Anti terror laws ruled illegal..

[Mr Angry]

From here.

Let the games commence.

[Gary L]

That puts a spanner in the workings of a Police State.

reading the article it would appear that a journalist and a peace protester felt that their human rights had been violated to such an extent they felt it nescesary to put everybody elses' life in danger by stopping random searches of suspect people

we can't have it both ways ,we have to sacrifice some freedome in the interests of catching terrorists

[Derek]

"I am disappointed with the ECHR ruling in this case as we won on these challenges in the UK courts, including the House of Lords."

I'm sure that in the upcoming election no political party will try to make something of a foreign establishment overruling every British court thats been asked if these powers were lawful.

Originally Posted by martyh

reading the article it would appear that a journalist and a peace protester felt that their human rights had been violated to such an extent they felt it nescesary to put everybody elses' life in danger by stopping random searches of suspect people

we can't have it both ways ,we have to sacrifice some freedome in the interests of catching terrorists

The police being able to stop people without cause is too far. I don't want to give up my freedoms because of a few terrorists. A line needs to be drawn and we seem to have crossed it long go.

[Derek]

Originally Posted by Damien

The police being able to stop people without cause is too far.

It'll just revert back to the powers the Police have under the Ways and Means Act 2009

Of course then there will be an outcry that certain racial or religious groups are targeted more than others.

[Stuart]

One thing I'd like to ask: How effective *are* these measures at preventing terrorism? I doubt terrorists would go to all the effort of sending out someone to photograph a potential target, when the chances are they could find out a lot about it from Google.

I personally don't think they are successful.

Originally Posted by Derek S

It'll just revert back to the powers the Police have under the Ways and Means Act 2009

Of course then there will be an outcry that certain racial or religious groups are targeted more than others.

How is searching people at random any help anyway. Maybe for knife crime or something...

Well what I'd actually like to know is how many terrorists have actually been arrested on random stop and search,charged and successfully prosecuted?

I mean just how does one pick out whom is a terrorist before they have committed a terrorist act except by surveillance and intelligence reporting?

After all surely a terrorist is going to be very aware of the possibility of stop and search at certain places and certain times and completely random stop and search is very unlikely to catch anyone with half a brain.So stop and search needs to be a lot more specific to be successful.

Is losing such weapon in the war on terrorism likely to make a lot of difference?

[Gary L]

Originally Posted by Derek S

It'll just revert back to the powers the Police have under the Ways and Means Act 2009

Of course then there will be an outcry that certain racial or religious groups are targeted more than others.

We don't mind. we're too tired with it all to care anymore.

Originally Posted by Damien

The police being able to stop people without cause is too far. I don't want to give up my freedoms because of a few terrorists. A line needs to be drawn and we seem to have crossed it long go.

i see your point but they do have cause technically because they may be terrorists ,a bit of a poor argument i know but thats the one the police will use .i know there will be police who are over zealous in the implementation of the rule but i do still think it's needed and i daresay that during any random searches some knives or guns will have been found and removed from the street

Originally Posted by Gary L

We don't mind. we're too tired with it all to care anymore.

You may be but some of us are fed up with the lack of common sense displayed by this regi errr government and the adopting of what amounts to kneejerk reaction politics and laws with apparently little actual discussion or decision about how it all works and joins up with other laws.

[Tarantella]

Originally Posted by martyh

i see your point but they do have cause technically because they may be terrorists ,a bit of a poor argument i know but thats the one the police will use .i know there will be police who are over zealous in the implementation of the rule but i do still think it's needed and i daresay that during any random searches some knives or guns will have been found and removed from the street

The point is that though we all know islamic terrorists are both terrorists and muslims and the government know islamic terrorists are both terrorists and muslims and the police know islamic terrorists are both terrorists and muslims, the police force cannot be seen to discriminate against a minority.

To counter this for every 10000 muslims they stop and search they must stop and search 150000 or so other people which is a criminal waste to time and taxpayers money.

http://www.politics.co.uk/news/policing-and-crime/security-minister-hit-by-police-stop-and-search-$1343348.htm

actually having done a bit of digging around it would seem that it's all the Mets fault because it's they that have been abusing the spirit of the law

the original law is intended as a temporary measure implemented (presumably in times of high alert)in a set area for a max of 28 days but the Met have been using it continuously as an alternative to the PACE laws which demand resonable suspicion for a search

Whilst the s.44 authorisation is supposed to be temporary (up to 28 days), and limited to a defined area, the entire Metropolitan Police area had been covered, and the power had been continuously renewed (and continues to be). Many other police forces behave in the same way.

http://mtpt.wordpress.com/2010/01/12...op-and-search/

[SMG]

Originally Posted by Damien

I don't want to give up my freedoms because of a few terrorists.

Are you serious?

How many terrorists do you need to blow up one aircraft.