Cable Forum

Cable Forum (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/index.php)
-   Current Affairs (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/forumdisplay.php?f=20)
-   -   Anti terror laws ruled illegal.. (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/showthread.php?t=33660301)

danielf 13-01-2010 20:07

Re: Anti terror laws ruled illegal..
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by martyh (Post 34944298)
you're not going to start acting all weird on buses are you just to test that theory :D

I might be wrong here, but Police do have the right to stop and search someone, provided they have a reasonable suspicion a person has committed a crime or intends to commit a crime. Presumably they would need to name the reasons for their suspicion should something come to trial.

The problem with this law is that it allows them to search someone even without suspicion. The law is meant to apply to specific areas and specific times, but in practice is applied everywhere at all times. Which is wrong...

martyh 13-01-2010 20:12

Re: Anti terror laws ruled illegal..
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by danielf (Post 34944308)
I might be wrong here, but Police do have the right to stop and search someone, provided they have a reasonable suspicion a person has committed a crime or intends to commit a crime. Presumably they would need to name the reasons for their suspicion should something come to trial.

The problem with this law is that it allows them to search someone even without suspicion. The law is meant to apply to specific areas and specific times, but in practice is applied everywhere at all times. Which is wrong...


thats what i said

Hugh 13-01-2010 20:54

Re: Anti terror laws ruled illegal..
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by nomadking (Post 34944276)
So, no investigation of a crime can ever take place because everyone is assumed innocent? You couldn't even question somebody because that would assume that they could be guilty.
Is there no murderer until after somebody has been convicted of that murder?:rolleyes:

You appear to be misunderstanding what I said - it is one of the basic tenets of UK law that guilt has to be proved, not innocence;

The only way this can be validated is by investigation of the crime, collation of evidence, and presentation of this evidence to CPS (to see if they agree there is enough evidence to support a prosecution), and then a trial to review and judge the evidence, at which point guilt or innocence is decided. Up till then, the accused are suspects, nothing more.

But I am sure you knew that.:rolleyes:

Nidge 14-01-2010 10:20

Re: Anti terror laws ruled illegal..
 
Don't search them just shoot them, they can't complain then can they??

Pauls9 14-01-2010 10:57

Re: Anti terror laws ruled illegal..
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Earl of Bronze (Post 34944295)
Just because a small proportion of the population carries a blade, or an illegally held firearm, or distributes illegal drugs, does not mean *I* should be treated like a potential criminal. If the police ever decide to "give me a tug" under Nu-Liebours anti-freedom laws I shall refuse to comply. If that means I end up in the cells, so be it....

Our lad spent a year after graduating living in London and visiting towns and universities around the country selling magazine subscriptions. This often involved waiting for the rest of his team at a railway station before travelling. Since he is half south American, to an untrained eye he can look somewhat middle eastern, especially in the summer. He was stopped, questioned and searched on a number of occasions, all without the police finding any evidence, since there was none in the first place. Can you imagine the embarrassment in front of crowds of travellers? The one occasion he had had enough and started asking why they were doing this, he ended up in the cells, was strip searched, fined for not co-operating and now has this record against him. It says something for his sense of right and wrong that he didn't go down the path of "radicalisation".

Quote:

Don't search them just shoot them, they can't complain then can they??
Don't forget, "they" could easily be you and me, if we had a different skin colour.

Yes, stop and search and the terrorism act are there with good intentions, but the police do seem to overstep the limits too often.

Maggy 14-01-2010 14:52

Re: Anti terror laws ruled illegal..
 
I would still like to know just how many terrorists have been caught by stop and search?:erm:

Saaf_laandon_mo 14-01-2010 15:04

Re: Anti terror laws ruled illegal..
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Nidge (Post 34944673)
Don't search them just shoot them, they can't complain then can they??

That's already happened - just as the Mendez family.

martyh 14-01-2010 15:18

Re: Anti terror laws ruled illegal..
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Maggy J (Post 34944823)
I would still like to know just how many terrorists have been caught by stop and search?:erm:

none that i've heard of ,but that doesn't mean we don't need it at certain times like high alert but definately not all the time

Tarantella 14-01-2010 16:35

Re: Anti terror laws ruled illegal..
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Maggy J (Post 34944823)
I would still like to know just how many terrorists have been caught by stop and search?:erm:


That would require more paperwork.

