House Arrest

Markgway · Post by **Markgway** » 25 Feb 2005, 00:14

Should the Home Secretary have the power to confine non-British terrorist suspects to their homes in lieu of releaseable evidence?

Is this a breach of their human rights... or in defence of ours?

Mordib · Post by **Mordib** » 25 Feb 2005, 00:29

i think there should be a refurendum. if the public vote these people should not be held on whatever grounds we suspect them to be held for then the government should listen and instead detail all cases where they wouldve put someone under house arrest. then if an attack evr should happen and the perpetrators turn out to be people on the list then another refurendum should be held to see with people still hold with their original opinions. that would be democracy at work...

Yi-Long · Post by **Yi-Long** » 28 Feb 2005, 14:29

People are innocent till proven guilty. That's my view on things. Just look at all the peeps who were locked up and tortured at Quantanamo Bay for years... it's a fucking disgrace that a civilisation like ours doesnt even get upset at such nazi-shit...

Mordib · Post by **Mordib** » 28 Feb 2005, 15:01

Yi-Long wrote: it's a fucking disgrace that a civilisation like ours doesnt even get upset at such nazi-shit...

it does, its just those that get upset will never win against those that dont. Get a large room and put 200 pacifists and 1 psychotic into it. The psychotic will always win because the only actions that would stop them are the very same actions that the pacifists stand against. Its a sad fact that peaceful protest, democracy and good will dont always work, and wont ever unless every single person in the world subscribes to them. welcome to 1984....

m.

Markgway · Post by **Markgway** » 28 Feb 2005, 23:23

Yi-Long wrote:People are innocent till proven guilty. That's my view on things. Just look at all the peeps who were locked up and tortured at Quantanamo Bay for years... it's a fucking disgrace that a civilisation like ours doesnt even get upset at such nazi-shit...

We were talking about house arrest, not torture. That's a different story. The Guantanamo prisoners may well be guilty (it's unlikely they were captured at random), but for security reasons can't be prosecuted. That's where my question comes in: should the good of the society be placed over the good of the individual? If a government has strong evidence that a terrorist is in Britain, but can't prosecute, should house arrest be employed? If not, then what action should be taken?