42 Day Detention without charge vote....
12 June 2008, 08:35 AM
#61
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Worthing..
Posts: 7,575
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It would be complete and utter political suicide for any government to ignore the advice of the police on this issue, because if anything bad happens due someone not being held for long enough there would be absolute hell to pay.
The Tories come out of this with little credit, if they were in power they would be forcing this through as well (despite what davis has said)
The Tories were dead set against it in 2005, when Labours popularity was much higher, and they were after 90 days.
God help us if the Lords ever get abolished. It's the only thing standing between us and a government with a large majority doing exactly what it likes.
12 June 2008, 09:40 AM
#62
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Type 25. Build No.34
Posts: 8,222
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thing is Martin, MI5 have said they don't want to know, the DPP has said it's unnecessary.
The Tories were dead set against it in 2005, when Labours popularity was much higher, and they were after 90 days.
Well yes, there are safe guards in place. But they don't seem to do the job. The exmple being of the 2 peopel that were held up to the 28 day point - In both cases all the evidence was gathered by 12 days, and on relese, not a single shred of further evidence had been obtained.
God help us if the Lords ever get abolished. It's the only thing standing between us and a government with a large majority doing exactly what it likes.
The Tories were dead set against it in 2005, when Labours popularity was much higher, and they were after 90 days.
Well yes, there are safe guards in place. But they don't seem to do the job. The exmple being of the 2 peopel that were held up to the 28 day point - In both cases all the evidence was gathered by 12 days, and on relese, not a single shred of further evidence had been obtained.
God help us if the Lords ever get abolished. It's the only thing standing between us and a government with a large majority doing exactly what it likes.
Pete
I will change my view on this the day someone is held for 42 days and then released without charge.
As for the Lords, I'm all for checks and balances, but let's inject democracy into the process
12 June 2008, 09:53 AM
#63
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Worthing..
Posts: 7,575
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The beauty of an appointed house is that you can take a long term , non-populist view
12 June 2008, 12:25 PM
#65
Guest
Posts: n/a
The Devil's Kitchen FROM TODAY:
"Perhaps the mistake we have made has been to consider ourselves somehow above the rules of history, or beyond their reach. We're not, we never have been, and we're only now finding that out. The old and diseased body politic's dominant minority will still dominate, while the minority in which it stands will get smaller and smaller. We will still berate the Russians for daring to develop the kind of democracy that suits them, while our own democracy continues to decline. We will still engage in the kind of experiments in educational ideology that have ruined thousands of lives, while refusing to acknowledge both the importance of effort and of encouraging children to value excellence for its own sake, teaching them to be the best in their fields, in their own lives, that they can possibly be.
In a century's time, of course, none of our current problems are going to matter, and as a smart guy once said, in the long run we are all dead. It's a pity that the decline of British civilisation seems to have been so deliberately engineered - one can only wonder for what purpose. Some might call it treason".
dAVE
"Perhaps the mistake we have made has been to consider ourselves somehow above the rules of history, or beyond their reach. We're not, we never have been, and we're only now finding that out. The old and diseased body politic's dominant minority will still dominate, while the minority in which it stands will get smaller and smaller. We will still berate the Russians for daring to develop the kind of democracy that suits them, while our own democracy continues to decline. We will still engage in the kind of experiments in educational ideology that have ruined thousands of lives, while refusing to acknowledge both the importance of effort and of encouraging children to value excellence for its own sake, teaching them to be the best in their fields, in their own lives, that they can possibly be.
In a century's time, of course, none of our current problems are going to matter, and as a smart guy once said, in the long run we are all dead. It's a pity that the decline of British civilisation seems to have been so deliberately engineered - one can only wonder for what purpose. Some might call it treason".
dAVE
12 June 2008, 01:37 PM
#66
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 39,877
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is a dreadful thing to have happened. I believe this is the basis of an Orwellian switch which will be used in the future to subjugate the people of this country. Despite the Lords, this will become law and we shall be the losers.
I keep wondering that as I mentioned in my first post in this thread, that they used heavy influence on the DUP which included financial inducements to persuade them to vote with the government. Surely this is nothing short of bribery and I cannot see how this can be tolerated when it comes to making this country's laws. Strange that all 9 members of the DUP voted the same way!
We have seen so many ways and means of controlling and spying on the populace being laid over the years. This latest is a very strong indication of what is called the secret agenda.
I fear for this country and its people!
Les
I keep wondering that as I mentioned in my first post in this thread, that they used heavy influence on the DUP which included financial inducements to persuade them to vote with the government. Surely this is nothing short of bribery and I cannot see how this can be tolerated when it comes to making this country's laws. Strange that all 9 members of the DUP voted the same way!
We have seen so many ways and means of controlling and spying on the populace being laid over the years. This latest is a very strong indication of what is called the secret agenda.
I fear for this country and its people!
Les
12 June 2008, 02:09 PM
#67
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Derbyshire
Posts: 12,304
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
12 June 2008, 02:22 PM
#68
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Derbyshire
Posts: 12,304
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
They could easily protect us all by locking us all up in solitary confinement for the rest of our lives. Personally I'd rather have the freedom and take the risk.
12 June 2008, 02:26 PM
#69
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Type 25. Build No.34
Posts: 8,222
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Has someone taken your freedom away then?
12 June 2008, 03:32 PM
#71
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Worthing..
Posts: 7,575
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was listening to his speech on Radio 4 at lunchtime, and Davis seems to be convinced of two things.
(i)Brown will invoke the parliament act if the Lords push it.
(ii)42 days will not be the end of it, he beleives that in 2 years it will be a vote on 56, then 64, then 72, then 90 and so on.
