London attacks - what's going on???

[duffistuta]

Originally posted by Ben Frain
I suppose this point all comes down to what each person finds acceptable.

For example your 'miscarriage of justice' would be my 'necassary evil'.

.

And if the 'necessary evil' was your mum being shot for a crime she didn't commit? Or your wife? Or you?

At least someof the Birmingham 6 had a chance to experience freedom again cos they were 'only' banged up for years and years.

I guess we should also be shooting suspected rapists, paedohiles, murderers, armed robbers et al, yes?

EDIT: Beaten to it by hemitt.

 

[HERMITT]

Sorry dude, same point well made!

Back tommorow for the continued debate!

 

[manike]

Originally posted by duffistuta
Then maybe I'm missing something, but don't we already have passports and licences? And you've said they work, so remind me again why we need ID cards as well?

Not everybody has a passport because not everyone wants to travel to other countries.

In essence it's the same thing, but a passport is big and heavy . I used to have to carry my passport for ID. It's a pain, the plastic drivers licence/id card here is far easier and smaller and more convenient.

 

[duffistuta]

Originally posted by manike
Not everybody has a passport because not everyone wants to travel to other countries.

In essence it's the same thing, but a passport is big and heavy . I used to have to carry my passport for ID. It's a pain, the plastic drivers licence/id card here is far easier and smaller and more convenient.

So it's a laziness based argument?

OK, I'm all for that - you convinced me now.

 

[Ben Frain]

Gents, again though, you are hyping the scenario up beyond feasibility (in my mind at least). The chances of my mum being offed for suspected terrorist activities are failry slim.

Of course if the person murdered by mistake is close to you/you then you won't feel it was such a good idea but if the majority of the area you are setting out to protect (the UK in this example) is safe and sound - was that such a bad call to make?

For example, the total of those killed last Thursday against one/two 'maybe guilty/maybe not' people - is that not an acceptable equation for the greater good and safety of the nation at large? After all we aren't talking about random 'offing's' here (like my mum for example) - we are talking about trouble makers with a strong possibility of being involved in or inciting terrorist activity towards UK civilians (Abu Hanza etc).

Maybe that is too bitter a pill for you to accept currently but these attacks start to happen more frequently and who knows maybe even you two would change your mind

Pleasure discussing this one with all so I'm signing off on it for now.

 

[Matski]

I don't think it's a case of lining up and shooting anyone suspected of being involved in terrorism. The IRA gang killed by the SAS were only dealt with in such a way as they were on their way to commit the deed. Theres a strong difference between spouting hate and actually planning/clear intention to commit an act of terror-violence..at which point I can't see the problem in it becoming a military issue.

ID cards may not work other than to track behaviours, however I think that this would more likely lead to much closer surveillance of an individuals activities when red flags are thrown up, rather than throwing someone in jail without trial at a whim.

It is identifying those red flags that could show which individuals require closer surveillance. If they have nothing to hide then close surveillance would show this. If they really are planning something then close surveillance would identify this also.

 

[duffistuta]

Originally posted by Ben Frain
1. Gents, again though, you are hyping the scenario up beyond feasibility (in my mind at least). The chances of my mum being offed for suspected terrorist activities are failry slim.

2. Of course if the person murdered by mistake is close to you/you then you won't feel it was such a good idea but if the majority of the area you are setting out to protect (the UK in this example) is safe and sound - was that such a bad call to make?

3. For example, the total of those killed last Thursday against one/two 'maybe guilty/maybe not' people - is that not an acceptable equation for the greater good and safety of the nation at large? After all we aren't talking about random 'offing's' here (like my mum for example) - we are talking about trouble makers with a strong possibility of being involved in or inciting terrorist activity towards UK civilians (Abu Hanza etc).

1. I don't see it as hype - it has to be someone's mum/dad/daughter/son. I imagine the birmingham 6 and their families thought along similar lines.

2. But again, they will be close to someone, and even if they're not, why should one innocent life be sacrificed?

3. So you martyr them, making them way more powerful in death than they ever were in life.

Basically, as soon as you sanction that, the very things we're supposed to be fighting for - freedom and democracy - are dead, and the likes of Bin Laden have won.

I don't want to live in that world, I'd rather take my chances like we have done in this country for the duration of my life, by trying to uphold the principle we're supposed to stand for - **** the IRA, **** Bin Laden, but we do it on our terms, not theirs.

 

[pestilence]

Duffy. Keep it up man. Your thoughts toward your arguments are the sign of an educated man.

Peace all.

P.

 

[Missy Q]

I want to add my heartfelt commiserations to everyone in the UK for the events of 7/7

I also want to congratulate everyone for not mentioning ramping guns for 14 pages...................dammitt!!

Anyone else think that finding the 'ID papers' for all these bombers is a little too convenient?

 

[Robbo]

Originally posted by pestilence
Duffy. Keep it up man. Your thoughts toward your arguments are the sign of an educated man.

Peace all.

P.

And those that conflict are indicative of an uneducated man?