i do wish i could completely disagree with youbut i can't.
i'm not smart enough or boned up on all of the intricacies of the law enough, and far to slow at typing to debate this on here properly.
i do think doing all of this under the guise of preventing terrorism is a bit of a non starter.
i'd much rather a few more doors got kicked in and the old bill made more of a nuisance of themselves for 'lower' level stuff, the kind of things that would actually make a difference to
society, but then we'd be passing hundreds of new laws every week to keep up with the bad guys. one law fits all is far from ideal i agree but i don't have a clue what the answer is.
(i'm not smart enough or boned up on all of the intricacies of the law enough, and far to slow at typing to debate this on here properly.
i do think doing all of this under the guise of preventing terrorism is a bit of a non starter.
i'd much rather a few more doors got kicked in and the old bill made more of a nuisance of themselves for 'lower' level stuff, the kind of things that would actually make a difference to
society, but then we'd be passing hundreds of new laws every week to keep up with the bad guys. one law fits all is far from ideal i agree but i don't have a clue what the answer is.
god save the queen making another unremarkable comeback,
Thu 12 Jun 2008, 11:41,
archived)
We've already got the laws for them to do their jobs.Im not an expert... but Im fairly certain that it was already illegal to blow stuff up - we got Guy Fawkes with that one a fair few years ago...
We've got plenty of laws that work already. You cant conspire to kill someone. You cant hurt people, rob people or wank in the street.
(,
Thu 12 Jun 2008, 13:35,
archived)
We've got plenty of laws that work already. You cant conspire to kill someone. You cant hurt people, rob people or wank in the street.