British want to extend to 42 days the time to hold someone without charging them

[Jackie]

British want to extend to 42 days the time to hold someone without charging them
http://news.scotsman.com/latestnews/...an-.3977276.jp

Kinda puts into perspective their views on the basic human right to bear arms? doesn't it?

The article has absolutely nothing to do with the right to bear arms and shouldn't even be in the context of the thread.

28 days is 27.5 too many

Now THAT, I disagree with. Bearing in mind a terror suspect is someone who is suspected of being ready to kill masses of people at a moments notice, half a day is in noway enough time to make sure you can convict them, and in letting them go, you run a serious risk. 42 MAY be too many, but half a day is a ridiculously short amount of time. ManInBlack, do you have any connection to law enforcement or military organisations in any form? Surely you must understand the security implications and the amount of time things take!?

I'm strictly against Guantanamo Bay, but even I recognise thast a mere half a day is absurd.

I have to back officer bennett 100 percent on that. Guantanamo bay is unconstitutional to the extreme, Bush screwed big time with that one. It's a throw back to the mentality of ww2 and the American Japanese on the west coat who were unlawfully detained for the war.

I would rather have a 48 day detention for international terrorist suspects than an indefinite imprisonment. The "patriot act" is far from patriotic and many believe it needs to be reversed.

your attitude is severely disturbing.........I believe in america the limit is 24 hours.....and prosecutors should not be able to hold anyone without evidence to prosecute and win. Period.

In the US...you cannot be arrested, detained or imprisoned (with the exception of the terrorist suspects) without JUST CAUSE. A police officer cannot go and pull you over while driving down the street without reason to pull you over.

People who are "detained" are usually acting suicidal, mentally unstable, public drunkenness...still, there has to be a reason for them to be detained.

A police officer is NOT your enemy. The officer is not on the street to make your life miserable. He is simply there to respond to emergencies, enforce traffic laws, and in general...help people.

Have you never HEARD of the USA run Guantanamo Bay?

Terrorism is a crime yes, but one on a level completely dispropotionate to any other type of crime, more drastic measures need to be taken in order to save lives and neutralise a terrorist threat, even regular criminals can be held longer than your half a day statement. Though I don't necessarily agree with 42 days (I make no comment either way), you need enough time for the Security Services to complete any required work.

Guantanamo Bay is the only exception. In general no one can be held or detained without probable cause. If an officer brings someone into the police station for questioning that person can be held their unless the officer is certain a crime has been committed. In an interrogation, the suspect has rights, one is to say absolutely nothing.

A detective is questioning someone to extract a confession, without that confession it's highly unlikely the officer has enough evidence to win his case. An officer can lie but not coerce a confession out of the suspect.

In order for that detective to even bring a suspect in for questioning, they need to make sure there is reasonable probabilities that this person is guilty of the crime . In cases where a zealous cop tried to coerce a confession that confession can be thrown out of court and then the whole department looks guilty.

Unfortunately we still have laws on the books from back during the Rockerfella era that allow search and seizure that are to an extent unconstitutional. But since those laws deal with drugs no one wants to reverse them. *rolls eyes*

What is also scary is what currently happening to the smokers. The government knows it cannot out right ban cigarettes or we will have a huge black market problem remnant of prohibition of the 30's.

So, when you can't out right ban something you:

make very expensive with taxes.

pressure ban smoking in public buildings to protect people from "2nd hand smoke."

ban smoking in front of children...including your own car...that could also be your own home. (Shivers)

Launch massive campaigns to make cigarette manufacturers look evil and cigarettes to be the main cause of cancer.

Hide or alter the true statistics on cancer rates.

Out of 100 smokers:

20 percent will develop some sort of health issue.

2 percent will develop cancer.

out of 100 non-smokers...

the rates are about the same.

Note:

every food coloring currently on the market and being used causes cancer in lab rats.

There is so many preservatives in the human body, ingested from food, that it takes the body longer to rot than it did 100 years ago.

There are growth hormones in our meat and no one knows the long term affect.

Girls are now starting puberty as early as 8

Cancer has surpassed heart disease in killing rates.

the rate of cancer in kids have dramatically increased.

Somehow I don't think it's the cigarettes that caused all that.

[Womble]

Out of 100 smokers:

20 percent will develop some sort of health issue.

2 percent will develop cancer.

out of 100 non-smokers...

the rates are about the same.

As my dad says, those who neither smoke nor drink, die healthy.

[Madeleine]

British want to extend to 42 days the time to hold someone without charging them

Kinda puts into perspective their views on the basic human right to bear arms? doesn't it?

Other proposed legislation that'll never get enacted is the plan for a small village in Cheshire to apply to leave England and become a part of Wales; for another statutory Bank Holiday to be added to the calendar; and for Tesco to be allowed to build in Rotherfield.

Please now draw some entertainingly irrelevant conclusions, Mr InBlack

[Womble]

Other proposed legislation that'll never get enacted is the plan for a small village in Cheshire to apply to leave England and become a part of Wales; for another statutory Bank Holiday to be added to the calendar; and for Tesco to be allowed to build in Rotherfield.

And for Berwick-upon-Tweed to officially end its state of war with Russia

[Madeleine]

That's one of the funniest bits of world politics; even funnier than Andorra (which has a standing army of seven people) still officially fighting the First World War long after everyone else had moved on to the Second

Anyway, I don't want that to ever happen, it'd deprive geeks everywhere of a nice bit of trivia.