it makes them appear a 'leftie liberal'. I couldn't care less for the rights and freedoms of terrorists or the views of conspiracy theorists

Liberal doesn't belong to the left baggy, well, only in the US.