For sale: 1 map of London

[slimfandango]

I am selling a map of London. In good condition, not much used. I am selling it because I feel it is now illegal to own. I hear the police are arresting people who carry 'information which may be of use to terrorists' and figured my map would be top of their list.

Sounds like a pretty catch-all law to me. Is it a blunketism?

[Oneeyedvic]

QM - I know I said I wouldn't post anymore questions, but, to quote Jeremy Paxman "please answer the question"......If you signed the resolution........

 

Elfin - whilst I agree we do not need toknow, I would think that the suspect and their legal council do need to know, and sadly they do not have that right. - or to put it another way, anyone can be arrested on mock up charges of terrorism, held indifinetley, not told what the resaon is for being held etc.

I thought that we lived in a democracy where everyone was innocent until proved guilty.......

Still, Elfin, we could always just lock up anyone we suspect, or even looks dodgy - terrorism attacks on the mainland would go way down (can they go down from zero?).

[Quizmonster]

Yes.

[Elfin]

Vic, on the basis that there is no smoke without fire, I'd suggest that people stay away from both the smoke and the fire so they do not place themselves under suspicion of anything in the first place.

If you look at it another way, perhaps the way we currently deal with it is what keeps the mainland tally at zero...

[Oneeyedvic]

Elfin - Be interested to know how to change the colour of your skin or your accent (after all weren't the Guilford 4 just four Irish people who happened to be in the vicinity).

Luckily no smoke without fire eh!

[Elfin]

No Vic they weren't!  There were perfectly valid reasons for their initial arrest and detention which stand to this day.  It was their convictions for the specific offences they were charged with that was later deemed unjust.

[Oneeyedvic]

Sorry Elfin, you obviously followed a different story to me - I thought they were innocent, got a public apology from the Prime Minister who said and I quote "I am very sorry that they were subject to such an ordeal and such an injustice. They deserve to be completely and publicly exonerated."

Still - they probably deserved it didn't they, because as you say, no smoke without fire. Must have been guilty of something!

I would also like to pint out that Spain has both ID cards (which the governement issist are needed in the fight against terror) and allow terrorist suspects to be held without charge for up to 5 years. This didn't do a lot for the victims in Madrid did it.

[Elfin]

Nope. See here, para 5 "It is probably fair to say..." http://www.kevinboone.com/miscarriages_of_justice.html

Like I said...smoke.

I'm sure you'll agree with Sir William Blackstone's quote though.  Tricky one that.

[Oneeyedvic]

Okay, they were not pillars of the community, but please note the word 'may' used in paragraph 5.

Point is, at least they were charged, had a trial, and were convicted by a jury with a judge presiding. Imagine if they were just picked up and left to rot - no charge, no trial but just left in jail. There can be no appeal as there has been no trial.

As I have said in a previous post - I am not scared of a terrorist attack - I am more scared of this governement and the draconian legislation they are bringing in.

[Elfin]

Yep, I do understand what you're saying.  The "held indefinitely without trial" thing is not satisfactory, but I still see the validity of not releasing intelligence info, even to the detainee and their legal counsel.

I'm not scared of "draconian legislation" brought in by the government though.  People should not believe that being a UK citizen in a democracy gives them carte blanche to:

a) be a religious activist promoting anti-western beliefs

b) be a member of, or be associated with, any organisation which may pose a threat to national security

If they do, they should be prepared for scrutiny at any time.

[Oneeyedvic]

Fine, lock up Gerry Adams.

Animal Rights protestors (here is a generalisation) have caused massive problems to UK nationals from preventing them from going to work through to digging up a body. This must make the eligible as a threat to National Security (ie Nationals of this country are at risk).

By donating money to street canvassers who opose vivisection, a person is 'associated with an organisation that poses a threat to national security'.

By going on a protest march (where the may be 100,000 people and you don't know 1% of them) certain elements of that march are a 'threat to national security' - your peaceful protest has now turned you into a dangerous terrorist.

Over the top examples maybe, but did you know a person was held for several hours as he was delivering a package and got caught up in the Mayday protests?

Was it his fault that he was delivering something (just doing his job) - no he was associated with other people and cordoned off.

Also, with your first point - I thought in this country we had both Religious tolerance and freedom of speech. Would you like to take these rights away as well (if someone is saying something that you don't like of course).

[Elfin]

Hmm Vic you do get caught up in the detail.  By threats to national security I mean threats to people because they are British nationals. (Otherwise you'll be citing every crime against the person that ever took place, whatever the reason!)

There are lots of interpretations of freedom of speech. Why should someone be allowed to preach anti-Western/British propaganda (religious or otherwise) whilst enjoying their residence status and the very benefits it brings?  What kind of person does that? And who wants to hear it? It's not a bad place to live in the run of things - if they don't like it here they should naff off to somewhere that suits their beliefs better. <Rant over>

As for some fella who got detained for a couple of hours for being in the wrong place at the wrong time, well he was obviously innocent cos they let him go didn't they...