I think he wants ot make a stand a nip it in the bud now. By making the by election an issue fought soleyl on the issue of civil liberties, he is effectively conducting an opinion poll (quite an accurate one) on the public take on civil liberties.
It's not without risk, As much as I doubt their validity, polls suggest that the public at large want the 42 day extension. So whilst it's easy to say it is an empty gesture, Davis has publicy said that he will not fight it on Browns Performance, or Europe, or Crime or Road tax or any other issue. He is basically saying, ignoring everything else, if you think that there is an eropsion of civil liberties, and you want to stop it, then vote for me.
Also, I can't praise Nick Clegg enough for not taking the opportunity to take pot shots at the tories and potentially get a by eleciton win, taking a tory front benchers seat away from him.
I don't think Clegg has had a particularly good start to his leadership, but this is a real gesture of sticking to your principles.
(i)Brown will invoke the parliament act if the Lords push it.
(ii)42 days will not be the end of it, he beleives that in 2 years it will be a vote on 56, then 64, then 72, then 90 and so on.
I think he wants ot make a stand a nip it in the bud now. By making the by election an issue fought soleyl on the issue of civil liberties, he is effectively conducting an opinion poll (quite an accurate one) on the public take on civil liberties.
It's not without risk, As much as I doubt their validity, polls suggest that the public at large want the 42 day extension. So whilst it's easy to say it is an empty gesture, Davis has publicy said that he will not fight it on Browns Performance, or Europe, or Crime or Road tax or any other issue. He is basically saying, ignoring everything else, if you think that there is an eropsion of civil liberties, and you want to stop it, then vote for me.
Also, I can't praise Nick Clegg enough for not taking the opportunity to take pot shots at the tories and potentially get a by eleciton win, taking a tory front benchers seat away from him.
I don't think Clegg has had a particularly good start to his leadership, but this is a real gesture of sticking to your principles.
12 June 2008, 03:36 PM
#72
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Type 25. Build No.34
Posts: 8,222
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is just nonsense.
Your freedom is the same now as it was 24hrs ago, the only thing that's changed is the the police could hold you for 14 days longer than before.
Last edited by Martin2005; 12 June 2008 at 03:44 PM.
12 June 2008, 06:57 PM
#73
Guest
Posts: n/a
It's a long and slippery slope and Nu Labia have taken us a long way down. Time to wake up and smell the coffee ...
Dave
12 June 2008, 07:31 PM
#74
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Type 25. Build No.34
Posts: 8,222
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is blatantly NOT nonsense! The point is they can hold me (or you, or anyone!) for 42 days WITHOUT charge. With noone being told where you are, etc etc. There is absolutely NO reason in a supposedly democratic society to hold anyone without charge for more than a few hours. (THEN they go before a judge and they decide if there is any *evidence* to hold them further. You do know that word 'evidence' ??).
It's a long and slippery slope and Nu Labia have taken us a long way down. Time to wake up and smell the coffee ...
Dave
It's a long and slippery slope and Nu Labia have taken us a long way down. Time to wake up and smell the coffee ...
Dave
As I understand it the police have to keep going back to a judge to get the detention extended upto a maximum of 42 days
So if summary your freedoms and liberty are no more at risk today that they were yesterday, your chances of being detained for upto 28 days are unchanged, it's only your chances of bing detained for another 14 days that have changed.
12 June 2008, 07:49 PM
#75
Guest
Posts: n/a
Well you say it 'blatantly not nonsense' and then make my point for me. The only difference is the maximum length of detention. So your freedom is no more under threat today as it was yesterday.
As I understand it the police have to keep going back to a judge to get the detention extended upto a maximum of 42 days
So if summary your freedoms and liberty are no more at risk today that they were yesterday, your chances of being detained for upto 28 days are unchanged, it's only your chances of bing detained for another 14 days that have changed.
As I understand it the police have to keep going back to a judge to get the detention extended upto a maximum of 42 days
So if summary your freedoms and liberty are no more at risk today that they were yesterday, your chances of being detained for upto 28 days are unchanged, it's only your chances of bing detained for another 14 days that have changed.
End of ...
Dave
12 June 2008, 07:59 PM
#76
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Type 25. Build No.34
Posts: 8,222
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you read what I wrote you'll see that I don't agree with locking people up for 28 days. If there's no evidence then there's no crime therefore you shouldn't be able to hold that person. As soon as the gov. get 42 days they'll ratchet it up slowly until they get to, at least, the 90 days they were going for when it origibally got extended to 28. 28 was the compromise. As I said, we're already down a slippery slope and the sooner people stand up for our rights and freedoms the better off we'll be. Obviously the political classes don't see it that way ....
End of ...
Dave
End of ...
Dave
I don't see the government trying to push through anymore extentions anytime soon though, do you?
It's not a case of there being no evidence, it's about being able to gather all the evidence so that they can bring a prosecution.
As I said before, the day someone is detained for 42 days and released without charge is the day I'll change mind about this
13 June 2008, 05:10 AM
#77
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: West Yorkshire
Posts: 385
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How can they possible hold somebody for 42 or even 28 days without charge. Was it not the case that after a couple of days at most suspects had to be either charged or released. Are they still allowed a phone call, what about a solocitor. Or is it the case as soon as they mention the word terrorism the rules no longer apply and the authorities can do what they want.
Imagine being locked up for 42 (or 28) days and having your life utterly and completely destroyed if you are innocent. That would be enough to make you a terrorist when you come out even if you weren't when you went in.
Imagine being locked up for 42 (or 28) days and having your life utterly and completely destroyed if you are innocent. That would be enough to make you a terrorist when you come out even if you weren't when you went in.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post