"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both."
Benjamin Franklin.
So, our government is considering proposals allowing police to stop and question anyone in the UK about their identity and movement, under new anti-terror laws. Anyone refusing to co-operate could be charged with obstructing the police and fined up to £5,000.
Before I get on my soapbox, I really can understand the reasons behind such a controversial plan - in the recent fertiliser bomb trial, among the targets discussed by the plotters were the Bluewater shopping centre and the Ministry of Sound nightclub. Bombing a shopping centre and a nightclub has nothing to do with the issues of Afghanistan or Iraq or Palestine - it's a statement of intent by people who consider our society decadent and corrupt when compared to their skewered vision of Islam.
Benjamin Franklin.
So, our government is considering proposals allowing police to stop and question anyone in the UK about their identity and movement, under new anti-terror laws. Anyone refusing to co-operate could be charged with obstructing the police and fined up to £5,000.
Before I get on my soapbox, I really can understand the reasons behind such a controversial plan - in the recent fertiliser bomb trial, among the targets discussed by the plotters were the Bluewater shopping centre and the Ministry of Sound nightclub. Bombing a shopping centre and a nightclub has nothing to do with the issues of Afghanistan or Iraq or Palestine - it's a statement of intent by people who consider our society decadent and corrupt when compared to their skewered vision of Islam.
But does the police really need these proposed powers? At present, under section 44 of the Terrorism Act 2000, officers already have the power to stop and search people or vehicles in an area seen as being at risk from terrorism even if they are not suspected of any breach of the law.
In our rush to protect our democracy and way of life, laws that are supposed to defend us could instead end up destroying what we are trying to protect. Remember, powers under the Terrorism Act were used against Walter Wolfgang at the 2005 labour conference for the heinous crime of shouting "nonsense" as Foreign Secretary Jack Straw defended the government's Iraq policy.
In our rush to protect our democracy and way of life, laws that are supposed to defend us could instead end up destroying what we are trying to protect. Remember, powers under the Terrorism Act were used against Walter Wolfgang at the 2005 labour conference for the heinous crime of shouting "nonsense" as Foreign Secretary Jack Straw defended the government's Iraq policy.
We are walking a precarious tightrope between liberty and security...
More stop and quiz terror powers
More stop and quiz terror powers
No comments:
Post a Comment