BBKing 14-01-2010 18:11

Re: Anti terror laws ruled illegal..
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Derek L
a foreign establishment

I've said it about a trillion times, but the ECHR is not a foreign establishment, it was set up by the British (specifically Sir Winston Churchill and Sir David Maxwell-Fyfe*) to teach the rest of Europe basic lessons about how to avoid a police state. For some reason in 1945, with fascists in Spain and Portugal and Stalinists running the Eastern Block and threatening power in France, Italy and Greece this seemed like quite a pressing issue. The rule remains: if your government repeatedly gets caught by the court doing something it shouldn't, get a new government.

It's also nothing to do with the European Union, which it predates by some years - the EU mandates signing up to the ECHR as a condition of membership, but not the other way round - the Court involves far more countries, under the auspices of the Council of Europe.

* A Conservative Home Secretary, Nuremburg war crimes prosecutor and the man who sent Derek Bentley to the gallows. The girly wet liberal.

Derek 14-01-2010 20:12

Re: Anti terror laws ruled illegal..
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by BBKing (Post 34944970)
*SNIP*

No idea who Derek L is so I'll reply on his behalf. :)

The history of the court will not be of interest to the majority of people out there. They'll see law passed by the UK parliament being torn up by, to their minds, a foreign establishment, and I'm pretty sure in the next 3-4 months that will be dragged up by various political parties to score points.

danielf 14-01-2010 20:19

Re: Anti terror laws ruled illegal..
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Derek S (Post 34945065)
No idea who Derek L is so I'll reply on his behalf. :)

The history of the court will not be of interest to the majority of people out there. They'll see law passed by the UK parliament being torn up by, to their minds, a foreign establishment, and I'm pretty sure in the next 3-4 months that will be dragged up by various political parties to score points.

There appears to be a consensus on this board that the court, foreign or not, has reached the right conclusion though.

Chris 14-01-2010 20:22

Re: Anti terror laws ruled illegal..
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by BBKing (Post 34944970)
I've said it about a trillion times, but the ECHR is not a foreign establishment, it was set up by the British (specifically Sir Winston Churchill and Sir David Maxwell-Fyfe*) to teach the rest of Europe basic lessons about how to avoid a police state. For some reason in 1945, with fascists in Spain and Portugal and Stalinists running the Eastern Block and threatening power in France, Italy and Greece this seemed like quite a pressing issue. The rule remains: if your government repeatedly gets caught by the court doing something it shouldn't, get a new government.

It's also nothing to do with the European Union, which it predates by some years - the EU mandates signing up to the ECHR as a condition of membership, but not the other way round - the Court involves far more countries, under the auspices of the Council of Europe.

* A Conservative Home Secretary, Nuremburg war crimes prosecutor and the man who sent Derek Bentley to the gallows. The girly wet liberal.

Quoted without snippage in the vain hope that somebody might actually read and take note of it. Although, sadly, Derek is probably right, Labour and Tory alike will most probably use it to score cheap political points in the months ahead.

It worries me that British laws are now routinely over-ruled by an institution that our grandparents set up in order to share what they considered to be British values to the rest of Europe.

Derek 14-01-2010 20:24

Re: Anti terror laws ruled illegal..
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by danielf (Post 34945071)
There appears to be a consensus on this board that the court, foreign or not, has reached the right conclusion though.

They probably have, however if the Government passed a law allowing small children to be used for target practise which was later ruled illegal a significant chunk of the population would be unhappy at being told by 'Europe' they can no longer do it.

martyh 14-01-2010 20:24

Re: Anti terror laws ruled illegal..
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by danielf (Post 34945071)
There appears to be a consensus on this board that the court, foreign or not, has reached the right conclusion though.

have the court said the law is illegal or the way it's being used ?


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 15:02.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
All Posts and Content are © Cable Forum