David Davis bashing begins on BBC Watch

This discussion is closed.
thebucketwoman
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#21
Report 13 years ago
#21
(Original post by TheVlad)
This implies that civil liberties stand in the way of saving people's lives.
.
That's undeniably true though. What you consider the right balance to be is a different debate, but we restrict civil liberties when we lock up murderers and terrorists in prison for example. If we didn't restrict that liberty, more people would be killed.
0
TheVlad
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#22
Report 13 years ago
#22
(Original post by thebucketwoman)
That's undeniably true though. What you consider the right balance to be is a different debate, but we restrict civil liberties when we lock up murderers and terrorists in prison for example. If we didn't restrict that liberty, more people would be killed.
No, we send murderers to prison to protect other people's liberty to stay alive.
0
thebucketwoman
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#23
Report 13 years ago
#23
(Original post by TheVlad)
No, we send murderers to prison to protect other people's liberty to stay alive.
Its still restricting a civil liberty for murderers to be able to walk freely.

Or how about 30mph speed limits? They restrict drivers' liberty but protect pedestrians liberty to stay alive.

And the same argument could be said for any of the measures the government wants to take. Whether theyre right or not is a different matter, but sometimes civil liberties can stop lives being saved.
0
TheVlad
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#24
Report 13 years ago
#24
(Original post by thebucketwoman)
Its still restricting a civil liberty for murderers to be able to walk freely.
There is a difference. It is within the government's remit to prevent people from directly infringing on other people's liberties and to punish those that do. However, I personally, have not done anything of the kind and therefore my liberty is not to be taken away.
Or how about 30mph speed limits? They restrict drivers' liberty but protect pedestrians liberty to stay alive.
Yes. They restrict drivers from directly infringing on pedestrians' liberty to stay alive.
And the same argument could be said for any of the measures the government wants to take. Whether theyre right or not is a different matter, but sometimes civil liberties can stop lives being saved.
I suppose it is inevitable that there must be a line drawn between liberty and necessity in instances such as tax payment. However I do not see why this line needs to be shifted in the direction of authoritarianism.
0
thebucketwoman
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#25
Report 13 years ago
#25
Well, we half agree then!

Anyway I'm off, got to get up early for the start of my dirty weekend. Night.
0
TheVlad
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#26
Report 13 years ago
#26
(Original post by thebucketwoman)
Well, we half agree then!

Anyway I'm off, got to get up early for the start of my dirty weekend. Night.
Not on ID cards we don't.

Yeah, you make sure all the beds are comfortable and soft. And don't worry, there won't be a nuclear attack.
0
Jamie
Badges: 18
#27
Report 13 years ago
#27
(Original post by TheVlad)
Like introducing ID cards. There have already been worrying noises from the government, like Charles Clarke saying that the attacks could not be predicted because one has to strike a balance between intelligence and civil liberties. This implies that civil liberties stand in the way of saving people's lives.

I find this deeply worrying.
of course civil liberties gget in the way of intelligence.
after all, if you have asuspicion that mr A is part of a terrrorist organisation because you've heard him mentioned by other people in passing, you can't bug him due to civil liberty laws.

poor example, but i think you understand what i mean
Jamie
Badges: 18
#28
Report 13 years ago
#28
(Original post by TheVlad)
No, we send murderers to prison to protect other people's liberty to stay alive.
we can lock up those who havent murdered who we think will murder, but whom might be treatable, but cant lock up those who are untreatable.

seriously...
yawn
Badges: 13
#29
Report 13 years ago
#29
(Original post by Jamie)
of course civil liberties gget in the way of intelligence.
after all, if you have asuspicion that mr A is part of a terrrorist organisation because you've heard him mentioned by other people in passing, you can't bug him due to civil liberty laws.

poor example, but i think you understand what i mean
When you pass 'special laws' to prevent terrorism, the bugging of anyone is permissable.

This happens in NI all the time.

Haven't some sort of special laws been passed in this country to counter terrorism? I'm sure they have and if so, the law will be interpreted and implemented as it is in NI.
X
new posts
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Did you get less than your required grades and still get into university?

Yes (49)
29.34%
No - I got the required grades (97)
58.08%
No - I missed the required grades and didn't get in (21)
12.57%

Watched Threads

View All