Your Say Thursday: Should Terror Suspects be Held for Longer?

Hello you lot, Have Your Say time has come around again, and this time the question is about the proposed government legislation to raise the amount of time a terror suspect can be detained without charge from 28 days to 42 days. The full discussion thread can be found here.

""I'm less concerned about terror now than I was 20 years ago. LiberalLeft AndProud"

Well, that’s OK then isn’t it? Just a pity the loved ones of the 52 murdered on 07/07/2005 by real life terrorists (of which there are more plotting as we speak) are unable to enjoy the same devil-may-care attitude, eh?"
Matt Marshall

Well you've turned my opinion around, Matt. Thanks to your rediculous appeal to emotion, from now on I'm going to remember to shit myself whenever I get on a train. In the 80s and 90s, the IRA carried out no less than 16 major acts of television on the UK mainland, whereas bin Laden's mob have managed a grand total of one in the twelve years since the last IRA attack in February 1996. Now if you've got as far as your Maths GCSE, you should be able to work out that means that, statistically, we should be a lot less worried about terror now than we were 20 years ago, because there's a lot less terror going on, regardless of what bleating headlines tell you.

Hmmm, you'll ban the 'Three Little Pigs' nursery rhyme but you won't incarcerate suspected terrorists long enough to find out what they're up to. I'll be sure to skip the UK on my next vacation and go someplace safe.
Justin Thyme, Denver, United States

Oh please don't skip the UK, Justin, we just don't have enough Americans wandering around London getting confused by our bridges. And 'Three Little Pigs'? What does that have to do with anything? Are you somehow saying that banning things someone wants banned is alright, so long as you ban everything everyone wants banned, or are you making an argument that... what... the... now look what you've done, Jason. You've broken my mind.

"They can hold them for 42 YEARS as far as I'm concerned.

The issue here is MY human right not to be blown up by some lunatic."
[Sepenenre]

Yes, Sepenere, let's dispense with hundreds of years of legal tradition because you can't see a beard without pissing your pants. When will you idiots learn that it's not your 'human right' to take away those of others just because you think anyone from anywhere outside the Home Counties is a crazed paedophile terrorist coming to eat your face?

"I agree with the 42 days detention for terror suspects - or lets re-label and call those who are suspected of bomb making, bombing or be accused of any such crime. The 42 days has nothing to do with anyone else - unless you're caught with a ton of pesticide and don't have a back garden. Mutated with foreign languages these cases take time to package. I would bang them up for much more - I prefer the Amercian system of Guantanamo bay - much cleaner and efficient. It makes terrorists petrified"
Aargonaut, Birmingham

I find it hard to take someone seriously who can spell 'pesticide', makes some sort of complaint about foreign languages, and then comes out with such a nonsensical statement as "Mutated with foreign languages these cases take time to package". What does that even mean? Any of it? You are an idiot.

48 days?

This is Political Correctness gone mad.

Why shouldn't the state be allowed to lock up anyone they think is a threat indefinatley. Look at America they have Guantanamo Bay and since 9/11 they havn't had any terrorist attacks.

Thats what this country needs! Stop pussy-footing around Gordon Brown and get this sorted!
S, Fernando, Hailsham

Canada's law enforcement are only allowed to detain people without charge for 1 day, and they haven't had any terrorist attacks since ever. That's not saying that we should reduce the current maximum detention period, not at all. It's just saying that you're a mouth-breathing idiot who shouldn't be allowed an opinion, on anything.

"Steady on old chap, I am one of 'the people' and I am quite happy for the State to imprison anyone for as long as they need to in their efforts to keep me and my family safe.

Got that?"
Anne O'Malley, Leeds

I find it painfully funny whenever I see someone on Have Your Say who uses the fact they once gave birth as a weapon to try to bludgeon everyone else into agreement. I will not be happy if I get locked up indefinately by your own personal police force, so no, I haven't got that. You aren't talking to your fat, hellish offspring now, and it doesn't take brains nor grant dazzling insight to fire bawling babies from between your hideous blubbery thighs, you condescending old sow.

"I'm less concerned about terror now than I was 20 years ago.

LiberalLeft AndProud, United Kingdom

Dont pay much attention to this world do you? I would suggest you pay attention to what the islamists tell us they will do & actually are doing.
Being compliant, ignorant & pretending there is no threat belies the reality.
The islamists are spouting their radical agenda then hiding behind your laws & being protected by the empty headed thinkers like you & useful idiots in the media."
barry mulvany, Columbus, United States

Bloody hell, this LiberalLeft bloke seems to have really brought out the best of the loonies this week. Being compliant to what? Do you know what that word means? That would mean converting to Islam, which I presume is what you believe the 'Islamists' want us to do. What does 'Islamist' mean anyway? A follower of Islam is a Muslim, so it's not like there wasn't a word for it to start with. 'Spouting their radical agenda'? I don't know what it's like in Columbus, Barry, but I've never gone to the shops and been harrassed by some radical 'Islamist' who was 'spouting their radical agenda'.

You're like the BNP lot who put leaflets through my door saying that Islamic extremists were VERY DEFINATELY COMING TO MY TOWN TOMORROW during the recent local elections. I waited for bloody ages and they never showed up. They're a rude lot, those Islamic extremists. Throw them all out, that's what I reckon.

Anyway, that's quite enough idiots for this week, and I was actually slightly heartened by the amount of posts dismissing this idea for being the rediculous piece of arse that it is. I was expecting at least a 90:10 rating of numpties to normals, but it turned out to be nearer to 50:50, and special kudos must surely go to LeftLiberal who really got the nutcases into a frenzy. I don't like either wing but I've got to admit that the right lot are far funnier when they get angry.

Goodnight.